You are on page 1of 19

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.


“Meta-Analytic Review of Leader–Member
Exchange Theory: Correlates and Construct

Article in Journal of Applied Psychology · November 1997
Impact Factor: 4.31 · DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.82.6.827


1,061 336

2 authors, including:

David V. Day
University of Western Australia


All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: David V. Day
letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 19 June 2016

1948)... Univer. group. and its relationships with other Charlotte R. Dyadic relationship development is eau. The relationship between LMX and actual turnover was not significant. (c) a prescriptive approach ety for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. and most of the work associated with sity Park. in-groups and out- is based on Charlotte R. Inc. recent developments. We also thank Ste. Pennsylvania. Mintzberg. Unlike traditional theories that sions of the theoretical background and development of seek to explain leadership as a function of personal char. Florida. the quality of the relationship that studying hypothesized linkages between leadership pro. Rela- tionships between LMX and its correlates are examined. 1995. Uhl- theories by its focus on the dyadic relationship between Bien. including measurement and leader-member agreement. Vol. The Penn. there is unresolved ambiguity about the nature of the con- struct. role clarity. develops between a leader and a follower is predictive of cesses and outcomes. Department of Psy- organizational variables. Results suggest significant relationships between LMX and job performance. and (d) LMX as a sys- Orlando. 1975). them is theoretical. & Haga. proaches focused on leader traits and behaviors (e. 1990. Gerstner and David V. Janet Swim. group and network levels). 827-844 0021-9010/97/S3. 429 Bruce V. & Scandura. Graen. LMX is distinguished from other leadership Uhl-Bien. Meta-analysis showed that the LMX7 (7-item LMX) measure has the soundest psychometric properties of all instruments and that LMX is congruent with numerous empirical relationships associated with transformational leadership. Graen & Cash. This article discovery of differentiated dyads (i. an operable alternative to the traditional leadership ap- tion of the dyadic relationship as the level of analysis. features of the situation. 1975. satisfaction with supervi- sion. Liden. or an and theoretical development. this basic unit of analysis has re- leader-member exchange (LMX) theory has evolved into mained unchanged. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed tems-level perspective (i. First proposed by Graeri and col. The latter two stages are fairly sylvania State University. Graen and Uhl-Bien (1995) classified the evolu- marino on earlier versions of this article. 6. Moore Building. No. An earlier groups).. leader vs. LMX is unique in its adop.e. review. 16802-3104. Cashman. 1997.00 Meta-Analytic Review of Leader-Member Exchange Theory: Correlates and Construct Issues Charlotte R. overall satisfaction. LMX continues to provide interaction between the two. John Mathieu. 82. Stogdill. Day. one of the more interesting and useful approaches for According to LMX. We gratefully acknowledge the contributions made by Dan part to the evolving nature of LMX theory. Within the broad area of organizational leadership. Graen. 1973. 1997. els of analysis. tion of LMX theory into four stages: (a) work socializa- phanie Klein for coding all the studies used in these analyses tion and vertical dyad linkage where the focus was on the and Chuck Pierce for assisting us with data analysis. Although researchers remain enthusiastic about LMX. moving beyond the dyad to to Charlotte R. and organizational lev- leagues (Dansereau. After more than 25 years of empirical research acteristics of the leader. Jim Farr. & Graen.e. its measurement. to dyadic partnership building. & Wayne. member competence. 1976.g. Danser. Gerstner and David V. LMX). The majority of empirical research 827 . 1973. Sparrowe. Although the theory has been modified and expanded Bass. since first proposed. Graen. This ambiguity may be due in chology.. Department of Psychology. grounded in role and exchange theories (see Graen & man.e. Day The Pennsylvania State University The leader-member exchange (LMX) literature is reviewed using meta-analysis. and turnover intentions. member) as moderators of the relationships between LMX and its correlates. (b) LMX where the focus was on the relation- version was presented at the 10th annual conference of the Soci- ship quality and its outcomes. as are issues related to the LMX construct. Leader and member LMX perceptions were only moderately related. In a recent Brass. The Pennsylvania State University. Gerstner. May 1995. for more detailed discus- a leader and a member. Partial support was found for measurement instrument and perspective (i. Gerstner's master's thesis. commitment.Journal of Applied Psychology Copyright 1997 by the American Psychological Association. 1997. role conflict. outcomes at the individual. and Francis Yam.

e. in press.50 between leader LMX and member LMX. We tested in the operationalization of the core construct. which LMX measurement instruments over the years. The low correlation between leader and member should best be measured.828 GERSTNER AND DAY evaluating factors thought to contribute to high-quality interrelated dimensions of respect. and the recent recommendation provided by Graen and Uhl-Bien (1995) that it be adopted as the Correlates standard measure of LMX.90 range. An issue preted as evidence of scale unidimensionality (Cortina. We use the results of these tive is your working relationship with your leader [fol- quantitative summaries to draw conclusions about LMX lower]?". multidi. p. 236). et al.. Neider. indicating the sues related to the LMX construct.35. Liden relation. in press.. but they are al] highly related article is to quantitatively summarize and evaluate the and can be adequately measured with a unidimensional mea- existing LMX research base to build a foundation for sure of LMX. & Novak. Harris & Schaubroeck. > . We also examined measurement perspective as between-study moderator of outcomes. as well by the centroid item of the LMX7 scale (i. they concluded that LMX may stand these extensions of LMX theory. The con. there is 1986.e... On the basis of a potential between-study moderator of the relationship the amount of research that has gone into its development between LMX and its correlates.. 1982) would demonstrate the highest reliability performance-related and attitudinal variables. Scandura. Through this proposition by estimating the sample-weighted corre- the use of meta-analytic techniques. Thus. LMX can be measured from both leader ment and empirical research. has demonstrated relatively low agreement (r = .g. Dienesch and meaning that the average item intercorrelation is also relatively Liden proposed that LMX is comprised of the dimensions large. Graen and Uhl- of negotiating latitude (NL) to more elaborate. Scandura. agreement can be used as an index of the quality of data.80) cannot always be inter- Internal consistency and unidimensionality. . 1 Although a large alpha (e. 1992) concerns the potential < 10). Schriesheim et al. that has been raised by numerous researchers (e. & Tepper. we expected that averaged alphas future empirical work. however. Thus. Clearly. and refinement. would be generally large (i. . internal consistency) and largest correlations with other variables.. It is possible that a scale with a relatively high alpha may of perceived contribution. a large coefficient alpha estimate can be construed as multidimensionality of LMX. others have reported much Instruments. we expected that the seven- item LMX measure (LMX7. trust. Bien (1995) suggested that the degree of leader-member mensional scales (e. it does provide information regarding the average interitem cor- Dienesch & Liden. 1986. 1993). Liden & Maslyn. For example.e. Novak. Despite claims of an apparently robust lower correlations (e. as compared with other LMX measures. cor- struct of LMX has evolved from the two-item measure rected. it was possible to lation between corresponding leader and member LMX examine the type of measurement instrument as a potential ratings. Graen. however... Graen and represent a multidimensional construct. 1992). They implied that an aggregate. reported a correlation of only . Liden & Maslyn. phenomenon (e. 1997. We addressed the possibility of multiple dimensions and work-related outcomes occurred during the second underpinning the LMX scales by examining aggregated in- stage of LMX theory development. sample-weighted correla- ent studies use different LMX scales. but is it the same construct when measured from different perspectives? Empirical support for the relationship between leader LMX and An Analysis of LMX Issues member LMX has been equivocal. Graen & Uhl-Bien. loyalty. LMX is generally found to be associated with positive kamp.24 between perspec- surprisingly little agreement on what LMX is or how it tives). Perspective. and identify opportunities for future theoretical develop. "How effec- as the correlates of LMX. more research is needed to under. More specifically. The theoretical progression of exchange is consistent with meta-analytic research on LMX described above is illustrated by the changes in self-supervisor agreement on performance ratings. Graen. The goal of this comprise several dimensions.80.g.. Therefore. especially (i. 1995). Graen & Uhl-Bien. and mutual obliga- exchanges and analyzing the connection between LMX tion. it is unclear whether tion assessing the level of agreement between leader and conflicting results are due to deficiencies in the theory or member reports would be positive and strong. Graen and Cashman Measurement and Dimensionality (1975) found a correlation of .e. above .. the dimensions Uhl-Bien (1995) argued that LMX is comprised of the are probably highly intercorrelated.g. 1988). and affect. if the number of items is reasonably small (e.g.. ternal consistency (i.g. we consider is. coefficient alpha) estimates of It could be argued that the last two stages show the most LMX.g. Schries. heim. Because differ... & Sommer. and member perspectives.80).1 Graen and Uhl-Bien noted that Cronbach alphas for potential for describing leadership behaviors in complex multidimensional LMX measures were consistently in the organizations. including measurement likelihood of one underlying LMX dimension summarized scale properties and leader-member agreement.

1982. conference papers.. The reference lists of identified themes found in the LMX7 scale. We identified relevant published articles primarily Novak. Vecchio & Gobdel.. & Taber. the study had to measure enced either of the seminal LMX articles (i. Finally. 1985). we worked with a total of 85 general predictive validity. and dyadic leadership. and several cles. 1990). those variables hypothesized to affect the development of Behavior and Human Performance (later Organizational Be. ables hypothesized to result from LMX). in press. 1990). Because most of the chology from 1975 to 1996 to identify studies that measured empirical research reviewed in this article is correlational and LMX. we avoid discussing them in terms of causal interest.g.. such as member competence (cf. In particular. Administrative From a conceptual standpoint.e. We identified disserta. therefore. Liden. literature on LMX correlates into two categories: antecedents man Relations. (c) higher overall These unpublished studies were also included in the analyses. & to be only moderately correlated. but we chose to be negative). construct operationalization is far from consistent. different perspectives (leader vs.. & Sommerkamp. suggested that a meta-analysis can be conducted with as few as two studies (Hunter. Graen. 1993). Constructs Included in the Meta-Analyses LMX. and Personnel Psy. 1986). were not actively solicited. Although this term is commonly found in the litera- Method ture to refer to the dyadic relationship between a leader and a member. has been was necessary to ensure that the number of studies for each equivocal. those vari- havior and Human Decision Processes). (b) better 1996) computer database. The relationships analyzed are described in the following section. and (c) the relationship reported Kim & Organ. Group and Organization Management. we conducted a man- ^ ual search of Academy of Management Journal. the Social Sciences Citations Index to identify articles that refer. 1987). We used their general working relationship. The last criterion Graen. den & Maslyn. Although it has been previously investigated correlates of LMX. and (f) more positive results were sufficient to calculate an effect size for the relation- role perceptions (e. These include (a) higher performance rat. We Literature Search identified seven different versions of the LMX scales developed by Graen and colleagues. 1982)... Schriesheim et al. 1975). Liden. 1982. member) might demon- strate divergent relationships due to variability in the con- struct's meaning inherent in these perspectives. . & Hoel. We identified a population of 164 studies using these proce- (d) greater satisfaction with supervisor (e. Vecchio. (e) stronger organizational com- exchange quality was measured in the study. & Sommerkamp. although measures from the independent samples. dyadic exchange quality in a manner consistent with the general 1975. & Stilwell. two additional LMX measures (Li- The studies included for analysis consisted of published arti. To be included in the analyses. doctoral dissertations. we treat them all as correlates.. For period from 1990 to 1994 by manually searching the programs purposes of the present analyses. Because of the variability empirical studies and theoretical reviews were also cross- checked for additional references. Snyder & Binning.. We identified conference papers presented during the inferences regarding the direction of these relationships. and member LMX perceptions. (b) the reported mitment (e. Liden et al. criteria. 1993) and turnover (cf. 1982) is by far the most frequently through computer-based searches of the Psyclnfo (1984-1996). Schmidt.e. Gerstner. The criteria for inclusion in the analyses were (a) dyadic Green. 1984). it makes sense to divide the Science Quarterly. we retained 79 studies for the analyses. and unpublished modified versions of these scales. Graen. Support ship between exchange quality and a correlate. request from Charlotte R. LMX7 differs from the earlier VDL mea- PsycLit (1974-1984). Hu.g. We expected LMX scale reliability to be six as the cutoff for our study because of concerns about Type generally acceptable and leader and member LMX ratings I and Type II errors in the moderator analyses (Sackett. There is no strict rule about the minimum role conflict. tions using the Dissertations Abstracts International (1975- ings (e. and ABI/INFORM (1975-1996) data. or between leader for other relationships. On the basis of these specific moderating variables.3 Six studies sized that the LMX7 scale would demonstrate the best contained two samples. LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGE META-ANALYSIS 829 for members. dures. leader-member relationships) and outcomes (i. sures in that it does not focus on the amount of negotiating bases using the keywords leader—member exchange. The LMX7 scale (Qraen. 1985).2 In general. was also reported in at least five other studies.. Harris.. Spector & Levine. kamp. 1986.g.e.g. Journal of Applied Psychology. exchange quality. Graen & Cashman. Duchon. manuscripts. Novak. Although unpublished manuscripts objective performance (e. & Jackson. satisfaction (e.g. Organizational (i. 3 for the annual Society for Industrial-Organizational Psychology A list of the reasons for study exclusion is available on and Academy of Management meetings.. meta-analysis was adequate for drawing generalizable conclu- Our meta-analysis provided overall effect estimates for sions about the proposed relationships. 1982. Wayne. 1982). 1992). used LMX measure. vertical latitude a leader allows a member but rather on the nature of dyad linkage. although it may not have been the primary variable of cross-sectional. Nystrom. & Sommer. Dansereau et al. second-order we expected that correlations between LMX and member sampling error poses a distinct threat to the validity of results performance and attitudinal variables would be positive when only a small number of studies are included (Hunter & and strong (the exceptions being turnover processes and Schmidt. We proposed and tested Orr.g. some authors sent unpublished manu- scripts when communicating about other published studies. in which cases the direction was expected number of studies to include in a meta-analysis. we hypothe.. Novak.

. our anal. We examined the relationship between wilhin-study correlations (Huffcutt. Steers. (Bass. cifically to a correlate of LMX but rather to the agreement Kroeck. 1990). (c) type of sample (lab versus field.075 coding satisfaction with the supervisor. We examined two constructs related to work were coded independently by two raters (Charlotte R. 1973). statistical artifacts such as measurement error can attenuate Turnover processes. and range). supervisory ratings of a member's job performance. Day. Gerstner satisfaction in the meta-analysis: overall job satisfaction and and a psychology doctoral student). article. Because competence was conceptualized as a more changed to reflect a dyadic perspective. In the present meta-analyses. which typically meant indexes of the quantity or quality instrument.. In such instances. We used correlation coefficients in the computation of all effect naire. We then averaged the rfs to ceptions. LMX and turnover in two separate analyses. We did not include global measure of ability. leader or of work. All disagreements were resolved through discussion with organization. We evaluated studies on between leader and member regarding LMX quality. Novak. This analysis did not refer spe- dyadic in nature and have recently been reviewed by Lowe. However.e. a closer estimate verse coded). In cases of uncertainty. of satisfaction. conference paper. Olkin (1985). mitment scales developed by Mowday. Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire. 1985) because these relationships are not consistently Leader-member agreement. only one effect size from each sample in each meta-analysis. We organization. measurement instrument and reliability). author(s) to determine if they would classify their measure as LMX. (g) LMX measurement perspective (i. Although there are many dif. Many different aspects of role perceptions corrected the corresponding sample-weighted correlations for have been linked to LMX. Graen. ables (i. dissertation.. we cognitive ability tests. Objective performance referred to type of field sample). Measures of competence included research before the specific LMX scales were developed (e. more explicitly to how satisfied a member was with his or her working relationship with a supervisor. In addition to the correlations between LMX and the con- We excluded global measures of competence (i. (h) scale properties of LMX measure (i.830 GERSTNER AND DAY found in scales explicitly labeled "LMX. with 86% agreement between the two how satisfied a member was with the job in general or the raters. and Porter When measurement reliability information was available for (1979). Dansereau. House. All studies a case-by-case basis to determine if the constructs used could that reported a correlation between leader LMX and member be classified as LMX. We ferent types of commitment discussed in the literature. LBDQ).e. (b) publication form them separately in the relationship between competence and (i. both self. such as the total number of cases processed or the total member). Hoppock Scale. whereas satisfaction with the supervisor referred David V. & Sommerkamp. we also Role perceptions. and Minnesota Satisfaction Question. and Sivasubramaniam (1996). & Cashman. In order to preserve the independence of samples. If a correlation coefficient could not be calculated from the one of the facet scales associated with these general measures reported statistics. unpublished manuscript). not related structs described above. One analysis was Hunter & Schmidt. All studies Satisfaction. we . we contacted the LMX were included in this analysis.and supervisor ratings of general ability or expertise. Measures of both attitudinal and calcu. book chapter. we converted rs to lated (or behavioral) commitment were included.g. reliability sales in dollars (e. 1990). and correction formulas to the study-level correlations. or LMX. and experimental manipulations of com- included studies using the LBDQ only if the item referents were petence. d+. This construct was operationalized as subjective. obtain an estimate of the overall effect size. & Bennet.. Although the application of corrections is number of studies available to meta-analyze all role perceptions.. however. the following information was coded to performance in a specific job) from this analysis but analyzed for each study: (a) date of publication. With two ex. all studies in this analysis used a version of the com. we included Organizational commitment. given that Lirtzman(1970). ity information is available.g. (e) demographic infor- all measures of performance that did not rely on a subjective mation regarding leaders and members. 1982. Coded Variables Performance ratings.e. The analysis for role this is an acceptable procedure provided that sufficient reliabil- clarity also included studies that measured role ambiguity (re.e. ( f ) LMX measurement rating. computed estimates of overall effect sizes and homogeneity of ysis included only measures of members' commitment to the effect sizes according to the formulas set forth by Hedges and employing organization.. A total of 1. 1993. Hedges and Olkin (1985) stated that LMX and role conflict and role clarity.g. Graen.. the study was dropped from further analyses. included the LBDQ because it was used in the early empirical Member competence. traditionally associated with the Hunter and Schmidt (1990) We conducted meta-analyses to assess the relationships between approach to meta-analysis. Satisfaction with supervisor was usually measured using sizes. (d) sample size. ds and corrected for sampling error.e. including the Job Description Survey. Minami. Arthur. Before combining effect sizes. Overall satisfaction referred to decisions were made.. and (i) measurement information for criterion vari- Tanner & Castleberry." we also included a conducted using actual turnover data whereas the second analy- few other measures that were used to assess the LMX construct sis included member self-reports of intentions to leave the (e. Several different scales Computation and Analysis of Effect Sizes were used to measure satisfaction. at least 75% of the effect sizes in a given analysis. there was an insufficient measurement error. we did not use specific performance studies that used the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire ratings in this analysis. Objective performance. The most common measure of role perceptions of the true population correlation can be attained by applying was a version of the scale developed by Rizzo.

Gerstner.89) than for the sources of heterogeneity. Some re- searchers have advocated the removal of statistical outliers in and could not be rendered homogeneous with the removal an attempt to achieve homogeneity of effect sizes.77). The categorical moderator analy- present meta-analyses. Huffcutt & Arthur. member). In the of potential moderators. effect of measurement instrument was not supported for this relationship. this effect was heterogeneous and could not be data. meta-analysis with regard to their deviations from the mean Potential implications of this finding are examined along effect size and then sequentially eliminating the largest outlier until the overall Q statistic was nonsignificant (indicating homo- with recommendations for better LMX measurement in geneity of effect sizes).85. . Overall effect sizes for all relationships are In addition to the estimates of overall effect size. homogeneity of effect sizes are inappropriate for disattenuated effect sizes. Hedges & Olkin. pp. According to Hedges.37 corrected for the overall effect size that is calculated from the remaining leader and member LMX unreliability). all others). and the internal consistency acteristics is available on request from Charlotte R. LMX7 internal consistency (. and member reports of LMX was .83). 256-257). the mag- A summary of the relationships included in our study is reported in Table 1.. within-class effect will be nonsignificant (indicating homogene. estimates (i.76). It was necessary to remove nine outliers Results and Discussion (38%) before a homogeneous effect size was obtained. that nearly all heterogeneity can be attributed to statistical arti- with the average number of scale items estimated at 7.e. We analyzed the internal consistency (i. however.29 (. Moderator and out- calculated a homogeneity statistic (Q) for each analysis.e. be sufficient variability in effects to pursue an analysis 1987. and of the type of measurement instrument. (b) LMX perspective (i. although the average sample- specified class variable determined on the basis of study charac. when homogeneity The mean sample-weighted correlation between leader can be achieved by removing fewer than 20% of the outliers. On directions. 1987). as compared with the mean effect size based on all studies. facts. we con. coefficient alpha) of leader and member rected correlations. 1992). which we used For leaders' LMX reports. mean of all other instruments (. the average number of items to examine the impact of these two variables on the homogeneity of the overall effect sizes.36) than the average item one-way analysis of variance that compares effect sizes by a number for members.57. or until 20% of the original studies the final section.. These analyses are analogous to a was slightly greater (M = 8. Thus. we did not interpret the Q statistics associated with the correlations corrected for measurement unreliability. leader vs. 1995). as well as a of fewer than 20% of the effects. Although Hunter and Schmidt (1990) argued the members. LMX7 vs. We Reliability used the corrected correlations only to estimate a mean weighted effect size. results ducted outlier analyses to attain homogeneity of effect sizes.. the relationship between leader 4 A detailed summary table describing individual study char- and member reports of LMX. there appears to more reliable estimate of the true population effect size (Hedges. Overall. LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGE META-ANALYSIS 831 calculated summary effect sizes with both uncorrected and cor. The moderating studies may better represent the population distribution of ef- fects. of these analyses suggest somewhat better reliability for This was accomplished by ordering the effect sizes in each members' (as compared with leaders') reports of LMX. Unlike the member results. the mean sample-weighted alpha was . (b) leader-member agreement. such as This estimated effect size was significantly heterogeneous between-study moderators and statistical outliers. the between-class effect will be significant whereas the explained by outliers. we also summarized and reported in Table 2. the basis of the work of many statisticians. The results nificant Q statistic indicates that the overall mean effect size are organized into the following subsections: (a) reliabil- does not adequately describe all the effect sizes and further ity analysis. for the category of other measures (. which addresses conclusions and future were removed (see Hedges & Olkin. however. heterogeneity may also result from other factors. Hedges (1987) suggested a 20% cutoff as a rule of thumb for concluding Leader-Member Agreement whether the heterogeneity of effect sizes could be attributed to a few aberrant values. 1985. weighted alpha was smaller (.e. For (Hedges. Because the formulas for correlates. If a categorical moderator model completely fits the reports.78) and the alpha estimated In addition to the categorical moderator analyses. we conducted both categorical moderator sis for measurement instrument indicated a generally analyses and statistical outlier analyses to examine potential higher alpha for the LMX7 category (. As with the member teristics. Although the overall effect size was significant.4 We calculated overall effect sizes for the 10 LMX correlates.e. there was no statistically significant difference between ity within classes. we identified two these results indicate generally acceptable internal consis- a priori categorical moderators of overall effect sizes: (a) the tency estimates from the members' perspective regardless LMX measurement instrument (i. LMX reports. On the basis of our review of the literature. Johnson & Turco. Overall. Cronbach's Tt is fairly common for overall effect sizes to be heterogeneous alpha) reliabilities of member LMX and leader LMX. 1985. and (c) LMX moderator analyses are warranted. A sig- lier analyses are summarized in Tables 3-5..

classes were also heterogeneous. However. we for a supervisor to rate someone favorably as a result of a positive LMX relationship can translate into favorable included only one effect size from each study in each analysis.88 Overall satisfaction 33 6.83 Performance ratings (member LMX)a 30 4. It was necessary visor regarding an employee's performance become crite- to do separate analyses for this relationship because many ria on which important decisions are made.832 GERSTNER AND DAY Table 1 Number of Samples. Aggregate Sample Sizes.86 .460 . although the rela- outlier analyses are summarized in Tables 3-5. We conducted two separate may be artificially inflated.85 .006 .105 . by same-source bias and the resulting effect size estimate Performance ratings. It should be noted that the ses.81 — Turnover intentions 8 1. A tendency of the studies included both leader and member reports of LMX.909 . and Reliability Estimates far All Relationships Samples Aggregate sample size Relationship (*) (AO LMX a Correlate a Correlate Performance ratings (leader LMX)' 12 1.074 .89 Objective performance 8 982 . A' = total number of individuals across the k samples.80 Role clarity 14 4. 1986).84 . Although the correlation between leader LMX and sulted in a significant between-class effect for measure. * Member LMX reliability.728 . indicating that unex.885 — — Note. Dashes indicate that the statistic could not be computed. the results for the performance ratings analysis is leader LMX-performance correlation may be confounded described in more detail in the following paragraphs. Supervisory ratings may be member performance ratings. It would be performance ratings was very similar to that estimated . The moderator analysis for measurement instrument re. or negative expectations about an employee through the mance. achieve homogeneity. The mean sample-weighted correlation between mem- LMX Correlates ber reports of LMX and member performance ratings was . (In both cases. one for member-reported influenced by many factors. our results also ment instrument.887 . the performance measure was a supervisor's rating of the member's performance. ratings of member performance was high. however.880 . Furthermore.) The mean sample-weighted correlation between development of LMX perceptions may change the actual leader reports of LMX and member performance ratings performance level of employees (i. this bias is poten- analyses to assess the relationship between LMX and tially of theoretical interest. " Leader LMX reliability.41 (. a ~ average reliability coefficient.81 Organizational commitment 17 3.80 — Satisfaction with supervision 27 5.85 Member competence 15 3. ecy) and not just affect performance ratings (Feldman.30 corrected for LMX unreliability).55 corrected for LMX unreliability). " In both cases.302 .82 .87 Role conflict 12 3.329 — — Member LMX reliability 69 13. self-fulfilling proph- was .84b . nitude was relatively small for a relationship that is pur.82 .84 . the performance mea.218 . outcomes for the employee. Moderator and related with leader performance ratings. The difference between me two analyses is the source of the LMX measure.e.84 .86 .76 .74 Turnover 7 856 . Because tionship is not as strong as the correlation between leader they are somewhat unique compared with the other analy- LMX and performance ratings. creating positive sure was a supervisor's rating of the member's perfor. LMX = leader-member exchange. to preserve sample independence. necessary to remove four (33%) of the effect sizes to portedly dyadic.. These results Overall effect sizes for the analyses between LMX and demonstrate that member LMX perceptions are also cor- its correlates are summarized in Table 2. k — number of studies that included the relationship of interest.75 Construct issues Leader -member agreement 24 3.28 (. The within-class effect sizes for both indicate they are empirically distinct constructs. The moderating effect of measurement instrument for plained variance remained between study outcomes after the correlations between member LMX and corresponding accounting for the measurement instrument.77° Leader LMX reliability 22 3. Therefore. but the perceptions of a super- LMX and one for leader-reported LMX.

28. it was necessary to remove six mance ratings.41 .57 . meta-analytic tistic. sample-weighted correlation.58 0.52** the difference between leader LMX-performance and Leader LMX 12 . the effect sizes within LMX. Significance of Q statistics indicates rejection of the hypothesis mance.68** /-test for dependent correlations using sample size and Leader LMX 6 . " Correlations were corrected for unreliability of both LMX and criterion measures. d+ .85 — Note.16 0.35 .19 0.37" Leader LMX reliability 2.25 member LMX-performance correlations.92** the correlations between (a) leader LMX and perfor- Note. CI = confidence interval.91 0. r = mean leader and member LMX (see Cohen & Cohen.30* Objective performance 0.58 -0. thus suggesting that the outliers were symmetrically We calculated an overall effect size (r = . With the overall sample of studies (i.28 .80** Member competence 9. from the leader's perspective. Performance ratings (combined) 55. Although Table 3 there may be consistent differences in effect sizes attribut- Categorical Moderator Models for Perspective able to the perspective from which LMX is measured.70 0.31" Role clarity 0. Dashes indicate that the statistic could not be computed. »*p < .69 0. some researchers have ar- When these studies were excluded.10** 42 .11 0..28).77 — Member LMX reliability 3. 1983.67 .07 . this model did not completely fit the data. Although this violates the assumption of studies (20%) to achieve homogeneity of effect sizes.46 . This analysis We adopted two different approaches to test whether showed a significant between-class effect for perspective.e.53 -0.67 -0. b Correlations were corrected for only unreliability of LMX measure.28 .29 . and (c) of homogeneity.03*» 14 . Although there was a sig.34 .80 .55 1.84 0.64 .21 3. the two analyses for leader and member LMX and perfor- With regard to outliers.42" Role conflict -0.32 We also examined the impact of perspective by testing Member LMX 30 . For the subset of studies (k = 9.41. the difference between correlations of LMX with perfor.73 0.27 (p < moderators of theoretical interest (e.10 . Rosenthal. N . .55' Performance ratings (member LMX) 0. correlations.40 2.03 -.28" Construct issues Leader-member agreement . LMX = leader-member exchange.04" Turnover intentions -0. k = number of studies in each analysis.g. 57).26 -.29.01).00 1. (b) member LMX and performance.01.58 -0.62 .03 -.50 -.78 . with a significantly larger correlation between leader mance varied significantly as a function of measurement LMX and performance ratings (r = . Corrected r = mean weighted correlation corrected for measurement unreliability. How- ever.mean sample-weighted effect size. Qv = homogeneity of effect sizes within each class. respectively.29 .98 .31 266. the mean sample. Significant effect sizes are indicated by confidence intervals that do not include 0.63 . gued that this is an acceptable procedure when testing weighted correlation based on 22 studies was .53 0.909). First.. analysis using the two categories of member and leader nificant between-class difference. LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGE META-ANALYSIS 833 Table 2 Summary of Effect Sizes 95% CI d+ Relationship Lower Upper Corrected r Correlate Performance ratings (leader LMX) 0. it was necessary to combine each of the measurement classes remained heterogeneous. there are probably other moderating influences that con- Variable and class Qb k tribute to heterogeneous effect sizes within perspective'. p. In order to do this.28 128.59 1.75 0.50" Organizational commitment 0. We conducted a Member LMX 8 .25 3.03 1.57 .43' Turnover -0.31" Member competence 0.23 37.62 71' Overall satisfaction 1.49 -.41) than between perspective.54 0.07 -0. = between-classes goodness-of-fit sta. ined perspective as a categorical moderator. . r = mean sample-weighted correlation. and . 1991).28 -. LMX = leader-member exchange. these correlations were .41 343.46 .48 0. independence of effect sizes.33 2.11" Satisfaction with supervision 1. Q.32) and exam- distributed around the mean. as indi- cated by the significant within-class variation. we conducted a categorical moderator member LMX and performance ratings (r = . N = 1.26 .

Even association is stronger when measured from the leader's after accounting for these moderators. r = mean sample-weighted correlation. it can be may not be as straightforward as was first proposed.35 LMX7 9 .01.29 LMX7 11 . gb = between-classes goodness-of-fit statistics. and technical in correlations was significant.62 LMX7 8 . it seems that LMX is positively related to the correlations were .32 62.76 721. p < . Significance of Q statistics indicates rejection of the hypothesis of homogeneity.10 LMX7 4 .38 37.41 LMX7 6 .26** Other 8 . job knowledge.61.60 8 .» = homogeneity of effect sizes within each class.87** 27 . LMX = leader-member exchange.30 89. & Dorsey. *p<. White.26 LMX7 4 -. factors alone (Borman. However.74 154. In summary.91** 69 .70** 14 .31 74. **p<.p < .07 3.57** Objective performance 0. able variability across effect sizes.87* 17 . results indicate that the strength of this relationship de- mance differ significantly depending on whether LMX is pends on the perspective from which LMX is measured.65** Role conflict 29.27 11.27** Other 22 . measured from the leader's or member's perspective.78 120.28* Other 8 -.834 GERSTNER AND DAY Table 4 Categorical Moderator Models for Measurement Instrument Variable and class Performance ratings (LLMX) 19.551) = 3. LLMX = leader-reported LMX. suggesting the possibil- . We performance ratings.23 Satisfaction with supervision 202. Thus.49** 12 . For the overall analysis. = 1.23 59.10* Other 6 .45** Member LMX reliability 392.28 LMX7 12 .98** Other 41 .85 15 .34 LMX7 4 .37 1.97* Other 4 .26 70.60** Performance ratings (MLMX) 4.46 LMX7 11 .29 104.36** Other 18 .51** Other 8 .68** Other 13 . and .91** Other 12 .26 259. 1995). Q.83 1. that reported all three necessary correlations was also the relationship between LMX and performance ratings significant.07** Other 19 .37 293.909) = 5.17 24 .05** 12 -.11 11.43 Other 2 -.63* 30 . there is consider- point of view.40 14. LMX7 = seven-item LMX measure. MLMX = member-reported LMX. respectively. This is consistent with recent work tested both sets of correlations as a means of determining by Borman and colleagues demonstrating that the inclu- whether a different conclusion would be reached using sion of interpersonal factors can increase the variance the overall estimates as compared with those calculated explained in performance ratings by as much as two times from the subset.412. Our concluded that correlations between LMX and perfor. .31 8 -. LMX the difference in correlations for the subset of studies is one example of such an interpersonal factor.78** Turnover intentions 2.24 40.50 124.48** Organizational commitment 5.36.04** Note. t (1. the difference that explained by ability.01.45 203.26** Member competence 1.94** 33 .26 LMX7 7 .71** Other 10 . The as well as the type of measurement instrument used. ( (1.551) that included all three necessary correlations.21 Leader-member agreement 0.05. k = number of studies in each analysis.58 753.44 76.01.33 79.63 22 .77 LMX7 10 .89 476.16.80** Role clarity 13.35** Leader LMX reliability 1.85 LMX7 28 .43** Overall satisfaction 12.49 LMX7 6 -.

such as em- commitment. our results.05) for objective performance and .13** Partial 4 (33%) — — Role conflict Role clarity 170. Overall. its practical meaningfulness may serve to artificially inflate the correlations. and Horn (1986) suggested. Partial support for the moderator analyses means that the between-class effect (Qh) was significant. significance of the Q statistic indicates rejection of the hypothesis of homogeneity. Given performance and affective outcomes. actual turnover: Graen. Novak.10. evaluations.. The design of the study may also 1982).47** None 7 (47%) — Leader-member agreement 194.01 (n s) for turnover. organizational cess that depends on numerous variables. LMX = leader- member exchange. satisfac. impact the outcomes. overall satisfaction.30 Member competence 320.07 Satisfaction with supervision 1.p < . tive correlations between LMX and role conflict and turn. & Som. LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGE META-ANALYSIS 835 Table 5 Summary of Attempts to Reduce Heterogeneity Support for measurement Number of Overall r instrument outliers (after removing Relationship Q moderator (%K) outliers) Performance ratings (leader LMX) 873. the relationship be- over intentions.27 Objective performance 15. but the within-class effects (Qw) were also significant. actual turnover is a complex pro- tion with supervision. including variables that mediate and moderate this process. both overall effect sizes sociated with objective phenomena may serve to attenuate could be rendered homogeneous by the removal of one the correlations. differences in magnitude between subjective and objective mance (r = . & Hoel. turnover through other attitudes.07 (p < kamp (1982) study consisted of a field experiment in . plagued by range restriction and low power to detect sig- merkamp.01. our results sug. those as- is questionable.110. such as satisfaction and formance ratings and member affective outcomes than to commitment. objective measures. The Graen. the results suggest that having a tween LMX and turnover should not be abandoned but high-quality relationship with one's supervisor can affect rather should be examined more closely by searching for the entire work experience in a positive manner.11** None 9 (38%) — Leader LMX reliability 844.01 Turnover intentions 14. *p < . such as productivity and turnover. tive outcomes of performance and turnover. nificant relationships.03** Partial 4 (24%) 84. vention was very successful at increasing performance . which leaders were trained to maintain high-quality rela- Although there is not enough evidence at present to tionships with their members. Liden. Whereas the challenges inherent in the ns). Novak. Furthermore. We found significant positive corre. and role clarity. Griffeth.19** Partial 6 (43%) — Turnover 31. We found significant nega. For example.. Q = homogeneity statistic.57»* Partial 6(20%) .37** Partial 1 8 (67%) — Overall satisfaction 340.95* None 1 (13%) -. many turnover studies are outlier (objective performance: Graen.85** Partial 4 (33%) Performance ratings (member LMX) 149. outcome measures. Our results also sug. 1982. we believe gest that LMX is related to supervisory performance that these relationships are worthy of further examination. More complex models may be necessary to specify the Other correlates.80* None 1 (13%) .281. it is reasonable to propose that LMX affects gest that LMX is more strongly related to subjective per. For example.00** None 16 (68%) — Member LMX reliability 2. When these studies were removed from the analy. ity of additional contingencies. nature of the relationships between LMX and objective lations between LMX and objective performance. As Vecchio.69** Partial 14 (42%) — Organizational commitment 106.05. Number of outliers refers to the number of extreme cases that had to be removed before a homogeneous effect size was achieved. ployee attitudes and labor market conditions. Overall. and Sommer- ses. The There may also be methodological explanations for the two smallest overall effect sizes were for objective perfor. Although the effect size for objective performance study of subjective phenomena (e.g. same-source bias) was statistically significant. Overall rs after removing outliers were calculated only for analyses in which 20% or fewer outliers had to be removed to achieve a homogeneous effect size. the overall correlations were adjusted to . the LMX inter- support strong correlations between LMX and the objec. Dashes indicate that the statistic could not be computed. In this case.03. **p < .83** — 1 (14%) -.05) and actual turnover (r = —. outcomes.94** Partial 45 (65%) — Note.

The average sample. Unfortunately.5 More Although these analyses did explain some of the variation research is necessary to determine whether these effects in effects. re- sources. as suggested by other researchers (e. or with performance ratings. This LMX correlations with performance may be attenuated analysis did not result in overall homogeneity. Graen and Scandura (1987) argued that range restriction in leader LMX may attenuate agreement Measurement and Dimensionality between perspectives. future research should consider both methodological and theo- scribe all corresponding correlations. LMX is consistently corrected for measurement error only (Harris & Schau- correlated with member job performance. time constraints.. satisfaction broeck. such as task characteristics. one of the most provocative findings from study moderators in our analyses. it was not possible to include them the difference in correlations between leader and member in the present analysis. In addition to its higher average alpha.6 Uhl-Bien et al. which can influence actual LMX measures. however. There are two conclusions from the aggregate LMX and ratings of members' performance may not be reliability results that have relevance to this discussion. role perceptions. 1994). extant literature. more work is needed to determine whether leaders' and members' reports of LMX and the correlation LMX is best considered to be multidimensional. correlation be. quent attempts to replicate this field experiment. Our finding regarding leader-member (overall and supervisory). be considered. therefore. found that effect sizes were generally larger in unpublished There is an additional aspect to our results that should studies (as compared with those published in refereed journals). suggesting that mean correlations do not adequately de.e. leader-member agreement should be examined areas identified for additional theoretical and research at- as a relevant independent or dependent variable. entirely attributable to same-source bias. An interesting approach reported by Scandura and Graen (1984) and Graen. these analyses concerns leader-member agreement on rat- ings of LMX quality—or lack of it. however.g. 1986). agreement suggests a couple of directions for future re- and turnover intentions. First. In Our results also noted a systematic difference between particular. sures are associated with an identical core construct. We conducted mod. leader-member agreement should be assessed using lon- gitudinal designs. would be to compare the LMX-performance correlations and Graen (1986) in which LMX was significantly related to for dyads in which LMX agreement (i. High agreement should reduce in these studies. there have been few subse. ships. the final section presents Second. there were not enough studies that Summary of Results reported on these variables to examine them as between- Arguably. the higher cor- whether it can be adequately defined with a unidimen- relation between leader (as compared with member) sional scale. however. however. All overall effect sizes were heterogeneous. as well as our recommendations. one purpose of the present meta-analysis Scandura & Schriesheim. 6 We also conducted an exploratory analysis to examine publi- LMX reports and performance.22).29. In other words. LMX should always was to identify issues that guide further theory develop- be measured from both leader and member perspectives. Bivariate correlations between LMX and tween leader and member LMX) is high with dyads in performance could not be calculated from the results reported which agreement is low.and supervisor performance ratings (mean r = ..836 GERSTNER AND DAY (and satisfaction). Finally. 1988). Although we cannot offer a compelling reason for this result. physical setting. which is The results of the present meta-analyses suggest that only slightly higher than the correlation noted between LMX contributes both theoretically and empirically to the self. performance levels (Feldman. member cation status as a source of heterogeneity in study results. organizational leadership literature. . retical moderators of the relationships between LMX and erator and outlier analyses for the reported relationships outcomes. commitment. (1997) suggested to have an intervention in order to impact objective perfor. and cul- ture. tention. In addition to summarizing the search. As stated above. leader reports should be- The lack of consistency with which the LMX construct come less restricted over time and therefore demonstrate is operationalized makes it difficult to argue that all mea- higher levels of agreement with member reports. More research is certainly needed. Scandura. A leader's ex- First. to understand the degree to which same-source bias inflates the correlation between 5 Two notable exceptions are the LMX intervention studies LMX and performance ratings. ment and empirical testing. we as a result of disagreement with a leader's LMX rating. we found higher average alphas for the LMX7 mea- pectations are likely shaped by the quality of LMX that sure as compared with the average reliability for all other is developed with a member. several situational moderators of LMX-outcome relation- mance indices. organizational climate. objective performance. Thus. in an attempt to reduce the heterogeneity of effect sizes. Conclusions and Future Directions weighted correlation was estimated to be . complete homogeneity was achieved for only a will persist after the intervention and whether it is crucial few of the relationships.

Instead. It is conceivable cally. little theoretical or empirical justification for the develop- separate leader and member LMX measures might also ment of LMX based on simple demographics. Mabe and West (1982) found in 7 We computed overall effect sizes for the relationships be- a meta-analysis of 55 studies that self-ratings were more tween LMX and member education. Green. (cf. only member competence was examined as an leader's perspective. then correlating the facet LMX. 1995). 1993). is to care- with supervisor ratings when comparative performance fully examine its longitudinal development. Correspondingly. An implication of this finding is that leaders tion to the development of LMX. needed to understand the complexities of leader-member agreement. Thus. our results suggest that LMX is more reliably Antecedents of LMX Quality assessed from a member's perspective than from a leader's Researchers have only recently begun to devote atten- perspective.g. the ante- experienced events (e. . for a review of LMX antecedents). leader delega- the development of new measures. 1996. Graen. relational demography) as an antecedent of bers' LMX is unidimensional. there is very may have a somewhat more complex. Graen and Schiemann (1978) found preliminary evidence for differential weighting of pre- that agreement between leaders and members on mutually dictors for leaders and members. This finding is consistent with several scale anchors used social comparison terminology such of Graen and colleagues' longitudinal field studies in which as "better than average" or "as compared with fellow leader and member demographics have never shown consistent workers" than when phrased in absolute terms. and age but did not highly correlated with performance when self-evaluation find meaningful results. it could serve to open a dialogue on how to build Thus. thus providing a catalyst appears to provide the soundest psychometric properties for developing a stronger partnership. Liden et al. Bauer & Green. More research is needed in Agreement order to clarify the contributions of relational demogra- phy. sex. In other words. there appears to be perspectives.. LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGE META-ANALYSIS 837 studies using the LMX7 measure also tended to obtain change quality in relative terms might enhance rating higher correlations with outcomes than those using other agreement Although such agreement may not be expected measures (see Table 4). According to information was made available prior to the self-evalua- tions. Duchon et al. but empirical support for the role of relational of leader LMX that best matches member LMX would demography in predicting LMX quality has been mixed likely improve resulting agreement correlations.g. multidimensional little cumulative knowledge currently available regarding construction of exchange quality than members.. more mature stage of the leadership relationship (Graen & sure is recommended to researchers interested in assessing Uhl-Bien. agreement with leaders was stronger of the antecedents of LMX is clearly an area of opportu- for members reporting higher LMX. as well as other variables that have been examined It is unlikely that problems of low agreement between as antecedents of LMX. encouraging both leaders and members to think of ex.. member job problems. leader cedents of LMX may be different (or at least differentially support to member) varied as a function of LMX quality. Anderson. More research is nity for future empirical research.. unidimensional) exchange quality.. & Shivers. Future attempts to revise and develop antecedent of LMX in the literature. As such. an overall (i. comes. Second. Our results for the moderating effect of perspective Although they did not explicitly address agreement on on the relationship between LMX and competence show LMX perceptions. potentially valuable outcome variable in its own right. we believe tion. Development Over Time Interventions directed at improving agreement could be developed and tested. important) for leaders and members. Of those relationships we re- cated by the lower overall LMX alpha estimate from a viewed. as indi- the antecedents of LMX. that leader-member LMX agreement is an interesting and 1997. such as leader and member per- leaders and members will be completely eliminated with sonality traits. personal communication. Therefore. This difference may be partly to translate directly into performance and affective out- due to smaller estimated measurement error for LMX7. B.7 Theoreti- be able to improve overall agreement. Although some stud- alternative LMX measures should examine this notion of ies have examined demographic variables as antecedents exchange quality separately from leaders' and members' of LMX (e.. one implication of these findings is that LMX7 a better working relationship. 1986). Further examination More specifically. patterns with LMX (G. and moving to a of all available LMX measures. 1997).. Fahr and Dobbins (1989) found Another way to better understand the full range of that self-evaluations tended to be more strongly correlated LMX. the LMX7 mea. and leader-member similarity (see Liden et al. In addition to better measurement properties. it makes more sense to consider demographic simi- that if leaders' LMX is multidimensional whereas mem- larity (i. upward influence behavior.e.e. 1996. and possibly isolate LMX antecedents.

leaders who can appreciate posed by Burns (1978). the few existing longitudinal studies have part of a high-quality exchange. LMX is conceptually described as an exchange process. One proposition is that the more trans. posed by Bass and Avolio (1994) encompasses the full and Graen (1988) reported a median LMX stability of range of leadership behaviors. As lead.g. and further refined by Bass and multiple points of view may initiate high-quality relation. good assignments) for greater quality or formational the dyadic relationship. per. Change patterns may differ according to the perspec. It is unlikely quality of the working relationship. One of the more popular emerging development (e.. Members are seldom asked a relationship. relational) isfy their own self-interests rather than to develop characteristics. Scandura & Schries- nal field study. defining" (Kuhnert. Wakabayashi. and the effects on followers. 1994). including bility over time. For example. early in the development of a dyadic relationship. of LMX and its relationships with other variables. and the overall that this relationship will evolve and grow. In vestigating models of LMX change is an interesting area this field experiment. promotions. Liden et al. representing the average of all possible test-retest in the model? Our review supports the suggestion made correlations over six time periods. given the inherent exchange process that members or bring about meaningful change.. ment from members. Novak. his colleagues (Bass. (1975) reported fairly similar to the process of developing a unique exchange consistent NL means for both in.60. it seems likely LMX measures tap mutual respect.e. has received little em- (Avolio & Bass. Trans- ships with all members. Transformational leaders are other directed to the posed that exchange quality is determined early in the extent that they "continually adjust their behavior to the dyadic relationship and remains relatively stable over level to which the follower has been developed" time. These possibilities should be transformational leaders have been described as "self- studied using longitudinal designs. over a 9-month time period. the more it depends quantity of work. therefore. 1997. transactional or transformational).. Another indication of the transformational potential of tive (i. eral factors that support this suggestion.. been the transactional-transformational distinction pro- ated with LMX. In. and Sommerkamp (1982). frameworks for studying organizational leadership has mended. or higher levels of loyalty and commit- on leader characteristics. p. They are motivated primarily to sat- ships depend on both leader and member (i. the LMX relationship develops as Integration With Transformational Leadership a result of negotiation between the two parlies. 1995. the content of LMX training inter- both leaders and members) decreased with greater time ventions. a do not make explicit demands on members in the form measure of LMX taken at 6 months may still be relatively of harder work or greater commitment for these rewards. With the exception of the Japanese Career what is expected in return for the rewards they are given as Progress Study. 1994) that LMX should incorporate both transac- ment of LMX from 2 weeks to 6 months into the leader- tional and transformational processes. To the extent that most gether and learn more about each other. although the consistency of LMX (for measurement issues. (1993) studied the develop- heim. ion.and out-group members relationship that is central to LMX. Graen. trust. This assumption. In contrast. sonality. leaders were taught to maintain for future research. transformational (Kuhnert. 1997). member conscientiousness) is recom.g. 1994). leader or member) or the nature of the dyadic LMX can be found in the content of a training intervention relationship (i. but which factors affect this negotiation process? It could be that In addition to addressing criticisms regarding the nature some people are more likely to maintain high-quality rela.e. 1994) in that they are motivated by higher order values and beliefs and strive to develop fol- Much of the original theoretical work on LMX pro- lowers. Therefore. which seems conceptually pirical attention. of our synthesis was to clarify the role of LMX in the Additional research investigating robust dispositional larger context of leadership theory and to provide direc- characteristics that are theoretically associated with LMX tion for future research. LMX is more oriented that the LMX relationship changes in a simple linear fash. actional leaders exchange highly valued rewards (e. then the relationship might be better characterized as ers and members have new and different experiences to. If leaders working relationships may last several years.838 GERSTNER AND DAY Graen's (1976) model. or ability. There may also be leader characteristics associ. 1995. but but it is not usually measured this way (Liden et al. Three years into the Japa- If the transactional-transformational framework pro- nese Career Progress Study. results suggest that LMX can change over the course of Sparrowe & Liden. the exchange been conducted over relatively short time spans.. Results demonstrated general sta. then where does LMX fit . toward transformational leadership. Dansereau et al. however. a goal tionships with their leaders across jobs and situations. designed by Graen. is proposed in the latter. whereas transactional relation.. We identified sev- member relationship. regardless of demographics. Bass & Avolio. Graen. Initial impressions may be difficult to overcome. 207). high-quality LMX with all members by (a) spending time . In a recent longitudi- by others (Graen & Uhl-Bien. intervals. 1985.e. Many process is inferred but not directly measured.

much empirical research is outcomes beyond the individual or dyad level. In their struct to the transformational leadership literature (Kuhn. own job. the results of the One promising avenue for increasing our understanding present meta-analyses highlight a number of positive out. their impact on team and organizational level outcomes. organizational work groups and teams. and their working relationship. organizational citi- (c) refraining from imposing the leader's or manage. worth considering as a prototype in moving toward a (1997). 1993). quality exchanges. Scand- sharing some of the leader's expectations about his or her ura et al. Bass. ment's frame of reference on issues discussed. transformational leadership (r = . additional antecedents and consequences should prescriptive model of LMX. 1987. concerns. and ex. different levels of analysis (Graen'& Uhl-Bien. Deluga & Perry. including climate perceptions (e. More work is needed to specify A Comprehensive LMX Model the content of such training programs and the boundary conditions for their effectiveness. 1986). 1973. mentoring (Scandura & Schriesheim. tion.. at least at certain times and under dyadic relationships may be valuable both as an addition certain conditions. Many organizations have adopted commitment. Researchers ability addressed in their intervention can be trained. LMX has been linked to outcomes associated with member development. 1988). These outcomes could not be included in the pres- however.. it may prove beneficial charisma as predictors of LMX quality. Focusing on the development of high-quality be transformational. 1989). zenship behaviors (e. Bien et al.. search on LMX is to move beyond a descriptive leadership Deluga (1992) explicitly tested the hypothesis that high approach to a more prescriptive foundation (Yukl. have also begun to study additional consequences of pectations. (Keller & Dansereau. LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGE META-ANALYSIS 839 talking about each person's problems.. of levels issues is to examine the patterns of LMX and comes for members associated with high-quality LMX. merkamp's (1982) intervention makes that approach grated theoretical model proposed by Uhl-Bien et al. leader effectiveness (e. 1995).. of organizational context in the LMX model. 1986)..g. 1989).. to current models of leadership training and as an alterna- tive to these methods.g. Novak. Uhl- ert. and Som- of LMX and demonstrate empirical support for the inte.. Basu Graen (1989) described a model for conducting leader- factor analyzed LMX and the four transformational lead. job performance. Kozlowski & Doherty. member empowerment These training directives were aimed at producing high. Kuhnert & Lewis. can affect both the development of the dyadic leadership taking abilities initiate high LMX relationships with all relationship and the linkage between LMX and organiza- members. In order to continue to expand the nomological network The demonstrated efficacy of Graen. and One of the most interesting challenges for future re- career progression (Wakabayashi et al. Russell & Kuhnert. 1993. to adopt and appreciate multiple points of view—referred Researchers should also continue to examine the role to as perspective taking—is a recently introduced con. Finally. To the extent that leaders with high perspective. the relationship between LMX and relevant outcomes in These outcomes (e. This is an important study be investigated.g. 1994). a purportedly transactional process. and creativity (Tierney. In addition.87). In addi. How- ership scales and found no support for the distinction ell and Frost (1989) have also shown that it is possible between LMX and transformational leadership.g. and (d) Wayne & Green. Graen et al. We have discussed some possible future in demonstrating that the underlying perspective-taking research directions in terms of antecedents. Such . 1995). House. LMX was associated with transformational leadership.g. 1991). 1977). Graen et al. such as increased delegation Toward a Prescriptive Model of LMX (Leana. dynamics of leadership relationships within teams and matic leadership (e. 1985.. to train individuals to exhibit aspects of transformational there is emerging support for the notion that LMX may leadership. 1973. In terms of the effects on members. yet we know very little about the traditionally associated with transformational and charis. Thus. 1992). ship training that focuses on the dyadic relationship. The ability prehensive LMX model. such as needed to understand how the LMX model operates at work group and organizational performance.g. decision influence (e. Manogran & Conlon. such efforts might be better conceptualized as ent analyses because of an insufficient number of studies transformational in nature in that they encourage leaders but are important to the continued development of a com- to adopt the viewpoints of their subordinates. 1994.. complete model of relationship-based leadership. the member's job. sensitive to the particular issues raised by each member. the predictive power of LMX may expand to tional outcomes. empowerment (Keller & Dansereau. Basu (1992) also to devote greater attention to developing and evaluating found a strong positive correlation between LMX and LMX training models. Given that high-quality exchanges are consistently related He found support for individualized consideration and to favorable individual outcomes. (b) using "active" listening skills and being LMX. 1995). satisfaction with supervision) are also those team-based structures. Using an organizational case study. (1997) illustrated how situational moderators 1992).

R. and organiza. B.. L. 78. leader-mem- (3rd ed. G. (1994). Building from nate exchange relationships: Investigation of a manager be- these results. L. T. R. (1993). Addi.. (1994). J. J. Manager-subordi- perceptions and individual performance. T. & Avolio. The relationship of leader-member ex- for examining diffusion of transformational leadership. The relationship of subor- *Basu. *Deluga. both the descriptive and prescriptive value of LMX as a Dansereau. J. *Castleberry. 1992). B. M. J.. Thousand 326.. In light of the demonstrated ior.. NJ: Erlbaum. and managers. we propose that LMX has the potential to havior model. 39. Orga- References nizational Behavior and Human Performance. Leadership. (1989). 84—89. E. should continue to play a major role in models of dyadic "Carter. B. Hater & Bass. R. & Perry. transactional. 237-247). (1995). The role of subordinate *Bauer. viewed at multiple levels of analysis: A multi-level framework *Deluga. A vertical dyad theory of leadership. Individual consideration Management. Greensboro. leader-member exchange. (1990). & Graen. W. J. Oaks. theory if expanded and refined in several recommended Nashville. Finally. M. (1978). their consequences for individuals. Group and Organization Avolio. Jour- Bass. and relationship with the ment (i. tion Abstracts International. 239-252. Applied multiple regression/ dynamics of leader-member relationships over time and correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed. University *Dienesch. C. change with laissez-faire. N. Journal of Applied Psychol- model of dyadic leadership may be developed and tested. 168-177. 1538-1567. The development of performance and ingratiation in leader-member exchanges. & Bass. & Dorsey. Clark. R. Cashman. B. (1994). New ¥>rk: Free Press. sistently linked to favorable outcomes for members and Burns. 2980. A. and organizational citizenship behavior. B. linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role making process. *Deluga. (1988). New York: Free Press. M. Bass. M.. leadership in naval environments. NC: Center for Creative Leadership. Management Journal. The roles of similarity the relationship with one's supervisor as a lens through and task competence in the development of LMX relation- which the entire work experience is viewed. D. White. (1994. (1995). Howell & Avolio. 1991). (1985). this visor and peer performance ratings. J. agree on the meaning of LMX. 17.. & D. Researchers must mitment to the organization: Associations with performance. (1985). P. April). chology. acceptance.. Manuscript submitted for publication. D.. Journal of Applied Psy- is a promising area for future research.. Journal of Applied Business Research. 315— effectiveness through transformational leadership. B. I.).). (1975). LMX should be incorporated into leadership Dansereau. we view *Bumpus. ity theory and equity theory as complementary approaches in predicting the relationship of leadership and turnover among uated in terms of leader effectiveness. Journal of Occupational Psychology. M. 1993). (1996). E. satisfaction.e. & Haga. A. E. Purdue University. & Foti. J. 46-78.G. Clark. (1992). relationship between quality of leader-member exchange and 53. W. 32. zation: A role set analysis (Doctoral dissertation. S. *Dienesch. tional longitudinal field research is needed to explore the Cohen. Organizational Behavior and Human Perfor- member development. satisfaction. G. The role of affect and ability in the meta-analysis. dyad). Bass and Stogdill's handbook of leadership *Deluga. (1994). F. & Perry. 64. B. A test of the dimensionality of *Baugh. 184-200. J. P. J. An investigation of the apprenticeship organi- pressures to cut organizational costs while maximizing zational socialization strategy. Improving organizational nal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology. M. R.. M. Dissertation Abstracts International. 6. pectations. Leadership and performance beyond ex. TN.. New 'Vbrk: Free Press. (Doctoral dissertation. M. 176-195. LMX is con. C. Journal of Vocational Behav- human-resource potential. 67-86. An empirical investigation of the of Cincinnati.. J. (1991). Impact of leadership (pp. G. R. & Grain. groups. M. and per- formational leadership as predictors of innovative behavior ceived superior effectiveness with leader-member exchanges.B.. Academy of Group and Organization Management. (1973). Supervisor trust building. 3589. Lead. An empirical examination of LMX and trans. Graen. 10. & Ravlin. and how it should be measured. 1988. In K. These suggestions will enhance mance.. & Green. 19. tions. 98-104. & Cohen.. & Tanner. G. R. conflict. Disserta. E. M. 199-218. Campbell (Eds. ber exchange. E. (1992). T. J. (1983). Unpublished manuscript. Bass. initial exchange quality perceptions. S. Instrumental- training programs and the success of these programs eval. J. and transformational ership Quarterly. M. J.g. Salesperson's com- ways. On the basis of our review of the literature. What is coefficient alpha? An examina- formally integrated into LMX so that a comprehensive tion of theory and applications. manager. (1992). 80.). 5. References marked with an asterisk indicate studies included in *Day. CA: Sage. 380-397. Paper presented at the 9th annual meeting of play an even larger role in the context of organization the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology.840 GERSTNER AND DAY efforts are especially important under present economic *Blau. subordinate performance and satisfaction (Doctoral disserta- . the proper unit of measure- motivation. 52. benefits of transformational leadership in organizations Borman. Aspects of transformational leadership should be Cortina. dinate upward influencing behavior. 13. ogy. V. ships. R. Effects of ratee task performance and interpersonal factors on super- (e. Hillsdale. 67. Construct specification is crucial. Interpersonal influences in a project organi. (1988). W. J. (1992). leader-member exchange: A longitudinal test.

69. (1978). M. (1992). halo error.. strength on productivity. K.. A meta-analysis of on the quality of exchange relationships with subordinates self-supervisor. Journal of Management. L. P. Research in Organizational Behavior.. R. Journal of Applied *Dunegan. (1986). A 1976 theory of charismatic leadership.. 67.. Dissertation Abstracts International. (1985). V. M. & Dobbins. International generalizability of American hypotheses Applied Psychology. Carbondale: Southern Illinois cago: Rand McNally.. Organizational Behavior Psychology. G. J. Relationship-based ap- (LMX) as interactive predictors of subordinate performance. Journal of (1990). Leader cognitive complexity and its effects Harris. Anderson. and behaviors. Larson (Eds. (1977). R. A field 60. G. 73. Vertical dyad of dyadic organizing. 395-413. organizations. B. The Pennsylvania State University. 30. (1994). *Gast. L. A. Effects Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 702. S. 143-165). 16. 367-371. R. & Duchon. proach to leadership: Development of leader-member ex- Paper presented at the 54th Academy of Management meeting. W. Unwritten rules for your career. In J. & Olkin. Journal of Management. (1987). 1993). L. Leader-member ex. (1982). Dienesch. *Dockery. University. Journal of Applied Psychology. investigation of the joint effects of organizational variables *Graen. (1982). 68. ing the link between leader-member exchange and subordi. D. Toward a psychology *Duchon. and consequences.. 63. 1201-1245). & Graen. 611-623. experiment test of the moderating effects of growth need *Dunegan. (pp.. & Sommerkamp. M. L. American leader-member exchange: Predicting the predictor (Doctoral Psychologist. 2922. G. E. E. Hunt & L. 11. Graen. and peer-supervisor ratings. Graen. J. J. Novak. 41. J. (1986). Role-making processes within complex House. ting edge (pp. (1993). Superiors' evaluations and *Gerras.. 42.. Handbook of indus. Statistical methods for meta- stracts International. effects of leader-member exchange and job design on pro- zation Studies. B. & Steiner. M. change (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying Dallas. 1987). 47. L. leadership in formal organizations: A development approach. & Uhl-Bien. Dansereau. Georgia Institute of Technology.. 1987). H. & Larson.. G. J. *Green. (1988). J. J. 56. (1994. (1995). 777-781. TX.. (1990). 18. organizational influences on bank employees' work attitudes ogy. 484-491. C. W. G. a multi-level multi-domain perspective. in the employee withdrawal process. How hard is hard science. A. transactional leadership. 15. *Graen. B. M. N. (1989). S. about Japanese management progress: A strong inference in- Feldman. & Platz-Vieno. B. G. C. *Rikami. Scandura. (1983). 53. Hunt & L. ductivity and satisfaction: Testing a dual attachment model. & Cashman. (1990). R. (1996). J. (1975). ment.. 3820.-L. B. 71. Psychology. Hedges. (1987). 173-176. B. 203-214. M. 3819. & Scandura. Per- (Doctoral dissertation. Transformational leader- York: Wiley. B. & Schaubroeck. G. 59—76. Journal of Applied Psychol. Leadership: The cut- trial and organizational psychology (pp.). G. Green. 48. Dunnette (Ed. (1976). 175-208. In J. T. (1984). B... 74. Market and pany and union: Parallel models.. New Howell. Dissertation *Graen. Leadership Quarterly... W. (1986). and Human Decision Processes. 131. S. Wakabayashi. Academy of Management Journal. agreement between self. M. 219-247. V. R. L. G. 695- (Doctoral dissertation.. linkage: A longitudinal assessment of antecedents. 66. T. Examin. M. nate performance: The role of task analyzability and variety Graen. The interaction in leader-member exchange. T. Graen. Duchon.. G. B. G. G. Effects of comparative 6. D. M. & Uhl-Bien. 71. Journal of Applied Psychology. *Dobbins. M. performance information on the accuracy of self-ratings and *Graen. An interpersonal attraction approach to science? The empirical cumulativeness of research. August). Liden. J.). 9. J. 70. N. Kent. Demo- * Ferris.). Journal of Applied Psychology. I. Journal of Applied Psy- 619-632. D. B... E. *Green. 43-62. & Shivers. & Liden. Commitment to com... & Graen. (1993). Goodson. J. B. (1988). New \brk: Academic Press. G. R.W. D. OH: Kent State University. J. S. Hedges.. The effect of cognitive busyness and non. D. R. G. A note on the statistical correction of vestigation. Uhl-Bien. R. 16. Leadership frontiers change model of leadership: A critique and further develop. 1. Chi. B. Cardy. Minanii.. M. 499-521. Fahr. Journal of Applied Psychology. (1973). Leadership behaviors as cues to performance evalua- A contingency approach to appraisal satisfaction: An initial tion. 618—634. &Hoel. J.and supervisor ratings. C. 109- of dyadic quality and duration on performance appraisal. 868-872. G. A role-making model of Abstracts International. The role of the initial *Graen. & Cashman. 37. G. George Washington University. R. T. 206-212. Dissertation Ab. 606-610. 189-207). *Duarte. J. A. sonnel Psychology. S. Graen. & Klich. 71. locus of control. Group and Organi. & Bass. Academy of Management Review. & Schiemann. G. Graen. and support . & Avolio.. dissertation. J. 5082..G. Task-level climate (TLC) and leader-member exchange Graen. Dissertation Abstracts International. how soft is soft *Gessner. H. Leadership Quarterly. ment: A vertical dyad linkage approach. M. M. T. Journal of Applied change and related work attitudes. 1-23. B. M. &Taber. chology. measures.. 298-306. (1993). Larson (Eds. S. (1986). subordinates' perceptions of transformational and transac- verbal behaviors on trait inferences and LMX judgments tional leadership. analysis. Hater.. M. S. graphic and organizational influences on leader-member ex- drawal process: A constructive replication. Leader-member agree- as moderators. G.. D. Journal of Applied Psychology. (1985). University of Maryland. (1987). R. Blank. Role of leadership in the employee with. 53. T.. Role of leadership and appraisal characteristics. In M. R. D. 443-455. & Liden. K. V. (1989). self-peer. G. LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGE META-ANALYSIS 841 tion. ship. I. 1992). Academy of Management Journal.

J. J. value congruence: A multiple levels approach (Doctoral dis- formational leadership (pp. K. 11-19. P. organizational commitment. and between-group variation in leadership. E. 2679. Improving organizational effectiveness through trans. L. 563-588. Manogran. & Frost. (1989). J. Dallas. (1996). Predictors and consequences of delega- erly Hills. Bass & B. *K'Obonyo. Journal of Applied Business Research. K. M. (1993). & Schmidt. 15. D. & Porter.. of ability: A review and meta-analysis. W. The nature of managerial work.. Journal of meta-analysis using the proc means procedure in SAS. & Doherty. & Tbrco. T. Journal of Applied tion Abstracts International. Bev. Group and Organization Journal of Applied Psychology. 7. R. Jr. S. 59. Organizational Behavior and Human interpersonal trust on the quality of the relationship and out- Decision Processes. & Bennet. W. Disserta- outlier statistic for meta-analytic data. (1979). B. H. Hunter. 78. New Kozlowski. J. M. & Conlon. & Organ. Atlanta.. Leader- *James. P. Transactional and transfor. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. 388-396. (1990). 218-223. 15. (1990). A leader-member ex- *Kinicki. & Markham. Avolio *Murry. W. 119-131. J. 891—902. CT: JAI Press. W. R. B. CA: sertation. T. people through delegation. Percep. I. D. J. (1973). 34. study on the early development of leader-member exchanges. Proceedings of the annual meeting of the Academy pressure. Meta. A. Kuhnert. E. B. M. Personnel Psychology. Journal of Management.. 47-119). Journal of Applied Psychology. Personnel resource management (Vol. Psychology. 50. Personal Selling and Sales Management. CA: Sage.. Studies. Effectiveness correlates of transformational and transactional tions and job attitudes. (1994. TX. tion. & Vecchio. (1994). 14. J. A longitudinal of-fit indices in meta-analysis: A comment on Hall and Rosen..).. & Stilwell. R. & Jones. M. E. thai. Arthur.. The value of goodness. A. & Sivasubramaniam. Psychological Reports. 2. Management. Hater.... Hunter. Sage. (1982).. analysis: Cumulating research findings across studies. Sparrowe. J. W. L. Journal of Voca- Kuhnert. (1995).. A dyadic upward influence process: *Manogran. 10.... Greenwich. Perceptions of member exchange theory: The past and potential for the fu- psychological influence: A cognitive information processing ture. (1989). 66. D. Multidimensionality of Correlates of psychological influence: An illustration of the leader-member exchange: An empirical assessment through psychological climate approach to work environment percep. & Maslyn. 7. *Liden. Newbury leader-member exchange and motivation. August). (1981). & Johnson. *Liden. G. 75-82. R. 74. Leadership and empow. Integration of York: Harper & Row. CA: Sage. (1995). Ferris (Ed... (1993).. Castlebeny. P. E. & Coray. I. tional. 224-247. Methods of meta-analy. P. M. performance. Conducting and consequences of the cadre and hired hand.. 418-431.. M. D. (1989). C. E. University of Cincinnati. Kroeck. Academy of Management Journal. 1988). Journal of Applied Psychology. 327-334. Management meeting. (1982). 67. G.. A laboratory study of *Lagace. F. tions of a quality program and relationships with work percep. R. & Lewis. J. (1997).. Research in personnel and human approach for explaining moderated relationships. J. Communication Monographs.. Leader-member exchange and work (Eds. C. University citizenship behavior. & Gardner. (1993). 12. Educa. J. R.842 GERSTNER AND DAY for innovation: Key predictors of consolidated-business-unit mational leadership: A constructive/developmental analysis. Validity of self-evaluation Psychology. M. K. G. (1993). K. (in press). (1979).. erment: A social exchange perspective. A. W. & Conlon. An exploratory salesforce study of the relationship between sis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. R. (1994). D. S. & Dansereau.. 280-296. P. 249-253). Journal of Applied Mabe. Influences on the qual. W.. 80. T. & Ridnour. In G. Dissertation Abstracts International. R. 2225. 619-624. and Park. J.. April). of Management (pp. Kozlowski. Lowe. S3. Newcomer expectations and early socialization *Kim.. Paper presented at the 54th Academy of of South Carolina. Academy of Management Review. come variables in the sales manager/salesperson dyad (Doc- Huffcutt. N. P. tions. Gent. 1993). T. Steers. & Horn. Human Relations. Effects of within-group Leadership Quarterly. Leader-member exchange: Antecedents Huffcutt. F. subordinate exchange relationships. S. K. R. (1992). 72. * Jones. havior. 77-89. Wayne. leadership: A meta-analytic review of the MLQ literature. E. & Arthur. A. & West. (1987). W. GA: Academy of Journal of Organizational Behavior. Dissertation Abstracts Interna. (1993). I. J. (1988). A. T. L. Johnson. F. R. surement of organizational commitment. M. Glaman. L. S. A laboratory investigation of the effect of a subordinate's Leader-member exchange as a key mediating variable be- ingratiation (praise & performance) on the superior-subordi. 453-477. 9. role stress. 48. 1366. W. L. Liden.. W. Chao. and locus of control. pp... (1986). A. J. 243-269. The mea- Journal of Applied Psychology. J. climate and leadership: Examination of a neglected issue. *Murry. & Jackson. R.. P. manager evaluation. S. S. R. 43. R. outcomes: The moderating effect of role development factors. R. A. J. R. D. *Major. K. tween employees' perceptions of fairness and organizational nate exchange relationship (Doctoral dissertation. Psychology. Mowday. & Wayne. R. 10-25). P.. (1995). Leader-mem- . (1994. 127-146. *Lagace. change approach to explaining organizational citizenship be- ity of supervisor—subordinate relations: The role of time. R. J. Mintzberg. 32.. (1981). Howell. 662-674. *Lagace. E. *Leana. Determinants of leader. J.. Schmidt. S. 648—657. 78. J. 1987). P. W. Hater. An investigation into the impact of charismatic leadership. tional and Psychological Measurement. R. 546-553. S. scale development. *James. P. 385-425. 48. Journal of Applied "Keller. Development of a new toral dissertation. Thousand Oaks. R. Jr.. Stauffer. Psychology. In B.. 754—774. *Katerberg. (1993). L... Transforming leadership: Developing tional Behavior.). B. O. J. (1982).. 110-119. D. G. 54. W. 80.

(1997). & Russell. environment. 10. (1993).. R. 302. University of Cincinnati. B. Dunn.. view. A. Dissertation Abstracts Uhl-Bien.. administration. moderator variables in the meta-analysis of correlational data: Stogdill. Dissertation Abstracts Interna- empirical investigation (Doctoral dissertation.. & Kraut. 93-104. (1983). Academy of Manage. R. 1992). Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Graen.. Integrating skill acqui. R. B. A. (1984). G. 335-353.. & Tepper. A. J. Educational and Psychological Measurement. Journal of Occupational ogy. Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Reconsidering the vertical bility to type I and type II errors. L.. & Novak. Moderating effects of quality and performance: Studying the role of the sales man- initial leader-member exchange status on the effects of a ager. W. C. 65. G. (1977). M. On seeking Personality. of leader-member exchange and decision influence. Head nurse fit with staff.. S. Organization Studies. University of tional. A. 1988). F. "Tanner. LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGE META-ANALYSIS 843 her exchange relationships: A social exchange perspective. 33. J. tenure. 49.R. P. 72. P. M. Journal of Personal Selling managers decide not to decide autocratically: An investigation and Sales Management. 22. 195-207. T. (1989). grating study outcomes: A Monte Carlo study of its suscepti- *Rosse. A. Academy of Management Journal. R. R. F. A. 414-430.. Psychology.. tional leadership theory: A role-making approach. 69.. *Snyder. & Schriesheim. The dual attachment con. & Cashman. 990-1001. J. performance feedback.A comparative test of the independent sition and perspective taking capacity in the development of effects of interpersonal. Quality of vertical situation: Impact on unit performance and staff satisfaction dyad linkages: Congruence of supervisor and subordinate (Doctoral dissertation. Situational leadership theory: An exam- and Human Decision Processes. (1980). (1984). L.. The social context of leader-subor. Age. The contribution of leadership. *Phillips. P. Harris. Group and Organization new scale (LMX-6) to measure leader-member exchange in Studies. Journal of Social Behavior and Sackett. L. 444-451. B. Rizzo. ination of a prescriptive theory. J. 71. B. L. A. Uni- zational communication: A review of the literature and an versity of Cincinnati. A. Journal of Applied Psychology. House.. 81-94. J. C. I.(1991). A. Hassell. CA: Sage. 135-147. A. Justice and organizational citizenship be- of Applied Psychology. ogy. 35-71. 72.. Leader-mem- Rights Journal. (1990). A. J. Graen. (1992). (1987). Team-member exchange quality: A new Management Journal. and *Snyder. Neider.. *Uhl-Bien. E. (1990). (1986). A. (1992). 49. T. 28. & Graen. 2570. & Liden. 296-312.. & Scandura. siveness. M. 54.. & Wakabayashi. & Bruning. K. Administrative in leader-member exchange. 150-163. Academy of Management Re- Science Quarterly. Organizational Paper presented at the 9th annual meeting of the Society for Behavior and Human Performance. F. 6. K... 522-552. Group and sionals (Doctoral dissertation. & Lirtzman. 579-584.. M. 3-9. and organizational outcomes. mance: A quantitative field study (Doctoral dissertation. cept: A longitudinal investigation of the combination of task *Vecchio. 118-135. P. Company paternalism and the hidden-investment *Schriesheim. Journal of Applied Psychol- *Seers.. F. and work perceptions as predictors of reactions to butes. J. Journal of Applied Psychol- dyad linkage model of leadership. Williams. Role con. A. Meta-analytic procedures for social re. The University of Utah. & Orr. M. process: Identification of the "right type" for line managers B. Leadership Quarterly. B. construct for role-making research. C. & Graen. & Gobdel. (1989). A. & Kuhnert. 183-194.. 15. C. 1588-1602. dinate relations: An investigation of the effects of group cohe. (1984). Newbury Park.. ship: A survey of the literature. (1989). R. R.. 246. *Peck. E.. *Sidhu. 25. 116. 310. & Chonko. Leader-follower ex. R. R. Predicting employee turnover from 52. G. Meta-analysis for inte- search. and Organization Studies. Journal of Applied Psychology. The role of a leader-member exchange and *Nystrom. 27—36. C. 428-436. S. Perrewe. M. leader-member exchange: A failure to replicate. Unpub- *Schriesheim. 38. (1993). G.. Journal of Psychology. (1994). and reward domains on personal leaders. B. (1984). L. 71. 63-71. 56. 3. TN. 37. P. M. Tierney. T. M. Organizational Behavior *Vecchio. J. (1970). and individual attributes to creative perfor- *Schiemann. (1985). 1977). 43. R. Vertical *Scandura. Dissertation Abstracts International. Scandura. P. 10. 13. G. M. T. change quality: The role of personal and interpersonal attri. B. Journal of Applied Psychology. (1985). "Tanner. Sparrowe. Spector. J.. (1986). J. B.. competence and role stress as explanatory variables. & Levine. lished manuscript.. B. & Bedeian. G. *Vecchio. T. Disser. P. J. Nashville. 2307. 37. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management. 17-27. Mayfield. Jr. 15. havior: What is the relationship? Employee Responsibilities & *Scandura. Tiemey. A. L. 283—306. *Stepina. R. S. (1997). M. R. Graen. IS.. L. R. & Castleberry. 2922. 1987). ber exchange and supervisor career mentoring as complemen- tary constructs in leadership research. G. (1992). Harris. W. S. Group tation Abstracts International. (1991). 478-485. Process and structure flict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Vertical exchange Scandura. The nature and prediction of organi. (1990). When exchange and salesperson stress. (1948). S. E. task. 11—21. Development and preliminary validation of a in leading Japanese organizations. (1987). Journal of Psychology. Personal factors associated with leader- A Monte Carlo investigation of statistical power and resis.C. P. Rosenthal. P. The vertical dyad .. Academy of *Seers. Vertical exchanges and organizational work experience in the early career development of profes- commitments of American business managers. supportive ment Journal. characteristics and leader-member exchange. leadership intervention. N. T.. Rela- International.. A. P. (1994). J. Journal *Tansky. C. organizations. R. G. 6. tance to type I error.

(1993). P. 81. P. R. Human *Wayne. ity on performance ratings and interrater agreement. and nonmember individuals with any subscription problems. nal of Social Psychology. 1996 project effectiveness: Problem-solving competence as a mod. PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY AND IN INK IF POSSIBLE. M. P. (1989). RUNT FULL NAME OR KEY NAME OF INSTITUTION MEMBER OR CU5TOMERNUMBER (MAY BE FOUND ON ANY PAST ISSUE LABEL) ADDRESS DATE YOUR ORDER WAS MAILED (OR PHONED) PREPAID . Graen. & Horn. & Steiner. Englewood and exchange quality in supervisor-subordinate interactions: Cliffs. Herd. J. ganizational Behavior. Gavin.. C. 20. Mea- Wakabayashi. Once a claim w received and resolved. Organi. B. (1996). & DATE: STAFF NAME: LABEL NO. With the appropriate information we can begin a resolution. Jour. A laboratory experiment and field study. & Graen. (1989). The effects of leader. fectivity and employee attitudes. —————— (TO BE FILLED OUT BY APA STAFF) —^—————— DATE RECEIVED:. DATE OF ACTION: _ ACTION TAKEN: _ INV. send a copy. _CHECK __CHAROE CHECK/CARD CLEARED DATE: CITY STATE/COUNTRY (If possible. M. M.844 GERSTNER AND DAY linkage model of leadership: Problems and prospects. please do NOT duplicate claims through them and directly to us. Griffeth. D.. & Green. Journal of Applied Psychology. institutions. 126. D. surement and nonmeasurement processes with negative af- Japanese management progress: Mobility into middle man. ogy. NE. 88-101.. (1988). 1431-1440. R. 750 First Street. DC 20002-4242 PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE. *Weitzel. M. System development Received June 25. Accepted May 30. G. Yukl. J.) YOUR NAME AND PHONE NUMBER ISSUES: MISSING DAMAGED TITLE VOLUME OR YEAK NUMBER OR MONTH Thank you. (1986). 34. Attribu- zational Behavior and Human Performance. 531-544. A PHOTOCOPY MAY BE USED.. 75. NJ: Prentice Hall.. 617-625. Journal of Applied *Zalesny. G. Washington. (1990). 1997 erator variable. R. M. M. & Ferris. & Graen. 507-531. 217-227. 42. D. M. G. 73. affect. L. The effect of similar- Psychology. If you use the services of an agent. & DATE: Send this form to APA Subscription Claims. 81-96. Journal of Applied Psychol- agement.. Leadership in organizations. 487-499. S. NO. 46. delivery of replacement issues routinely takes 4—6 weeks. A. W. & Williams. The tigation of leader-member exchange effects.. *Wilhelm C. front and back.. tional conflict between managers and subordinates: An inves- *Vecchio. S. J. (1993). . B. *Williams.. G. S. Decision Sciences. of your cancelled check to help us in our research of your claim. member exchange on employee citizenship and impression management behavior. Journal of Or- predictive utility of the vertical dyad linkage approach. Human Relations. Influence tactics. 5-20. J. A. 1997 AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION SUBSCRIPTION CLAIMS INFORMATION Today's Date:_ We provide this form to assist members. R. M. L.. & Kirsch. (1990). Graen. Revision received May 29. *Wayne. W. Relations. A.. 14..