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.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Atwater LE, Yammarino FJ (1997) Self-other rating agreement: a review and model. In: Ferris G (Ed) Research in personnel and human resources management. 15, JAI Press, Greenwich, 121–174
Blau P (1964) Exchange and power in social life. Wiley, New York
Cogliser CC, Schriesheim CA, Castro SL (1999) Leader-member exchange (LMX) research: a comprehensive review of theory, measurement, and data- analytic practices. Leadersh Q 10(1):63–113
Cogliser CC, Schriesheim CA, Scandura TA, Gardner WL (2009) Balance in leader and follower perceptions of leader–member exchange: relationships with performance and work attitudes. Leadersh Q 20(3):452–465
Colella A, Varma A (2001) The impact of subordinate disability on leader–member exchange relationships. Acad Manag J 44(2):304–315
Dansereau F, Cashman J, Graen G (1973) Instrumentality theory and equity theory as complementary approaches in predicting the relationship of leadership and turnover among managers. Organ Behav Hum Perform, 10(2):184–200
Dansereau F, Graen G, Haga WJ (1975) A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: a longitudinal investigation of the role making process. Organ Behav Hum Perform 13(1):46–78
Deluga RJ (1998) Leader–member exchange quality and effectiveness ratings: the role of subordinate–supervisor conscientiousness similarity. Gr Organ Manag 23(2):189–216
Deluga RJ, Perry JT (1994) The role of subordinate performance and ingratiation in leader–member exchanges. Gr Organ Manag 19(1):67–86
Dienesch RM, Liden RC (1986) Leader–member exchange model of leadership: a critique and further development. Acad Manag Rev 11(3):618–634
Gerstner CR, Day DV (1997) Meta-analytic review of leader– member exchange theory: correlates and construct issues. J Appl Psychol 82(6):827–844
Graen G, Cashman J (1975) A role-making model of leadership informal organizations: a development approach, In: Hunt JG, Larson LL (Eds.) Leadership frontiers. Kent State University Press, Kent, pp. 143–166
Graen GB, 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. Leadersh Q 6(2):219–247
Greguras GJ, Ford JM (2006) An examination of the multidimensionality of supervisor and subordinate perceptions of leader– member exchange, J Occup Organ Psychol 79(3):433–465
Harris KJ, Kacmar KM, Carlson DS (2006) An examination of temporal variables and relationship quality on promotability ratings. Gr Organ Manag 31(6):677–699
Heider F (1958) The psychology of interpersonal relations. Wiley, New York
Liden RC, Graen G (1980) Generalizability of the vertical dyad linkage model of leadership. Acad Manag J 23(3):451–465
Liden RC, Maslyn JM (1998) Multidimensionality of leader– member exchange: an empirical assessment through scale development, J Manag 24(1):43–72
Liden R, Wayne S, Zhao H, Henderson D (2008) Servant leadership: development of a multidimensional measure and multi-level assessment. Leadersh Q 19(2):161–177
Pulakos ED, Wexley KN (1983) The relationship among perceptual similarity, sex, and performance ratings in manager- subordinate dyads. Acad Manag J 26 (1):129–139
Rosse JG, Kraut AI (1983) Reconsidering the vertical dyad linkage model of leadership. J Occup Psychol 56(1):63–71
Scandura TA (1999) Rethinking leader-member exchange: an organizational justice perspective. Leadersh Q 10(1):25–40
Scandura TA, Schriesheim CA (1994) Leader–member exchange and supervisor career mentoring as complementary constructs in leadership research. Acad Manag J 37(6):1588–1602
Schyns B, Day D (2010) Critique and review of leader-member exchange theory: issues of agreement, consensus, and excellence. Eur J W Organ Psychol 19(1) 1–29
Schyns B, Wolfram HJ (2008) The relationship between leader-member exchange and outcomes as rated by leaders and followers. Leadersh Organ Dev J 29(7):631–46
Sin HP, Nahrgang JD, Morgeson FP (2009) Understanding why they don’t see eye to eye: an examination of leader-member exchange (LMX) agreement. J Appl Psychol 94(4):1048–1057
Uhl-Bien M, Maslyn JM (2003) Reciprocity in manager-subordinate relationships: components, configurations, and outcomes. J Manag 29(4):511–532
Varma A, Stroh LK (2001) Different perspectives on selection for international assignments: the impact of LMX and gender. Cross C Manag 8(3/4):85–97
Vecchio RP, Norris WR (1996) Predicting employee turnover from performance, satisfaction and leader- member exchange. J Bus Psychol 11(1):113–125
Wayne SJ, Green SA (1993) The effects of leader–member exchange on employee citizenship and impression management behavior. Hum Relat 46(12):1431–1440
Wexley KN, Pulakos ED (1983) The effects of perceptual congruence and sex on subordinates’ performance appraisals of their managers. Acad Manag J 26(4):666–676
Wexley KN, Alexander RA, Greenawalt JP, Couch MA (1980) Attitudinal congruence and similarity as related to interpersonal evaluations in manager- subordinate dyads. Acad Manag J 23(2):320–220
Yrle AC, Hartman S, Galle WP (2002) An investigation of relationships between communication style and leader–member exchange. J Commun Manag 6(3):257–268
Zhou X, Schriesheim CA (2009) Supervisor- subordinate convergence in descriptions of leader- member exchange (LMX) quality: review and testable propositions. Leadersh Q 20(6):920–932
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer India
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gupta, M., Bhal, K. (2016). Significance of LMX Congruence and Its Flexibility on Subordinate Performance and Promotability. In: Sushil, ., Bhal, K., Singh, S. (eds) Managing Flexibility. Flexible Systems Management. Springer, New Delhi. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2380-1_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2380-1_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New Delhi
Print ISBN: 978-81-322-2379-5
Online ISBN: 978-81-322-2380-1
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)