PAF 410 Week 5 Building Leadership Skills Session 5
PAF 410 Week 5pdfpaf 410 Building Leadership Skillssession 5dyadic A
Paf 410 Week 5pdfpaf 410 Building Leadership Skillssession 5dyadic A PAF 410 WEEK 5.pdf PAF 410 Building Leadership Skills Session 5 Dyadic Approaches: Leader-Member Exchange Theory Agenda • Recap • Midterm Debrief • Leader-Member Exchange Theory: What is it? • Guest Speaker - CANCELED Recap • Servant leadership differs from many other leadership theories by emphasizing behaviors that put followers first • Servant leadership speaks to altruism among leaders. A strong motivation to help others may therefore be a prerequisite • It is critical that followers are receptive to servant leadership; otherwise perception of micromanagement Leader-Member Exchange Theory What is it? What is it? • Leadership as a process • Focuses on the interactions between a leader and individual followers • Differs from trait, skills and behavioral perspectives as we have covered them so far • Differs from theories focusing on the context and contingencies of leadership (next time) Illustration Dyadic relationship between leader and follower is the focal point for LMX.
Northouse 2016: 138 Two streams • Descriptive: What does the relationship look like? • Prescriptive: What kinds of relationships should the leader build with followers? Descriptive • Assumption that leaders treat all followers in a collective way is not realistic • Differences in the quality of relationships may exist • Work unit viewed as a series of linkages Northouse 2016: 139 In-Groups versus Out-Groups • Leaders form unique relationships with each follower • Some relationships are of higher quality (the ‘in- group’ ones) Northouse 2016: 140 In-Groups versus Out-Groups In-Group • Expanded role responsibilities (extra-role; beyond job description) • Based on mutual trust and respect • More information, influence, and attention Out-Group • Formal responsibilities as defined in employment contract • Formal communication • Monitoring and incentivizing How to become in-group member? • In-group versus out-group status based on … • How well follower works with the leader and vice versa • How followers involve themselves in negotiating new role responsibilities and tasks that go beyond formal job description Implications of LMX • High-quality exchanges (i.e., more in-group relationships) have been linked to positive outcomes for … • Leaders, followers, groups (work units), and organizations • Examples: Job performance, commitment, retention, satisfaction and role clarity Prescriptive • Emphasizes that leaders should develop high-quality (in-group) relationships with all followers rather than a few • 3 phases of leadership making as it develops over time … • 1: Stranger phase • 2: Acquaintance phase • 3: Mature partnership phase Northouse 2016: 143 The LMX Dilemma: Out-Group Formation • Why does out-group membership tend to occur?
What causes it? • What, if anything, can be done to prevent or remedy out-group formation? • Consider the leader, followers, and greater organizational context (such as HR policies and procedures) Followership • “Lead, Follow, or Get Out of the Way… • “Good… leaders do not guarantee good followership • Why followership is important • It is required for the implementation of goals and visions • It is relevant to good LMX in terms of in-group (versus out-group) formation • Effective followership does not equate to “brown-nosing†or being a “yes man†Effective Followers • Assume responsibility for one’s own job security and development independent thinkers • Balance the courage to serve with the courage to challenge • Avoid obstructionist behavior based on personal motives • Avoid “upward delegation†• Support organizational goals and strategies • Or have the courage to leave • Dilemma for organizations: Why are many followers either “passiveâ€, “conformistâ€, or “alienatedâ€?
Managing “Upward†• Working with (rather than against) the leader’s style and goals • Serving as a resource for the leader • Avoiding thinking in black-and-white terms about the leader • Building a relationship • Asking questions and asking for advice or feedback • Modeling the behavior that you seek • How might societal cultural factors come into play? LMX Strengths • Intuitive: Relationships matter: some are more developed than others • Dyadic focus: Leaders and followers play significant roles in shaping relationships Weaknesses • Privileged groups and access -> fairness? • Still not clear how high-quality exchanges are formed? • Endogeneity Case: Social Security Administration Read case 7.3 (pp. ) and discuss the following questions with your group: 1.
From a LMX theory point of view, how would you describe Jim’s relationships with his employees? 2. Can you identify an in-group and an out-group? 3. Do you think the trust and respect Jim places in some of his staff are productive or counterproductive?
Why? 4. As suggested in the chapter, leadership making recommends that the leader builds high-quality relationships with all of the followers. How would you evaluate Jim’s leadership in regards to leadership making?
Paper For Above instruction
The Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) theory provides a nuanced perspective on leadership dynamics by emphasizing the dyadic relationships between leaders and followers. Unlike traditional leadership theories that treat followers uniformly, LMX recognizes that leaders form distinct relationships with each subordinate, resulting in varying relationship qualities. This theory posits that high-quality exchanges—characterized by trust, respect, and mutual influence—are associated with positive organizational outcomes, including improved performance, satisfaction, and retention.
Fundamentally, LMX underscores the importance of differentiated relationships within a work unit, categorizing followers into in-group and out-group members. In-group members enjoy expanded responsibilities, influence, and access to leaders' attention, stemming from mutual trust and respect. Conversely, out-group members adhere strictly to formal roles and responsibilities, receiving less influence and support. The process of developing in-group relationships involves how efficiently followers demonstrate their willingness to go beyond their formal job descriptions, fostering trust and mutual respect over time. Leaders are encouraged to cultivate high-quality relationships with all followers, transitioning through the phases of leadership making: stranger, acquaintance, and mature partnership.
According to Northouse (2016), the effectiveness of high-quality leader-member exchanges manifests in numerous positive organizational outcomes, including enhanced job performance, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction. However, the formation of out-group relationships remains a challenge, often driven by differences in follower-leader interactions, organizational policies, or individual behaviors. Addressing out-group formation involves aligning organizational culture, implementing fair HR policies, and encouraging leaders to develop inclusive practices whereby all followers are treated as potential in-group members.
Followership plays a critical role in this dynamic. Effective followers are proactive, responsible, independent thinkers who support organizational goals and are willing to negotiate role responsibilities. They demonstrate courage to challenge when necessary and support leadership initiatives. Nonetheless, many followers tend to be passive, conformist, or disengaged, which impedes the development of high-quality relationships. Managing upward—working effectively with leaders—requires building trust, asking for feedback, and serving as a resource, especially considering societal and cultural influences that shape leader-follower interactions.
The strengths of LMX theory lie in its recognition of the dyadic nature of leadership, emphasizing that relationships matter significantly. It moves beyond the one-size-fits-all approach and considers individual differences in relationships, thereby providing a more realistic depiction of leadership processes. Nonetheless, weaknesses include concerns about fairness and access, as preferential treatment of certain followers can produce perceptions of inequality. Moreover, the precise mechanisms by which high-quality exchanges develop remain under debate.
In a practical context, such as the case of Jim within the Social Security Administration, applying LMX principles reveals insights into his relationships with employees. Jim likely forms stronger, trust-based relationships with certain staff members, establishing an in-group, while others remain as out-group members. Whether Jim’s trust and respect are productive depends on whether he promotes inclusive practices and strives to develop high-quality relationships universally. Effective leadership, aligned with the leadership making phases, entails active effort to extend positive relations to all followers, fostering a more cohesive and motivated workforce.
References
- Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th ed.). Sage Publications.
- Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16(1), 74-97.