2010
DOI: 10.1080/13594320902978458
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The X-factor: On the relevance of implicit leadership and followership theories for leader–member exchange agreement

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
109
0
4

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 90 publications
(122 citation statements)
references
References 107 publications
5
109
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, it would be more valid to ask leaders about their own cognitions and perceptions of these constructs than external observers, who may have less accurate appraisals. For example, meta-analyses indicate that leaders and followers significantly disagree on their perceptions of LMX quality (correlations range from .29 to .37) (Gerstner & Day, 1997;Sin, Nahrgang, & Morgeson, 2009), suggesting that followers may not be fully attuned to leaders' intrapsychic processes (van Gils et al, 2010). However, this approach raises concern of common method bias, which will be addressed below.…”
Section: Sample and Data Collection Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Therefore, it would be more valid to ask leaders about their own cognitions and perceptions of these constructs than external observers, who may have less accurate appraisals. For example, meta-analyses indicate that leaders and followers significantly disagree on their perceptions of LMX quality (correlations range from .29 to .37) (Gerstner & Day, 1997;Sin, Nahrgang, & Morgeson, 2009), suggesting that followers may not be fully attuned to leaders' intrapsychic processes (van Gils et al, 2010). However, this approach raises concern of common method bias, which will be addressed below.…”
Section: Sample and Data Collection Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…LIFTs are cognitive categories that reflect the conceptions that leaders have about the traits and behaviors of followers (Sy, 2010). LIFTs build on and extend the ILTs literature (e.g., Engle & Lord, 1997;Epitropaki & Martin, 2004;Lord, Foti & de Vader, 1984;Offermann, Kennedy, & Wirtz, 1994) and address gaps in our understanding of leader-follower interpersonal dynamics by explaining how leaders' conceptions of followers shape their judgments of and behaviors toward their own followers (Sy, 2010;van Gils, van Quaquebeke, & van Knippenberg, 2010). Researchers have long agreed that categorizing other people is an inevitable economizing strategy to simplify the complexity of our daily interactions (e.g., Allport, 1954;Sherif, 1948;Tajfel, 1969 and corresponding knowledge structures, which can influence perceivers' cognitions, affect, and behavior (e.g., Macrae & Bodenhausen, 2000).…”
Section: Leaders' Implicit Followership Theoriesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…OBSE, selfefficacy (Pierce & Gardner, 2004;Schyns, 2004). However, since followers play an important role in defining the relationship quality (Van Gils, van Quaquebeke, & Van Knippenberg, 2010), the opposite, i.e. that employee characteristics may influence the LMX relationship, has also been suggested (Lord et al, 1999;Pierce & Gardner, 2004).…”
Section: Lmx and Personal Resourcesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…IFTs put the focus of the research perspective on the followers. IFTs are a kind of expectation of leaders to followers, which includes effective or positive characteristics related to followers (Van Gils et al, 2010). Carsten and Uhl-Bien (2009) …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%