It is natural that in and out groups exist in an organization. It maintains a balance of resources, and helps employers meet the needs of their workers and likewise, the workers to the organization… and it’s not a bad thing if you can effectively apply the concepts of leader-member exchange theory, which states that leadership is a process that focuses on the relationship between leader and follower (PSU WC, Lesson 8, p4).
Each organization is as different as the people that work in them. In the process of leadership making, it is dependent upon the organization to explore what a high-quality exchange is in their particular workforce. It’s also through the leadership making process that one becomes aware of possible biases, and unfair treatment of in and out group members. In correcting behavior by treating all employees as though they were part of the in-group, or at least could be, a leader can increase organizational commitment and minimize the possibility of unfair treatment (Northouse, 2013).
> Northouse (2013) explains Leader-Member relationships and interactions with in and out groups
In group |
Out Group |
– Leaders-followers have a significant relationship beyond job responsibilities – Express higher confidence, trust and support for one another – Receive more information, additional jobs, rewards and opportunities |
– Leaders-followers have a strictly professional relationship – Have basic interactions required to perform job roles and responsibilities – Receive information and support necessary for job performance, no additional jobs or opportunities |
There are some individuals that have the desire to be in the spotlight; they are driven by ambitious goals and will do what it takes to obtain them. Others may simply have complimentary personalities with their boss and get on with them better than others. The out-group seems negative, but some people are quite happy being predictable and have no grandiose career goals to meet. They are content & nothing is wrong with that. I once worked with a lady, Judy, who at 60 years old was content working the midnight shift, as she had been for the last 25 years. After working with her for about a year, I asked why was she was still on shift and not our supervisor or the site manager. She was knowledgeable, respected and loyal, and also had a good relationship with leadership… I just didn’t understand it. She responded, nonchalantly, that she had taken over as the operations supervisor once, but just didn’t enjoy it and quickly switched back to her old job. She said her heart was in performing the work and she enjoyed being able to contribute her expertise in a hands-on manner. After knowing her for 10 years, I observed that she also found a lot of happiness in her predictable schedule and that she didn’t want to be in charge of anything… no extra duties, no filling in for the boss when he was gone, she didn’t even like having to stay an extra 10 minutes… She was going to show up for her shift and do her job and that was IT (Northouse, 2013).
The leadership making process prescribes that leaders create high-quality exchanges (interaction found with in-group members) with all workers by developing relationships in three phases. Phase 1 – stranger (relationship revolves around work-related roles and responsibilities), Phase 2 – acquaintance (leader and member begin developing more trust and career oriented relationship by expanding resources and information beyond job requirements), and lastly, Phase 3 – mature (leader and member have developed a trusting and respect-based relationship and are highly productive and effective). The three phases are building blocks of communication, all meant to facilitate the development of trust and organizational commitment, gradually. For out-group members, this means they perceive no disparate treatment; that those who were only in the out-group because perhaps they felt timid or intimidated to ask for extra responsibilities will be given an opportunity to be in the in-group; and finally, relations with all group members will be equal to what they put into it, but the leader will maintain an open door to the in-group (Northouse, 2013).
For Judy, a high-quality relationship was being able to remain predictable (she was given her specific dates for vacation and never had her workdays changed) and being relied upon for her extensive knowledge (so long as it didn’t include working extra hours, she would do anything to help the organization). She was respected and her opinion on the subject matter was highly regarded. Leadership had built a mature relationship with her. I, on the other hand, had a thirst for challenges and wanted any additional duties that opened up. My leadership took this ambition and met it with mentorship, and career advancement opportunities. We began at the stranger phase and worked through to the mature phase, when they knew my capabilities and I knew they could be trusted. This was my high-quality relationship. So, while Judy is regarded as an out-group member and me as the in-group member, really leadership emphasized communication and fostered relationships with us to make us each feel respected and empowered in the organization (Northouse, 2013).
The utility of leader-member exchange can be summed up from Judy’s perspective. While she liked being an out-group member, leadership fostered a trusting and supportive relationship with her and she knew that she had access to the in-group any time she wanted. Her relationship with leadership was reciprocal and harmonious. It went as far as each party was comfortable with and stopped when it began getting counter-productive (i.e. leadership never hounded her to assume more responsibility, but knew she enjoyed being asked for her opinion and expertise on issues, she reciprocated by giving them technical expert information they needed without hesitation) (Northouse, 2013).
In closing, the leader-member exchange can seem unfair, or negative, but in reality it is meant to prevent these very things by being aware they exist and taking necessary actions to counter them (Northouse, 2013). It’s like a spin on Newton’s law of motion – that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. When a leader puts forth the effort to nurture a high-quality relationship with all group members, those group members will react in kind with respect and organizational commitment no matter what group they identify with.
References:
Commerce Commend. (2011). Industry Occupation Photo: Retrieved 11 March 2013 from http://comerecommended.com/blog/2011/05/31/where-will-your-major-take-you-1030/
Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications. ISBN 9781452203409
Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2013). PSYCH 485 Lesson 8: Leader-Member Exchange. Retrieved 07 March 2013 from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp13/psych485/001/content/08_lesson/01_page.html
Science Clairified. (n.d.). Law of Motion Photo. Retrieved 11 March 2013 from http://www.scienceclarified.com/photos/laws-of-motion-2882.jpg