Leader-Follower Exchange Quality: The Role of Personal and Interpersonal Attributes.

Relational Leadership Theory: Exploring the Social Processes of Leadership and Organizing

“…Uhl-Bien et al (2000) describe the relationship development process as beginning with two individuals, who engage in an interaction or exchange sequence (a series of interactions). The nature of these interactions depends on several things: First, it depends on the characteristics each individual brings to the relationship, including their personal, physical, and psychological makeup that remains relatively stable and disposes them to approach interpersonal situations in a certain way (Phillips & Bedeian, 1994). Second, it depends on the individuals' expectations of the exchange, which are developed based on past experience, outside information about the other, and implicit leadership theories or 'schemas' (Lord & Maher, 1991).…”

Leadership in the Shaping and Implementation of Collaboration Agendas: How Things Happen in a (Not Quite) Joined-Up World.

“…In contrast, the contingency or situational approach emphasizes variables in the particular organizational situation under examination that will moderate the effectiveness of different leadership behaviors (Avolio, Howell, & Sosik, 1999;Fiedler, 1967;Graeff, 1983;Hersey & Blanchard, 1977;Howell, Dorfman, & Kerr, 1986). A variant of this approach, and a popular research thrust in recent years, is leader-member exchange theory, in which the unit of analysis, the dyadic relationship between a leader and individual members of a work group, suggests that leaders develop different types of relationships with different members (Phillips & Bedeian, 1994;Schriesheim, Neider, & Scandura, 1998;Sparrow & Liden, 1997;Wayne, Shore, & Liden, 1997). In the transformational, visionary, or charismatic approach, leaders are seen as "managers of meaning" (Bryman, 1996: 280) who raise the aspirations of followers in such a way that the leaders' and followers' aspirations are fused (Bass, 1985;Burns, 1978;Pawar & Eastman, 1987;Shamir, House, & Arthur, 1993).…”

An archival review of preferred methods for theory building in follower research

“…The LMX theory can thus be accused of favouritism and unfairness. Phillips and Bedeian (1994) commented on leader-follower attribution exchanges that have been conducted. Attitudinal similarity and introversion or extroversion measures were inferred to be more positively related to leader-member exchange level than follower growth, need strength and locus of control.…”