What Is Wrong With Treating Followers Differently? The Basis of Leader–Member Exchange Differentiation Matters

Chen, Xiaoping; He, Wei; Weng, Liang-Chieh

doi:10.1177/0149206315598372

Cited by 68 publications

(107 citation statements)

References 95 publications

(199 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, scholars have focused on LMX differentiation in teams, which describes the extent to which team members have different levels of exchange with their leaders. Chen, He, and Weng () found that LMX differentiation had a negative impact on team proactive behavior, but this effect became weaker when the differentiation was based more on individuals' task performance and organizational citizenship behavior. Third, the effect of exchange relationships with higher level leaders have been examined.…”

Section: Social Context Factors As Antecedents Of Proactive Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

How does the social context fuel the proactive fire? A multilevel review and theoretical synthesis

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The role of social context (e.g., leadership, team climate, and organizational support) in shaping employee proactive behavior has received considerable attention and has been investigated across multiple forms of proactive behavior. However, the research has not been well integrated. In this review, we adopt a multilevel approach to synthesize what is known about how social context factors influence employees' proactive behavior, as well as what mechanisms underpin these effects. Our analyses show that leader‐, team‐, and organization‐related social context factors mainly influence employee proactivity through shaping “reason to,” “can do,” and “energized to” states (i.e., proactive motivational states) via individual‐, team‐, and cross‐level processes. That has been most frequently investigated is the effect of the discretionary social context, particularly leadership, on proactive behavior. We also review the interaction effects between social context factors and other factors on employee proactive behavior and found inconsistent support for the motivational‐fit perspective that stimuli with the same directions enhance each other's effect. We offer a research agenda to advance theoretical insights on this important topic.

show abstract

Section: Social Context Factors As Antecedents Of Proactive Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

How does the social context fuel the proactive fire? A multilevel review and theoretical synthesis

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Low LMX variation involves equal treatment of followers, which could occur regardless of relative contribution, and thus fulfils the norm of equality and contravenes the norm of equity. Empirical studies examining both cognitive and affective group states (e.g., Chen, He, & Weng, ; Cobb & Lau, ; Li & Liao, ) have reported moderate negative correlations between LMX variation and processes such as group cohesion, group proactivity, coordination, and communication. A particularly noteworthy study is that of Li and Liao () which was longitudinal in design and collected objective outcomes of performance (reported as team profit).…”

Section: Theoretical Approaches and Empirical Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of particular interest was that LMX variation had a negative effect on climate strength, meaning it reduced the consistency of justice perceptions (more than the level or average climate perceptions). Examining both justice and conflict, Chen et al () found that LMX differentiation was more harmful when the grounds for differentiating amongst team members were not considered “fair” (i.e., team members' task performance was not the main basis for leaders' differentiation processes).…”

Section: Theoretical Approaches and Empirical Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leader–member exchange (LMX) differentiation and work outcomes: Conceptual clarification and critical review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary According to leader–member exchange (LMX) theory, leaders develop different quality relationships with followers in their team (termed LMX differentiation). An important theoretical question concerns how different LMX relationships within a team affect followers' work outcomes. This paper provides a critical review of the concept of LMX differentiation. We propose that the LMX differentiation process leads to patterns of LMX relationships that can be captured by 3 properties (central tendency, variation, and relative position). We describe a taxonomy illustrating the different ways these properties have been conceptualized and measured. We identify 2 approaches to LMX differentiation as being a “perspective of the team” (that are shared perceptions amongst team members) or a “perspective of the follower” (subjective perceptions unique to each follower). These perspectives lead to different types of measures that predict different outcomes at the individual and team levels. We describe theoretical models employed to explain the effects of LMX differentiation (justice, social comparison, and social identity theories). Generally, the lower the within‐team variation in LMX or the more a team member's LMX is higher than the mean team LMX, the better are the work outcomes, but many moderators condition these effects. Finally, we identify some key areas for future research.

show abstract

“…The idea of differentiated leadership was first elaborated in the leader-member exchange (LMX) literature (Chen, He, and Weng 2015;Erdogan and Bauer 2010;Liden et al 2006), and was later extended to research in transformational leadership (Cole and Bedeian 2007;Cole et al 2011;Wu et al 2010). Wu and colleagues (2010) defined differentiated leadership as "the case in which a leader exhibits varying levels of individual-focused leadership behavior to different group members" (p. 90).…”

Section: Differentiated Empowering Leadership and Followers' Trust Inmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chinese Traditionality Matters: Effects of Differentiated Empowering Leadership on Followers’ Trust in Leaders and Work Outcomes

Huo

Long

2015

J Bus Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From the perspective of the integrative model of organizational trust, this study proposes a multi-level model for whether, how, and when differentiated empowering leadership influences followers' trust in leaders and their work outcomes. Drawing on a sample of 372 followers from 97 teams in China, it was found that the negative effect of differentiated empowering leadership on followers' trust in leaders became salient when followers' Chinese traditionality was low. Moreover, followers' trust in leaders mediated the effect of differentiated empowering leadership and Chinese traditionality on followers' in-role performance, extra-role performance, and counterproductive work behaviors toward the organization. These findings have implications for managerial theory and practice in the domains of trust and differentiated empowering leadership.

show abstract

What Is Wrong With Treating Followers Differently? The Basis of Leader–Member Exchange Differentiation Matters

Cited by 68 publications

References 95 publications

How does the social context fuel the proactive fire? A multilevel review and theoretical synthesis

How does the social context fuel the proactive fire? A multilevel review and theoretical synthesis

Leader–member exchange (LMX) differentiation and work outcomes: Conceptual clarification and critical review

Chinese Traditionality Matters: Effects of Differentiated Empowering Leadership on Followers’ Trust in Leaders and Work Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About