Leader-member exchange differentiation and followers’ psychological strain: exploring relations on the individual and on the team-level
-
Published:2024-05-09
Issue:27
Volume:43
Page:23115-23129
-
ISSN:1046-1310
-
Container-title:Current Psychology
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Curr Psychol
Author:
Diebig MathiasORCID, Gritzka Susan, Angerer Peter, Erschens Rebecca, Gast Michael, Gündel Harald, Hofmann Sophie, Junne Florian, Schröpel Carla, Klasmeier Kai Niclas
Abstract
AbstractDue to social comparison in the team, leader-member exchange (LMX) differentiation has been shown to play a crucial role for explaining follower outcomes. LMX differentiation may be beneficial for some followers, but also detrimental for others, when perceived as unfair. In order to understand the impact of LMX differentiation on work-related outcomes, LMX differentiation should be described by three properties (relative LMX position, LMX variability, and team-level LMX). The aim of the study is to focus on LMX differentiation and test relationships between different properties of LMX and followers’ psychological strain. In sum, 75 teams with 322 followers answered an online survey about their leaders’ LMX and their individual levels of psychological strain. Results of multilevel modeling showed that the relative LMX position was negatively related to psychological strain on the individual level. This relation was moderated by LMX variability and team-level LMX. However, we did not find significant relations between team-level LMX and team-level psychological strain. The present study extends previous research by looking at relations between LMX and psychological strain on an individual follower level as well as on the team level. Our results suggest that the relative position of LMX within a team seems to play a crucial role for individual follower psychological strain. Results imply that leaders should aim to improve LMX relationships within their team and to reduce differences between team members. Leadership trainings should impart knowledge and skills to improve LMX quality and include elements about LMX differentiation, its origins, as well as consequences.
Funder
Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf. Anstalt öffentlichen Rechts
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference65 articles.
1. Aguinis, H. H., Gottfredson, R. K., & Culpepper, S. A. (2013). Best-practice recommendations for estimating Cross-level Interaction effects using Multilevel modeling. Journal of Management, 39(6), 1490–1528. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206313478188. 2. Bates, D., Machler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 3. Becker, T. E., Atinc, G., Breaugh, J. A., Carlson, K. D., Edwards, J. R., & Spector, P. E. (2016). Statistical control in correlational studies: 10 essential recommendations for organizational researchers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(2), 157–167. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2053. 4. Bernerth, J. B., Aguinis, H., & Herman (2016). A critical review and best-practice recommendations for control variable usage. Personnel Psychology, 69(1), 229–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12103. 5. Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 349–381). Jossey-Bass.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|