The leadership-member exchange theory is clearly one of the most intuitive theories we have discussed yet. After all, it does make sense that the better the relationship between the leader and the follower the better the results. As shown in our lesson commentary (PSU WC, 2013), a positive relationship results in less turnover, better results, higher commitment, and better attitudes among many other things. After further reading into this intuition-based theory, it reminds me of Drive by Daniel Pink (2011), a book that I used in early blogs to discuss another theory of leadership.
Pink (2011) subtlety emphasizes a proper relationship between management throughout his book, however; I believe he best captures in a section he titles “Players or Pawns?” His analogy of players and pawns asks us to take a look at the core of management, and how management treats employees. “Management didn’t come from nature. It wasn’t handed to us by God. It’s something that somebody invited” (Pink, 2011). Mr. Pink is correct, management was invented by our corporate business driven world. We can hypothesize that if something that we essentially created is not carried out in the proper way, there can be problems. For example, using the idea that we invented management based on the idea that people need to be led, wouldn’t it make sense that there is a proper relationship between the managers and their subordinates? I believe so. I believe that this ideal captures the root of the LMX theory. It also contextualizes one of it’s strengths. “LMX makes sense intuitively. We can all understand and feel in-groups and out-groups.” (PSU WC, 2013). The funny thing is that LMX doesn’t have the black and white feel that other theories may have, but it just makes sense.
Moving back to some words from Pink, he mentions in his book that it is our basic nature to be curious and self-directed (Pink, 2011). It seems that with most organizations, they tend not to understand this, and it leads to a problem with the basis of the LMX theory. If leaders do not let the their subordinates have delegated power and authority over their own actions it could clearly make the subordinates feel like they are incapable and damage the relationship between the leader and follower.
It is clear that we can apply the LMX theory to many places at work or on teams. Every theory we have learned so far can find a place for the LMX theory to be applicable. The relationship between the leader and followers is certainly one of the many keys to success. Not many people would willingly follow someone who treated them poorly or thought they were incapable, myself included.
References:
Pink, D. H. (2011). Drive, the surprising truth about what motivates us. New York, New York: Riverhead Books.
Penn State World Campus (2013). PSYCH 485 Lesson 8: LMX. Retrieved on Feb. 25, 2013, from
https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp13/psych485/003/content/08_lesson/01_page.html