Leader-Management-Exchange (LMX) - Coursework Example

Leader-Management-Exchange (LMX) The term LMX or leader-member-exchange, also known as the vertical dyad linkage, is a theory that describes the implicit interaction between the leaders of groups and their members through several agreements, with which these leaders maintain their positions. After observation of leadership behavior, it has been derived that the actions of a leader are not completely the same towards different members of the group. The relationship between the leader and the members and suggests that the result is dependent upon the degree of mutual respect, trust and loyalty. However, since these leaders do not have much time and power on their hands, they seek to narrow down their radar to focus their attention on those members who seem to capitalize on the leadership outcome that is the extent of the relationship. The theories prior to the leader-member-exchange theory either focused too much on the leader or on the members. The LMX on the other hand has a different approach, whereby it considers the relationship between the leaders and the members as an important element that contributes to leader effectiveness. Also unlike other theories that considered the entire group of members as a whole, the LMX judges each individual separately. According to the dealings and agreements between the members and the leaders, the theory identifies two different types of relationships. The two distinct relationships that are found after application of the LMX include the in-group and the out-group. There is a set of people within the members group that tend to go further than and achieve more than what their expected roles would limit them to, this set of people also take up a more productive and comprehensive approach to the tasks they need to complete. This set of people makes up the in-group that is shown as the high quality of the LMX with positive results. The constructive culture within the in-group enables the leaders to pick them out and place a spotlight on them, giving them special attention. Characteristics of the in-group consist of negotiations by the members to develop and increase their role ahead of their job prescriptions, mutual trust, respect and concern between the leaders and the members that in turn results in valuable promotions and perks. The out-group is formed by the set of members who work hard enough, only to complete the contractual requirements of their job prescriptions, nothing more. There is a low degree of enthusiasm compared to the in-group and they do not receive any form of special attention from the leaders, nor any additional perks or promotions. Even though the leader tries to better the degree of interaction, the out-group member does not show much interest and remains self-concerned. Therefore, the out-group is a low quality LMX and provides average level outcomes. It is argued that the existence of these two unique groups is somewhat discriminating and de-motivating, however they will continue to exist and the leader must constantly make an effort to expand the in-group of the organization. The quality of outcomes that the LMX is able to provide is under effect of several factors that may enhance it if controlled properly, however, if these factors are left casually undecided, they may very well result in average or possible less than average LMX outcome. Communication plays an important element in deciding the quality of the LMX. Individual interaction and communication with the leaders and the coworkers allows for a sense of belonging for the subordinates to build, making them feel like a significant part of the organization that matters. This results in a high quality LMX. When the leader of a group has authority that reaches higher on the ladder of an organization enabling him/her to have a good say in managerial decisions, task assignment and performance review, the members tend to be more motivated and confident, eventually leading to a good LMX. Sometimes it is possible that the leader and the member show similarities in carrying out a certain task, when this similarity is identified by the group, it leads to better interaction and thus a high LMX. The structure and work culture of the organization have profound effects on the quality of outcomes. The amount of lucidity in the working environment with respect to the flow of information also helps boost motivation and the will the exceed expectations. Other than this the organization must always adopt a competitive work culture that acts as a catalyst among the members, increasing interest. Even the leader is forced to keep keen interest as the nature of the tasks assigned is risky. Combined and handled carefully, these elements can substantially boost the quality of the LMX. Due to the characteristics of the LMX theory, it can prove to be excessively beneficial for an organization albeit at the same, is capable of harming the organization from within. The practicality of the LMX makes singling out the in-group from the out-group easier and provides good reason why both groups exist. The theory offers cause to develop and improve communication and exchanges in all aspects between the leaders and the members, which is in itself of great significance for the organization. Since the theory speaks about the improvement of relationships between the leader and the members, its mechanics aim to sustain the loyalty of members to a leader and this is important for the operation of the organization. The LMX theory may be beneficial in some areas, but there are certain aspects of the theory that may arguably prove consequential. The LMX is criticized for the promotion of discrimination within the organization by identifying and separating the in-group and the out-group, such policies are prohibited by the governing law. It becomes difficult to prove that this segregation of groups is actually beneficial for the company because a portion of the members receive special care and attention while the other does not. The theory is also criticized for the not being comprehensive enough to pay sufficient heed to leadership qualities and personalities, while also failing to properly explain the actual concept of how high quality exchanges occur. It is possible to divide the LMX theory into three stages of development that gradually result in proper leadership exchange. The first phase is known as the organizational stage. In this stage an individual within a group becomes more valuable and rises. This may happen for a number of reasons; the individual may have received a task that required a single person to lead or direct. The person who is now distinguishable from the crowd might have a certain quality that is found attractive by other members of that crowd which makes them eager to follow the unique individual. The person may seem to have more confidence, or be more intelligent, or may carry any quality and this creates a leader within the group of subordinates. The next phase is called the role development phase. Members of the organization receive their roles usually from the tasks they a required to perform. Other than that, roles are formed as prizes or rewards gained from favors done for the leader, also, the importance of division of labor also creates roles among the members, since the leader cannot complete every element of a certain task. At this point, a good balance has to be maintained between the involvement of the leader in the form of decision making and the part played by other members after work has been assigned to them. This balance is highly essential as an excess towards either side can be disastrous. The role of the leader is at stake since the distribution of authority or roles in the process of carrying out a task may amount to too much in favor of the members, in which case authority of the leader will be challenged. In the third phase of the LMX, a leader-led relation is formed. This relationship is fastened by several factors like culture, confidence, economy and more, while these are a few of the factors that tie the relationship and maintain it over a period of time. Leadership is a quality that is found in numerous individuals in modern society, these individuals include men and women both, leadership is not confined to a single sex. Even though both sexes are inherent of qualities that allow them to lead, somehow the women in society are unable to achieve too many leading roles. Women face numerous obstacles while even attempting to lead and these obstacles are better defined by the metaphor “a labyrinth”; a series of detours, dead ends and complexities. Perhaps the more significant obstacles found in this labyrinth are sex discrimination, the domestic responsibilities of a woman, and sometimes even a woman’s own lack of self-esteem and lack of belief in herself. It is believed that in order to eradicate this discrimination, four structures must change; the individual, the family, the culture and the organization. Leadership is, not entirely, but somewhat restricted to men. This is because discrimination still exists today; women are still targets of prejudice and stereotypical ideas and complexes. Women are still expected to be domestic housewives, carrying out domestic responsibilities of the house, taking care of the family and children. When a woman demands to be allowed a top level job or when a working woman asks for an increase in her salary, they are frowned upon. These complexities do not allow women to occupy leading roles in society since they are not seen to “have what it takes”. Diversity does not only include the typical distinctions like male and female, black and white, Christian and Muslim, there are other diversities that exist; an introvert and an extrovert, a slow learner and a fast learner, a liberal and a conservative and more. All of these diversities need to be embraced by any organization in order to function properly without conflict. Diversity within an organization is good in the sense that for the entire organization to function as a whole, it will need people who can think, people who can do, people who can dream, people who can organize. A good organization accepts the differences of the individual it hires and uses these differences to its advantage. There are four identified dimensions of diversity. The first dimension is the personality dimension which includes an individual’s beliefs, likes, dislikes and more. This dimension is responsible for affecting the other three layers throughout the individual’s life. The second dimension, called the internal dimension includes those aspects of diversity which we have no control over. Basic divisions between people are formed in this dimension of diversity. These dimensions include the first things we see in people that form the basis for wrong conclusions and assumptions. The third dimension, called the external dimension is the one that includes those elements of our lives that we may have some control over, alter after a period of time, and help us make career and other decisions. Also, this dimension plays a small role in deciding what kind of friends we make and what work we do. The fourth dimension is called the organizational dimension, it affects an individual’s attitude at the work place, whereby matters of promotions, perks, development and opportunities are dealt with in this dimension. Diversity can be managed and used by paying close attention to the details of these dimensions and figuring out which dimension had impacted an individual in what stage of his/her life. Ponder over the elements of the dimensions that may have affected the individual negatively. Reorganization of aspects of the dimensions that forces us to make assumptions about people is also a helpful exercise. Gender roles are the factors that determine how men and women should speak, think, dress, act and basically live within the context of society. It can be argued that gender roles today are not what they were like previously. Perhaps the most popular example of changing gender roles would be the roles of women in society. In the preceding eras, women were strictly confined to the house and care for the family, there was no concept of women working or being the bread winners of a family. However, in society today women are being accepted as part of the economy and contribute to it productively. Their roles have dramatically shifted to being of great value. Women today still believe that they face a glass ceiling that is barriers to advancing and developing further than the positions they hold. It is suggested that the discriminations that still prevail, have formed the glass ceiling, discouraging women managers. These elements seem to have an effect on the minds of female employees in a way that their aspirations to achieve higher statuses and positions have been suppressed, compared to those of men who do not seem hesitant and know what they want to become and what they need to do to get there. In order for the glass ceiling to shatter, the discriminatory culture has to change, but more importantly, women facing the barrier need to be persistent. Bibliography KUGELMASS, J. W., & RITCHIE, D. J. (2003). Dealing with Diversity: LMX Leadership: The Series. Information Age. http://www.myilibrary.com?id=138395 (2002). LMX leadership: the series. Greenwich, CT, Information Age Pub. NORTHOUSE, P. G. (2007). Leadership: theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, SAGE Publications. LEE, J. W., & ASHCRAFT, A. M. (2005). Gender roles. New York, Nova Biomedical Books Read More