Lio Group 1 Lmx

8/12/2019 Lio Group 1 Lmx

1/38

LMX T


2/38

Introduction

LMX Theory describes how Leaders in

groups maintain their position and obtainresults through a series of interactions

with their subordinates

LMX theory was originally called

Vertical Dyad Linkage.

The Leader-Member Exchange theory (shortly LMX t

occupies a unique position among leadership theories b

its focus on the dyadic relationship between leader and


3/38

IDEA 1

IDEA 2 IDEA 3

Doesnt focus on eitherleader or follower

Exchange: Looks at

interactions between

leader and

subordinates

Introduces the Idea of

an IN and OUT

group


4/38

Negotiations take place both wa

Influx of information, influence,

Two Way Street

More involvement and Dependa

Do more for me, Ill do more fo

No interest in an equal exchange One Way

No extra Input / No extra Output

Leader and follower remain formal

Minimal interaction between leader and follower

Come to work, do your job, Go home!!

Relationship TypesDefined RelationshipsOut Groups

Expanded Relationships


5/38

Leadership MakingThe three p

StrangerOUT Group

Hierarchical RelationshipMonetary Motivation

Self - Interested

AcquaintanceTransitional

Offer of ExchangeSharing of Ideas

Testing Period

Respect develops

Goal & Self Oriented

Leaders should strive to have all subordinates as part of the


6/38

THEEXCHANGE

High QLow E =

ACQ

Low QLow E =

ACQ

Low QLow E =

STR

PartnerIN Group

Mutual Trust

Sense of Obligation

ReciprocityFavors & Assistance

Group & Goal Interest


7/38

Factors Affecting LMX Follower Attributes

Ability

Willingness

Initiative

Leader Follower Perceptions of Each other Cognitive Similarities

Personal & interpersonal communication

Social Exchanges

Situational Factors Try-outs ( Role Episodes)

Other Factors Perceived Contractual Breach

Decision power of leader in the organisationals hierarchy

Task Characteristics

Caution

Organizational communication to followers


8/38

LMX theory works in two ways: it describes leadersh

prescribes leadership In both - the central concept is the dyadic relationship

Descriptively: To study the leadership It suggests that it is important to recognize the existence of in

out-groups within an organization

Significant differences in how goals are accomplished using in-

out-groups

Relevant differences in in-group vs. out-group behaviors

How can LMX be used?


9/38

Prescriptively: To execute effective leadership

strategy

Leader forms special relationships with all subord

Leader should offer each subordinate an opportu

new roles/responsibilities

Leader should nurture high-quality exchanges w

subordinates

Rather than concentrating on differences, leader

on ways to build trust & respect with all subordin

resulting in entire work group becoming an in-gro


10/38

Identify Out-group

Analyze past performance

Draw characteristics

Explore Motivation

Task preferences

Career goals

Personal Aspirations

Leader Follower feedback

Reduce De-motivation

Create Partnership

Increase try-outs & role episodes

Working Model for improving L


11/38

How do you measure attitudes & belief LMX 7

Assumption of mutual trust, loyalty & resp

Cannot measure social linkages

Ethical Dilemma

Pygmailian Bias

Criticisms & Biases


12/38

Innovation in Globally Distribu

Teams: The Role of LMX,Communication Frequency, a

Member Influence on Team

DecisionsRavi S. Gajendran and Aparna Jos


13/38

Proposed Theory In traditional team settings proximity facilitates a sense of belonging th

members to contribute to the team

Distributed team settings are characterized by an impoverished team elacking the material, social, and symbolic cues that drive engagement w

collective.

Leadermember exchangeis instrumental for fostering member involv

globally distributed teams.

High-quality LMX is characterized by leaders treating followers as uniqudeveloping ongoing dyadic relationships that are sustained through exc

material and socio-emotional resources

High-quality LMX could motivate members to provide inputs that influe

tasks and decisions.

Member influence on team decisions impacts team innovationthe de

new ideas, processes, products, and procedures

h


14/38

Hypothesis 1: Team dispersion will

moderate the positive relationshipbetween LMX and member influence

on team decisions such that therelationship will be stronger for teams

that are more dispersed.

Hypothesis 2 :Commfrequency with the teamoderate the positive

between LMX and memon team decisions su

relationship will be strcommunication freque

Hypothesis 3: The positive relationship

between LMX and member influence on teamdecisions will be jointly moderated by team

dispersion and communication frequency withteam leader. When communication frequency

is high, the relationship will be stronger asteam dispersion increases. When

communication frequency is low, relationshipstrength will not depend on the level of team

Hypothesis 4:Team-leinfluence on team dec

positively related to tea

HYPOTHESIS


15/38

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK


16/38

METHODOLOGY

A third of the respondents were based outside USA including

Japan, Korea, and Australia.

224 responses were reported in all from which a final sample

of 167 individuals from 40 teams

Teams were responsible for resolving complex and unantic

software- and hardware-related problems from across the

Employees surveyed for this study were involved in problem

teams

Survey was conducted in the software services division of

multinational Fortune 500 IT company with head quarters


17/38

5 item Measures

Member

influence

on team

decisions

Qualityof

leader

member

exchange

Commun

ication

frequency with

team

leader

Teamdispersio

n

Team

innovati

on.

IMPLICATIONS


18/38

IMPLICATIONS Member input on team activities and decisions is a critical driver for te

innovation

The study suggest that high-quality LMX relationships are effective in c

member inclusion and involvement in team decisions in highly disperswhen they are accompanied by frequent leadermember communica

For high-dispersion teams, when leadermember communication freqthe advantages to its members from a high-quality LMX relationship a

Personalized dyadic exchanges can lead to socialized outcomes benefitcollective.

To accelerate the development of LMX with distant team members, tebe composed of members whose past performance provides a clear siexpertise.

The study identifies that a relationship-based leadership approach in tLMX in combination with frequent leadermember communication camembers together and spur team innovation


19/38

Ab t t


20/38

Abstract

LMX differentiation in relation to team are still relatively r

Study among 269 Dutch secondary school teachers from 3

teams tested the hypotheses

Teachers completed questionnaires on LMX quality, dissimteam commitment

Principalsrated team performance

ResultLMX differentiation is positively related to both ovariables in teams but with a low LMX-quality median onl


21/38

Introduction LMX theory contends that leaders develop different

relationships with each of their subordinate through

of work related exchanges (Graen & Cashman, 1975Scandura, 1987)

The development of differential relationships amonand the subordinates who directly report to them inwork groups is referred to as LMX differentiation.(LiWayne, 2006)

The main goal of this study is to examine the relatio

between LMX differentiation and two relevant outc


22/38

LMX differentiation, team performa

and affective team commitment

First outcome variable team performance it is key

for leadership effectiveness

Second outcome variable affective team commitmen

can be defined as the individuals emotional attachmen

identification with, and involvement in the team. It is g

by free choice.


23/38

LMXmedian as a moderator

The study tested whether LMX differentiation and te

performance and team commitment depends on tea

quality median.

In the study , LMX-quality median is used rather tha

LMX-quality.


24/38

Hypothesis 1a

The median level of LMX within a team

moderates the relationship between team

LMX differentiation and team performanc

that LMX differentiation is positively relate

team performance when LMX-quality medlow, but is not related to team performan

LMX-quality median is high.


25/38

The median level of LMX within a team moderates therelationship between team-level LMX differentiation anmembers affective commitment to the team, so that LMdifferentiation is positively related members affective tcommitment when LMX-quality median is low, but is noto members affective team commitment when LMX-qumedian is high.

Dissimilarity among team members regarding work valupositively related to LMX differentiation

Hypothesis 1b

Hypothesis 2


26/38

Research Framework

Dissimilarity among

team members

LMX Differentiation

1. Team p

2. Affeccom

LMX Quality Median


27/38

Methodology1. Participants and procedure

Demographics

Response rate

2. Instruments Team LMX Quality

LMX differentiation

Dissimilarity among team members

Team performance

Affective team commitment

3. Data analysis: Agreement of within team responses, consisteresponses, ANOVA, Boxs M Test, Hierarchical multiple regres


28/38

Results Teams LMX quality median was significantly, positively re

team performance and affective team commitment. Dissamong team members was positively related to LMX diff

In teams with a high LMX quality median, LMX differentiasignificantly related to team performance (Beta = -.07; t =p>.05); while; for teams with a low LMX quality median (

relationship between LMX differentiation and team perfosignificant and positive (Beta = 0.50; t= 2.23; p


29/38

Continued.. For teams with a high LMX quality median, LMX different

not related to members affective team commitment (Bet= -1.10; p>.05); while; for teams with a low LMX quality mrelationship between LMX differentiation and members ateam commitment is significant and positive (Beta = 0.20p


30/38

Discussion

Implication for theory and research

Practical implications

Limitations


31/38

Leadermember Exchange (LM

Job Autonomy, and CreativeWork Involvement

Judith Volmer, Daniel Spurk, CornelNiessen


32/38

INTRODUCTION

Creativity is the generation of novel and useful idea and i

considered to be a key driver for organizational effectivensurvival

Creative work involvement is the extent to which an empengages his or her time and effort resources in creative passociated with work

Job autonomy is the extent to which employees have a mscheduling their work, selecting the equipment they will deciding on procedures to be followed.


33/38

HYPOTHESIS

Hypothesis 1 :The quality of leadermember exchawill be positively related with creative work involvem

Hypothesis 2 : Job autonomy will moderate the relabetween the quality of LMX and creative work involvsuch that the relationship is stronger for persons witjob autonomy.


34/38

METHODOLOGY

Study was conducted at a large, internationally operating

technology firm in Germany.

This site manufactures medical systems (e.g., X-ray apparnuclear spins).

The company had at the time about 2500 employees at t

A total of 378 randomly selected employees were asked tparticipate.

RESULT


35/38

RESULT

Findings revealed that creative work involvement was highest for empexperienced a good relationship with their leader and who also had gautonomy.


36/38

IMPLICATIONS One major finding was that LMX was positively relate

creative work involvement under high levels of job au

but unrelated with creative work involvement under

levels of job autonomy.

This implies that a high-quality LMX relationship, wh

associated with many numerous work and non-work

outcomes, is not sufficient when employees experien

design constraints


37/38

Continued..

High quality of LMX connections at work might also be re

work and job involvement as well as for job commitment

LMX alone is positive for creative work involvement but t

be augmented by granting job autonomy.

Persons with disciplinary responsibilities as well as perso

higher education indicated more creative work involveme

compared to others.


38/38

Documents

Lio Group 1 Lmx