Research into Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) theory has been gaining momentum in recent years, with a multitude of studies investigating many aspects of LMX in organizations. Theoretical development in this area also has undergone many refinements, and the current theory is far different from the early Vertical Dyad Linkage (VDL) work. This article uses a levels perspective to trace the development of LMX through four evolutionary stages of theorizing and investigation up to the present. The article also uses a domains perspective to develop a new taxonomy of approaches to leadership, and LMX is discussed within this taxonomy as a relationship-based approach to leadership. Common questions and issues concerning LMX are addressed, and directions for future research are provided.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c tIn this review, we develop a framework to guide future research and to examine the execution of leadership in extreme contexts. We start by defining and distinguishing extreme contexts from crisis and other contexts. A five component typology is developed comprised of magnitude of consequences, form of threat, probability of consequences, location in time and physical or psychological-social proximity. We discuss the unique influences these components have on leadership processes in extreme contexts examining the relevance of organization types such as critical action and high reliability organizations. Further, we present a set of factors that may attenuate or intensify the dimensions comprising an extreme context, thus influencing either a team or organization's ability for adaptive leadership response. Ultimately this framework seeks to develop a richer understanding of extreme contexts to advance the future development of contextualized theories of leadership for extreme contexts.Published by Elsevier Inc.

This paper asks how complexity theory informs the role of leadership in organizations. Complexity theory is a science of complexly interacting systems; it explores the nature of interaction and adaptation in such systems and how they influence such things as emergence, innovation, and fitness. We argue that complexity theory focuses leadership efforts on behaviors that enable organizational effectiveness, as opposed to determining or guiding effectiveness. Complexity science broadens conceptualizations of leadership from perspectives that are heavily invested in psychology and social psychology (e.g., human relations models) to include processes for managing dynamic systems and interconnectivity. We develop a definition of organizational complexity and apply it to leadership science, discuss strategies for enabling complexity and effectiveness, and delve into the relationship between complexity theory and other currently important leadership theories. The paper concludes with a discussion of possible implications for research strategies in the social sciences.A "new science" of complexity theory has emerged in the physical sciences and recently made its way into the social sciences