The security to lead: a systematic review of leader and follower attachment styles and leader–member exchange

Abstract

Attachment styles can predict the quality of organisational relationships, particularly in reference to Leader Member Exchange (LMX). However, there is much work to be done in articulating and summarising these findings and in detecting gaps in the literature. This systematic review fills a critical niche by providing a review of the attachment/LMX relationship. Using the PRISMA framework, this review integrates research on attachment styles and LMX by evaluating associations between secure, anxious, and avoidant attachment styles with LMX for leaders and followers. Across ten studies, we review the evidence for associations between leader and follower attachment and LMX. We seek to investigate if secure attachment is associated with high-quality LMX and if insecure attachment is associated with lower quality LMX. Our review in general provides mixed support for these propositions, although the association of avoidant attachment for followers with LMX received consistent support. Furthermore, our results highlight the need to consider potential moderating and mediating factors within the attachment/LMX relationship. Based on the patterns of these relationships and the methodological gaps in the literature, we discuss the managerial implications for attachment styles in work and organisational psychology and suggest several directions for future research on the attachment-LMX relationship.

A strange situation indeed: Fostering leader–follower attachment security during unprecedented crisis

“…The early applications of attachment theory to the study of leadership emphasized the parallels and distinctions between parent-child relationships and that of leader and follower (Kahn and Kram, 1994;Kahn, 1995;Keller and Cacioppe, 2001;Keller, 2003;Popper and Mayseless, 2003). As this research gained traction, leadership scholars extended their focus to explore how attachment theory could be integrated with leadership theories such as authentic leadership theory (Hinojosa et al, 2014), charismatic leadership theory (Shalit et al, 2010), leader member exchange theory (Fein et al, 2020) and transformational leadership theory (Popper et al, 2000).…”

“…Adult attachment research has since expanded to the context of organizations and workplace relationships (for reviews, see Harms, 2011 andYip et al, 2017). Organizational scholars have applied attachment theory to study authority in the workplace (Kahn and Kram, 1994), change agents (Kahn, 1995), employee health (Joplin et al, 1999), group dynamics (Bliese and Britt, 2001;Marmarosh et al, 2009;Mikulincer and Shaver, 2017;Thomas, 2000;Tucker et al, 2005), leadership effectiveness (Berson et al, 2006) and leader-follower relationships (Fein et al, 2020;Mayseless and Popper, 2018;Davidovitz et al, 2007).…”

Dynamics of person-supervisor fit in relationship quality and well-being of university academicians

“…Supervisors as first-line leaders in organisations have been posited to have first-hand influence on the work experience of their subordinates given their proximity to them. As such, this nature of leadership suggests that it is better viewed as interpersonal relationship involving the leader and subordinates (Fairhurst and Uhl-Bien, 2012; Fein et al , 2020; Molines et al , 2020; Tanskanen et al , 2019), which is considered as the core and probably the most vital relationship in the workplace (Thomas et al , 2013). As a social process, it focuses on the intricate interactions of relational process targeted at important individual and organisational outcomes.…”

Time-use preference and adaptation in relational exchanges

“…Even though similarity between a leader and team member has a strong influence on the quality of relationships (Henderson et al, 2009), there are many more personal and interpersonal factors that impact the development of quality relational exchanges (Dulebohn, Bommer, Liden, Brouer, & Ferris, 2012). Different attachment styles such as the predisposition to be anxious, secure or avoidant in relationships, sometimes affect the relational quality too (Fein, Benea, Idzadikhah, & Tziner, 2020).…”