This week I had the pleasure of learning about the Leader-Member
Exchange Theory of Leadership (LMX). This theory of leadership differs from the
previous styles of leadership we have studied over the last couple of weeks
because it does not focus solely on the leader or the follower, but the
relationship between the leader and the follower. According to Rowe and
Guerrero (2013), “The focal point in LMX theory is the dyadic relationship
between a leader and each of his or her followers” (p. 200). This theory is one
that I feel passionate about. In previous posts, I have discussed my feelings
for the people of an organization. I have talked about how I feel that the
people are the most important part of a company as they are more imperative
than the facilities, equipment or organization itself. The leader-member
exchange theory includes a discussion of the perils of a poor leader-member
relationship.
LMX is defined by the’ in-group’ and the ‘out-group.’
The in-group members are given more responsibility due to their strong
relationship with the leader. The out group members come to work and do the
minimum required for their job. This theory is important because it treats the
leader and follower equally in the relationship. If a follower is hired with an
attitude that they are just there for the paycheck and will give no additional
effort, then they will always remain in the out-group. However, if a follower
is hired and they have the attitude that they are going to work harder than
asked, but the leader does not extend the proverbial olive branch to build the
relationship then this follower will also remain in the out-group. I believe
the leader-member exchange theory is outstanding, but leaders must give all
members a chance and not form clicks in their department.
According to Rowe and Guerrero (2013), leaders must
attempt to develop a relationship with all followers who have the capability of
becoming an in-group member. I disagree with this statement in that I think
that leaders need to work to develop a relationship with all of their
followers. If the leader does not attempt to build a good relationship with
their followers, then how can trust be developed or reciprocated? Northouse (2013) stated that “Leaders should
look for ways to build trust and respect with all of their followers, thus
making the entire work unit an in-group” (p. 145).
As more Millennials and, eventually, members of
Generation Z enter the workforce, LMX will begin to play a larger role in
organizational leadership. In this high-paced, technologically-savvy world
people want to be recognized and understood. I believe this is the reason that
Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and various other social media sites have become
overwhelmingly popular. People want to tell their story, be understood, and be
appreciated for their effort or view. This is no different in the working
world. People will work harder for a leader who takes the time to invest in a
higher quality relationship with them because of the trust and appreciation
that accompanies this relationship.
As I thought about the relationships in leader-member
exchange theory, I began to paint a picture of children trying to develop a
relationship with their parents with the use of sports. Both of these children
play sports. The first child plays baseball and is in the process of developing
a great relationship with their parents. Mom and dad practice with the child
and come to the games. They show that they care for and trust the boy which
drives the child’s strong work ethic. The other child plays soccer but the
parents work all of the time and, unfortunately, the relationship is not as
strong. However, that does not affect the child’s work ethic. She practices
very hard and scores three goals in the game, but the parents are too busy to
notice. No matter the child’s talent or work ethic they will eventually not
care and mirror the out-group employee who comes into work just to give enough
effort not to be fired.
I began to wonder if I would harder than required for
a leader who attempted to build relationships with their employees and the
answer is a resounding yes. Actually, in my current positon, there have been
two leaders whose styles were polar opposites. My first ‘leader’ was nothing
but a figure head. They would use their employees to their own advantage. They
were not interested in building personal relationships, and all employees were
considered to be a member of the ‘out-group’ no matter the effort put forth. As
a new member of the team, I came in ready to work hard, build trust and prove
my worth. However, the actions of the leader caused me to be to develop zombie
like behaviors at work. I would come into work only to give the minimal effort
required and go home. Because there was no additional effort and not trust or
relationship with the leader, I viewed myself as an average employee.
On the other hand, my current leader does make an
effort to build a relationship with their followers. This week’s discussion
revolved around transformational and charismatic leadership. According to
Northouse, “Charismatic leadership transforms how followers view themselves and
strives to tie each follower’s identity to the organization’s collective
identity” (as cited by Rowe and Guerrero, 2013, p. 216). My current leader uses
a combination of charismatic leadership and LMX theory to create a level of
trust, respect, and appreciation with each follower. This combination of
leadership techniques has transformed the way I view myself from an average
worker to a hard worker who is a member of the in-group. I realized I am
willing to work much harder for this leader. There have been instances where I
have been asked to work nights and weekends, and I accept without question
because I know they will be there with me throughout the journey.
The implications of ‘in-group’ and ‘out-group’ members
play a vital role in meeting organizational goals and increasing production.
Without the individuals, the organization will never meet its goals, and the
results are always better when people are invested. There is no doubt
leadership plays a huge role in follower investment. According to Rowe and
Guerrero (2013), “LMX theory implies that we need to understand that in-groups
and out-groups exist in groups and organizations and that as leaders, we
participate in their development” (p. 202).
Leaders must work to create larger in-groups because the more members in
the in-group, the better the team will do. If the leader does not put forth the
effort, then the team could become all out-group members, and that will spell
trouble for both the leader and organization.
References
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership:
Theory and practice (7th ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Rowe, W. G. & Guerrero L. (2013). Cases in Leadership. (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA. Sage Publications, Inc.
No comments:
Post a Comment