Journal of Business and Psychology

, Volume 28, Issue 1, pp 63–77 | Cite as

Team–Member Exchange and Work Engagement: Does Personality Make a Difference?

  • Fang-Yi Liao
  • Liu-Qin YangEmail author
  • Mo Wang
  • Damon Drown
  • Junqi Shi



Adopting a person–situation interactionist framework, this study examined the joint effects of employee personality (i.e., extraversion, neuroticism, and conscientiousness) and social exchange relationships with peers (i.e., team–member exchange; TMX) in predicting work engagement.


This study is based on survey responses from 235 Chinese employees collected at two time points with 3 months in between. We conducted moderated regression analyses to test the hypotheses that employees higher in extraversion or conscientiousness or lower in neuroticism would demonstrate a stronger TMX–work engagement relation.


Results from this study showed that the three focal personality traits moderated the TMX–engagement relation simultaneously. Specifically, the positive TMX–engagement relation was stronger for employees with higher extraversion or lower neuroticism than that for their counterparts. Interestingly, the TMX–engagement relation was positive for employees lower in conscientiousness but negative for those higher in conscientiousness.


These findings support the notion that lateral social exchange relationships in the workplace (i.e., TMX) are an important antecedent of work engagement and, more importantly, their beneficial effects on work engagement are contingent on certain types and/or levels of personality traits.


This study not only advances our understanding of presumed antecedents of work engagement but also opens a new door for future research on work engagement by highlighting the importance of a person–situation interactionist framework.


Team–member exchange Work engagement Extraversion Neuroticism Conscientiousness 



The authors thank Ms. Jessica M. Santoro for proofreading our manuscript.


  1. Anand, S., Vidyarthi, P., Liden, R., & Rousseau, (2010). Good citizens in poor-quality relationships: Idiosyncratic deals as a substitute for relationship quality. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 970–988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., & Paunonen, S. V. (2002). What is the central feature of extraversion? Social attention versus reward sensitivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 245–252.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bakker, A. B., Albrecht, S. L., & Leiter, M. P. (2011). Key questions regarding work engagement. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20, 4–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bakker, A. B., Schaufeli, W. B., Leiter, M. P., & Taris, T. W. (2008). Employee engagement: An emerging concept in occupational health psychology. Work and Stress, 22, 187–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1–26.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big-Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Behson, S., Eddy, E., & Lorenzet, S. (2000). The importance of the critical psychological states in the job characteristics model: A meta-analytic and structural equations modeling examination. Current Research in Social Psychology, 5, 170–189.Google Scholar
  8. Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  9. Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein & S. W. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions and new directions (pp. 349–381). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  10. Bolino, M. C., & Turnley, W. H. (2005). The personal costs of citizenship behavior: The relationship between individual initiative and role overload, job stress, and work-family conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 740–748.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Cartwright, S., & Holmes, N. (2006). The meaning of work: The challenge of regaining employee engagement and reducing cynicism. Human Resource Management Review, 16, 199–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chiaburu, D. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2008). Do peers make the place? Conceptual synthesis and meta-analysis of coworker effects on perceptions, attitudes, OCBs, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 1082–1103.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Christian, M. S., Garza, A. S., & Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: A quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel Psychology, 64, 89–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cole, M. S., Schaninger, W. S., & Harris, S. G. (2002). The workplace social exchange network: A multilevel, conceptual examination. Group and Organization Management, 27, 142–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cronbach, L. J., & Gleser, G. C. (1957). Psychological tests and personnel decisions. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  16. Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31, 874–900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2003). Good business: Leadership, flow and the making of meaning. London: Hodder and Stoughton.Google Scholar
  18. Demerouti, E. (2006). Job characteristics, flow, and performance: The moderating role of conscientiousness. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 11, 266–280.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Dollard, M., & Bakker, A. (2010). Psychosocial safety climate as a precursor to conducive work environments, psychological health problems, and employee engagement. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83, 579–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Edmondson, A. (1996). Learning from mistakes is easier said than done: Group and organizational influences on the detection and correction of human error. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32, 5–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 350–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchinson, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Erdogan, B., Kraimer, M. L., & Liden, R. C. (2004). Work value congruence and intrinsic career success: The compensatory roles of leader–member exchange and perceived organizational support. Personnel Psychology, 57, 305–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Erdogan, B., & Liden, R. C. (2006). Collectivism as a moderator of responses to organizational justice: Implications for leader–member exchange and ingratiation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Evans, M. G. (1985). A Monte Carlo study of the effects of correlated method variance in moderated multiple regression analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 36, 305–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gagne′, M., & Deci, E. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 331–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gallup. (2010). Employee engagement. Retrieved October 28, 2010 from
  28. Goffman, E. (1961). Encounters: Two studies in the sociology of interaction. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
  29. Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers of the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Grace, J. B., & Bollen, K. A. (2005). Interpreting the results from multiple regression and structural equation models. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 86, 283–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader–member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 6, 219–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Griffin, M., Parker, S., & Neal, A. (2008). Is behavioral engagement a distinct and useful construct? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 48–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Halbesleben, J. R. B. (2010). A meta-analysis of work engagement: Relationships with burnout, demands, resources, and consequences. In A. B. Bakker & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and practice (pp. 102–117). London: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  34. Halbesleben, J. R. B., Harvey, J., & Bolino, M. (2009). Too engaged? A conservation of resources view of the relationship between work engagement and work interference with family. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1452–1465.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Harrison, D. A., Johns, G., & Martocchio, J. J. (2000). Changes in technology, teamwork, diversity: New directions for a new century of absenteeism research. In G. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 18, pp. 43–91). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  36. Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280–1300.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Higgins, E. T. (2000). Making a good decision: Value from fit. American Psychologist, 55, 1217–1230.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Ickes, W., Snyder, M., & Garcia, S. (1997). Personality influences on the choice of situations. In R. Hogan, J. A. Johnson, & S. R. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 165–195). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Inceoglu, I., & Warr, P. (2011). Personality and job engagement. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 10, 177–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Iverson, R. D., Olekalns, M., & Erwin, P. J. (1998). Affectivity, organizational stressors, and absenteeism: A causal model of burnout and its consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 52, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Judge, T. A., & Ilies, R. (2002). Relationship of personality to performance motivation: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 797–807.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kahn, W. A. (1992). To be full there: Psychological presence at work. Human Relations, 45, 321–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kamdar, D., & Van Dyne, L. (2007). The joint effects of personality and workplace social exchange relationships in predicting task performance and citizenship performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1286–1298.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Kanfer, R., & Heggestad, E. D. (1997). Motivation traits and skills: A person-centered approach to work motivation. Research in Organizational Behavior, 19, 1–56.Google Scholar
  46. Kanungo, R. N. (1982). Measurement of job and work involvement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 341–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  48. Kim, H., Shin, K., & Swanger, N. (2009). Burnout and engagement: A comparative analysis using the Big Five personality dimensions. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 28, 96–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kinnunen, U., Feldt, T., & Mäkikangas, A. (2008). Testing the effort-reward imbalance model among Finnish managers: The role of perceived organizational support. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 13, 114–127.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Klein, K., Lim, B.-C., Saltz, J., & Mayer, D. (2004). How do they get there? An examination of the antecedents of centrality in team networks. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 952–963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Langelaan, S., Bakker, A. B., van Doornen, L., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2006). Burnout and employee engagement: Do individual differences make a difference? Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 521–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Lapierre, L. M., & Hackett, R. D. (2007). Trait conscientiousness, leader–member exchange, job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behavior: A test of an integrative model. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80, 539–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Larsen, R. J., & Ketelaar, T. (1991). Personality and susceptibility to positive and negative emotional states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 132–140.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Latham, G. P., & Pinder, C. C. (2005). Work motivation theory and research at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 485–516.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Law, K. S., Wong, C., & Mobley, W. H. (1998). Toward a taxonomy of multidimensional constructs. Academy of Management Review, 23, 741–755.Google Scholar
  56. Levin, K. (1935). A dynamic theory of personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  57. Liden, R. C., & Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader–member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of Management, 24, 43–72.Google Scholar
  58. Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Sparrowe, R. T. (2000). An examination of the mediating role of psychological empowerment on the relations between the job, interpersonal relationships, and work outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 407–416.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Liu, Y., Keller, R. T., & Shih, H.-A. (2011). The impact of team–member exchange, differentiation, team commitment, and knowledge sharing on R&D project team performance. R&D Management, 41, 274–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Liu, D., Zhang, Z., & Wang, M. (2012). Mono-level and multilevel mediated moderation and moderated mediation: Theorization and test. In X. Chen, A. Tsui, and L. Farh (Eds.), Management research methods (2nd edn, in Chinese; pp. 545–579). Beijing, China: Peking University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1293–1349). Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  62. Love, M. S., & Forret, M. (2008). Exchange relationships at work: An examination of the relationship between team–member exchange and supervisor reports of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 14, 342–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 3–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Major, D. A., Kozlowski, S. W., Chao, G. T., & Gardner, P. D. (1995). A longitudinal investigation of newcomer expectations, early socialization outcomes, and the moderating effects of role development factors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 418–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397–422.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Mauno, S., Kinnunen, U., & Ruokolainen, M. (2007). Job demands and resources as antecedents of work engagement: A longitudinal study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 70, 149–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. May, D. R., Gilson, R. L., & Harter, L. M. (2004). The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 11–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. McCrae, R. R., & John, O. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60, 174–214.Google Scholar
  69. Mendoza-Denton, R., Ayduk, O., Mischel, W., Shoda, Y., & Testa, A. (2001). Person × situation interactionism in self-encoding (I Am… When…): Implications for affect regulation and social information processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 533–544.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 6, 20–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Moon, H. (2001). The two faces of conscientiousness: Duty and achievement striving in escalation of commitment dilemmas. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 533–540.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. Murray, H. (1938). Explorations in personality. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  73. Muthén, L., & Muthén, B. (2002). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles: Muthén and Muthén.Google Scholar
  74. Newman, D. A., & Harrison, D. A. (2008). Been there, bottled that: Are state and behavioral employee engagement new and useful construct “wine?”. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 31–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Ng, T. W. H., & Sorensen, K. L. (2008). Toward a further understanding of the relationships between perceptions of support and work attitudes: A meta-analysis. Group Organization Management, 33, 243–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Nixon, A., Yang, L. Q., Spector, P. E., & Zhang, X. C. (2011). Emotional labor in China: Examining moderators and consequences of the emotional labor process. Stress and Health, 27, 289–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Nosek, B. A. (2005). Moderators of the relationship between implicit and explicit evaluation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 565–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  79. Oysterman, D., Kemmelmeier, M., & Coon, H. (2002). Cultural psychology, a new look: Reply to Bond (2002), Fiske (2002), Kitayama (2002), and Miller (2002). Psychological Bulletin, 128, 110–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26, 513–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Preacher, K. J., Curran, P. J., & Bauer, D. J. (2006). Computational tools for probing interaction effects in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31, 437–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Ren, F. (2009). Perceived organizational support, work engagement and employee performance: Structural equation modeling analysis. Unpublished master thesis, Macau University of Science and Technology, Macau, China.Google Scholar
  84. Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 698–714.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Rich, B., LePine, J., & Crawford, E. (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 617–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. The American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21, 600–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Saks, A. M. (2008). The meaning and bleeding of employee engagement: How muddy is the water? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 40–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Salanova, M., Agut, S., & Peiro, J. M. (2005). Linking organizational resources and work engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty: The mediation of service climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 1217–1227.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. Saucier, G. (1994). Mini-Markers: A brief version of Goldberg’s unipolar Big-Five markers. Journal of Personality Assessment, 63, 506–516.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2003). UWES-Utrecht Work Engagement Scale: Test manual. Unpublished manuscript. Department of Psychology, Utrecht University,
  92. Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., Gonza′lez-Roma′, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A confirmative analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Schmidt, L. L. (2006). Self-reported emotional intelligence as an indicator of social exchange quality at work. Unpublished dissertation, University of Houston, Houston, Texas.Google Scholar
  94. Seers, A. (1989). Team-member exchange quality: A new construct for role-making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43, 118–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Seers, A., Petty, M. M., & Cashman, J. F. (1995). Team-member exchange under team and traditional management: A natural occurring quasi-experiment. Group and Organization Management, 20, 18–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Seppala, P., Mauno, S., Feldt, T., Hakanen, J., Kinnunen, U., Tolvanen, A., et al. (2009). The construct validity of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale: Multisample and longitudinal evidence. Journal of Happiness Study, 10, 459–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Shimazu, A., Schaufeli, W. B., Kosugi, S., Suzuki, A., Nashiwa, H., Kato, A., et al. (2008). Employee engagement in Japan: Development and validation of the Japanese version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 57, 510–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Sonnentag, S. (2003). Recovery, employee engagement, and proactive behavior: A new look at the interface between non-work and work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 518–528.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. Tse, H. H. M., & Dasborough, M. T. (2008). A study of exchange and emotions in team member relationships. Group & Organization Management, 33, 194–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  101. Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1997). Measurement and mismeasurement of mood: Recurrent and emergent issues. Journal of Personality Assessment, 68, 267–296.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. Weigl, M., Hornung, S., Parker, S., Petru, R., Glaser, J., & Angerer, P. (2010). Work engagement accumulation of task, social, personal resources: A three-wave structural equation model. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77, 140–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Zhang, Y., & Gan, Y. (2005). The Chinese version of Utrecht Work Engagement Scale An examination of reliability and validity. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 13, 268–270.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fang-Yi Liao
    • 1
  • Liu-Qin Yang
    • 1
    Email author
  • Mo Wang
    • 2
  • Damon Drown
    • 3
  • Junqi Shi
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyPortland State UniversityPortlandUSA
  2. 2.University of FloridaGainesvilleUSA
  3. 3.Portland State UniversityPortlandUSA
  4. 4.Peking UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations