Significance of LMX Congruence and Its Flexibility on Subordinate Performance and Promotability

Abstract

The Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) theory has been researched widely, but what has consistently been observed is that most studies of this nature have looked at leaders’ and members’ perspective while determining members’ outcomes. Some studies have addressed the issue of the match or congruence of perception in leader member dyads. Limited studies have tried to establish the relationship between LMX congruence and leaders’ assessment of the subordinates. In quest of analyzing LMX quality, a lot of researchers ignored the fact that a match or congruence between the leaders’ and members’ perception is significant to determine the leaders’ assessment of subordinates Cogliser et al. (Leadersh Q 10:63–113, 1999). Perceptions of individuals tend to be flexible and vary from one to another. A leader varies his style of interaction and communication in a flexible manner and tends to form different relationships with different subordinates. Based on balance theory (Heider, The psychology of interpersonal relations, 1958), we propose that a mismatch may have more negative impact on subordinate outcomes than poor LMX. A sample of 100 matched dyads of leaders and members is studied to assess the congruence, in leader and member LMX ratings; and its relationship with leaders’ assessment of the subordinates. LMX congruence is assessed through the framework given by Cogliser et al. (Leadersh Q 10:63–113, 1999) which conceptualizes four types of congruence; balance high (high leader and subordinate LMX), balance low (low leader and subordinate LMX), follower overestimation (low leader but high subordinate LMX), and follower underestimation (high leader but low subordinate LMX). The four types of LMX congruence are hypothesized to be the predictors of job performance (measured from leader perspective) and promotability (measured from leader perspective) of the members. For this first multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) was conducted on the entire model which was followed by analysis of covariance (ANOVA) for each one of the three independent variables. As anticipated, balance high (low) relationships correlated with higher (lower) levels of performance and promotability as perceived by the leader. Follower underestimation resulted in highest levels of job performance and high balance resulted in highest level of promotability as perceived by the leader. Results support our assertion that a mismatch in leaders’ and members’ perceptions predicts different outcomes. Results are discussed for theoretical and practical implications.