The present empirical investigation had a 3-fold purpose: (a) to cross-validate L. R. Offermann, J. K. Kennedy, and P. W. Wirtz's (1994) scale of Implicit Leadership Theories (ILTs) in several organizational settings and to further provide a shorter scale of ILTs in organizations; (b) to assess the generalizability of ILTs across different employee groups, and (c) to evaluate ILTs' change over time. Two independent samples were used for the scale validation (N1 = 500 and N2 = 439). A 6-factor structure (Sensitivity, Intelligence, Dedication, Dynamism, Tyranny, and Masculinity) was found to most accurately represent ELTs in organizational settings. Regarding the generalizability of ILTs, although the 6-factor structure was consistent across different employee groups, there was only partial support for total factorial invariance. Finally, evaluation of gamma, beta, and alpha change provided support for ILTs' stability over time.

The results of the present longitudinal study demonstrate the importance of implicit leadership theories (ILTs) for the quality of leader-member exchanges (LMX) and employees' organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and well-being. Results based on a sample of 439 employees who completed the study questionnaires at 2 time points showed that the closer employees perceived their actual manager's profile to be to the ILTs they endorsed, the better the quality of LMX. Results also indicated that the implicit-explicit leadership traits difference had indirect effects on employee attitudes and well-being. These findings were consistent across employee groups that differed in terms of job demand and the duration of manager-employee relation, but not in terms of motivation. Furthermore, crossed-lagged modeling analyses of the longitudinal data explored the possibility of reciprocal effects between implicit-explicit leadership traits difference and LMX and provided support for the initially hypothesized direction of causal effects.

This paper reports a meta-analysis that examines the relation between Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) relationship quality and a multi-dimensional model of work performance (task, citizenship and counterproductive performance). The results show a positive relationship between LMX and task performance (146 samples, ρ= .30), citizenship performance (97 samples, ρ= .34) and negatively with counterproductive performance (19 samples, ρ= -.24). Of note, there was a positive relationship between LMX and objective task performance (20 samples, ρ = .24). Trust, motivation, empowerment and job satisfaction mediated the relationship between LMX and task and citizenship performance with trust in the leader having the largest effect. There was no difference due to LMX measurement instrument (e.g., LMX7, LMX-MDM). Overall, the relationship between LMX and performance was weaker when (i) measures were obtained from a different source or method and (ii) LMX was measured by the follower than the leader (with common source and method biased effects stronger for leader-rated LMX quality). Finally, there was evidence for LMX leading to task performance but not for reverse or reciprocal directions of effects.

No abstract

This paper reports a meta‐analysis that examines the relationship between leader–member exchange (LMX) relationship quality and a multidimensional model of work performance (task, citizenship, and counterproductive performance). The results show a positive relationship between LMX and task performance (146 samples, ρ = .30) as well as citizenship performance (97 samples, ρ = .34), and negatively with counterproductive performance (19 samples, ρ = ‒.24). Of note, there was a positive relationship between LMX and objective task performance (20 samples, ρ = .24). Trust, motivation, empowerment, and job satisfaction mediated the relationship between LMX and task and citizenship performance with trust in the leader having the largest effect. There was no difference due to LMX measurement instrument (e.g., LMX7, LMX‐MDM). Overall, the relationship between LMX and performance was weaker when (a) measures were obtained from a different source or method and (b) LMX was measured by the follower than the leader (with common source‐ and method‐biased effects stronger for leader‐rated LMX quality). Finally, there was evidence for LMX leading to task performance but not for reverse or reciprocal directions of effects.

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.

Terms such as moral and ethical leadership are used widely in theory, yet little systematic research has related a sociomoral dimension to leadership in organizations. This study investigated whether managers' moral reasoning (n = 132) was associated with the transformational and transactional leadership behaviors they exhibited as perceived by their subordinates (n = 407). Managers completed the Defining Issues Test (J. R. Rest, 1990), whereas their subordinates completed the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (B. M. Bass & B. J. Avolio, 1995). Analysis of covariance indicated that managers scoring in the highest group of the moral-reasoning distribution exhibited more transformational leadership behaviors than leaders scoring in the lowest group. As expected, there was no relationship between moral-reasoning group and transactional leadership behaviors. Implications for leadership development are discussed.

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.