Implicit Leadership Theories (ILTs) and change behaviors: the mediating role of LMX

Document Type: Research Paper

Authors

1 Faculty of Management and Economics, Vali-e-Asr University of Rafsanjan, Kerman, Iran

2 Department of Accounting, Sirjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sirjan, Iran

Abstract

Capitalizing upon Implicit Leadership Theories (ILTs) and Leader-member exchange (LMX), this research aims to explore the relationship between the congruence of employees’ ILTs and those traits of their managers and employees’ supportiveness, resistance and behavioral creativity for change. After distributing three questionnaires at three points among teachers, 296 participants completed all three questionnaires. Having conducted some confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs), we utilized Latent Congruence Modeling (LCM) to analyze the final proposed models. The findings showed that the congruence has no direct effects on behavioral change responses. However, LMX can function as a full mediator. LMX has significant relationships with employees’ support and resistance for change. Nevertheless, the path coefficient was non-significant for behavioral creativity to change. This study, therefore, extends prevailing follower-centric perspective on leadership and strengthens its essence in organizational change with fundamental socio-cognitive research.

Keywords

Main Subjects


Article Title [Persian]

نظریه های ضمنی رهبری و رفتارهای تغییر: نقش میانجی گر تبادل رهبر_عضو

Authors [Persian]

  • محمد صادق شریفی راد 1
  • سوده حاج حسینی 2
1 دانشکدة مدیریت و اقتصاد، دانشگاه ولیعصر رفسنجان، کرمان، ایران
2 گروه حسابداری، دانشکده سیرجان، دانشگاه آزاداسلامی، سیرجان، ایران
Abstract [Persian]

با استفاده از نظریه های ضمنی رهبری و تبادل رهبر- عضو ، این تحقیق به دنبال آن است که روابط بین همخوانی بین نظریه های ضمنی رهبری پیروان و آن خصیصه ها برای مدیران آنها از یک طرف و حمایت، مقاومت و رفتار خلاقانه پیروان از طرف دیگر را مورد بررسی قرار دهد. بعد از توزیع سه پرسشنامه در سه نقطه زمانی متفاوت در بین معلم ها، 296 شرکت کننده هر سه پرسشنامه را به صورت کامل پر کردند. پس از انجام یک سری تحلیل عاملی تاییدی، از روش مدلسازی همخوانی مکنون برای تحلیل مدلهای پیشنهادی نهایی استفاده گردید. نتایج نشان داد که این همخوانی تاثیر مستقیم بر روی پاسخ های رفتاری در برابر تغییر ندارد. با این وجود، کیفیت روابط رهبر و پیرو به عنوان یک متغیر میانجی گر کامل عمل می کند. کیفیت روابط بین رهبر و پیرو تاثیر معنا دار بر روی حمایت کارمند و مقاومت در برابر تغییر دارد ولیکن این رابطه برای متغیرهای LMX و خلاقیت برای تغییر معنادار نبود. بنابراین، این مطالعه دیدگاه موجود محوریت پیروان را بسط داده است و اهمیت آن را در تغییر سازمانی با یک تحقیق ادارکی اجتماعی مورد تاکید قرار می دهد.

Keywords [Persian]

  • نظریه های ضمنی رهبری
  • پاسخ های رفتاری در برابر تغییر
  • تبادل رهبر عضو
  • همخوانی
Alharbi, A. M., Armstrong, S. J., & Hoyland, T. (2016). The influence of leader-member exchange on resistance to organizational change. In Proceedings of the Eighth Saudi Students Conference in the UK (pp. 77-92).

Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in organizational behavior10(1), 123-167.

Armenakis, A. A., & Bedeian, A. G. (1999). Organizational change: A review of theory and research in the 1990s. Journal of Management, 25, 293–315.

Attaran M. (2004). Exploring the relationship between information technology and business process reengineering. Information & Management, 41(5), 585–596.

Atwater, L., & Carmeli, A. (2009). Leader–member exchange, feelings of energy, and involvement in creative work. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(3), 264-275.

Bass B, Riggio RE. (2006).Transformational leadership. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bauer, T.N., Erdogan, B., Liden, R.C., & Wayne, S.J. (2006). A longitudinal study of the moderating role of extraversion: Leader–member exchange, performance, and turnover during new executive development. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 298–310.

Berger, C. R., & Calabrese, R. J. (1974). Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human communication research1(2), 99-112.

Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York, NY: Wiley. Bluedorn, A. C., & Denhardt, R. B. (1988). Time and organizations. Journal of Management, 14, 299–320.

Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. Transaction Publishers.

Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and loss: Retrospect and prospect. American journal of Orthopsychiatry52(4), 664.

Burke, R. J. (2002). Organizational change: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks: CA: Sage.

Caldwell, S. D., Herold, D. M., & Fedor, D. B. (2004). Toward an understanding of the relationships among organizational change, individual differences, and changes in person–environment fit: A cross-level study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 868–882.

Carter, M. Z., Armenakis, A. A., Feild, H. S., & Mossholder, K. W. (2013). Transformational leadership, relationship quality, and employee performance during continuous incremental organizational change. Journal of Organizational Behavior34(7), 942-958.

Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of management31(6), 874-900.

Dienesch, R.M., & Liden, R.C. (1986). Leader–member exchange model of leadership: A critique and further development. Academy of Management Review, 11, 618–634.

Dulebohn, J. H., Bommer, W. H., Liden, R. C., Brouer, R. L., & Ferris, G. R. (2012). A meta-analysis of antecedents and consequences of leader-member exchange: Integrating the past with an eye toward the future. Journal of management38(6), 1715-1759.

Dutton, J. E. (2003). Energize your workplace: How to build and sustain high-quality relationships at work. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Engle, E. M., & Lord, R. G. (1997). Implicit theories, self-schemas, and leader–member exchange. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 988–1010.

Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. (2005).From ideal to real: A longitudinal study of the role of Implicit Leadership Theories on Leader–Member Exchanges and employee outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(4), 659–676.

Epitropaki, O., Sy, T., Martin, R., Tram-Quon, S., & Topakas, A. (2013). Implicit leadership and followership theories “in the wild”: Taking stock of information-processing approaches to leadership and followership in organizational settings. The Leadership Quarterly24(6), 858-881.

Fedor, D. B. (1991). Recipient responses to performance feedback: A proposed model and its implications. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 9, 73–120.

Fedor, D. B., Caldwell, S., & Herold, D. M. (2006). The effects of organizational changes on employee commitment: A multilevel investigation. Personnel Psychology59(1), 1-29.

Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd Ed.)New York: McGraw-Hill.

Folger, R., & Skarlicki, D. P. (1999). Unfairness and resistance to change: Hardship as mistreatment. Journal of organizational change management12(1), 35-50.

Furst, S. A., & Cable, D. M. (2008). Employee resistance to organizational change: managerial influence tactics and leader-member exchange. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 453-462.

Galambos, J. A., Abelson, R. P., & Black, J. B. (1986). Knowledge structures. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Gerstner, C.R., & Day, D.V. (1997). Meta-analytic review of leader–member exchange theory: Correlates and construct issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 827– 844.

Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American sociological review, 161-178.

Graen, G.B. (2004). New frontiers of leadership, LMX leadership: The series. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.

Graen, G.B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader–member exchange (LMX) theory over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6, 219–247.

Hess, C. E. (2010). Trust in Leadership: The Role of Implicit Leadership Theory Congruence. (Doctoral Dissertation). U.S.: North Carolina State University.

Hobfall, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American psychologist44(3), 513- 524.

Junker, N. M., & van Dick, R. (2014). Implicit theories in organizational settings: A systematic review and research agenda of implicit leadership and followership theories. The Leadership Quarterly25(6), 1154-1173.

Jyoti, J., & Dev, M. (2015). The impact of transformational leadership on employee creativity: the role of learning orientation. Journal of Asia Business Studies9(1), 78-98.

Kanfer, R., & Ackerman, P. L. (1989). Motivation and cognitive abilities: An integrative/aptitude–treatment interaction approach to skill acquisition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 657–690.

Kim, T. G., Hornung, S., & Rousseau, D. M. (2011). Change-supportive employee behavior: Antecedents and the moderating role of time. Journal of Management37(6), 1664-1693.

Kraft, A., Sparr, J. L., & Peus, C. (2018). Giving and making sense about change: The back and forth between leaders and employees. Journal of Business and Psychology33(1), 71-87.

Liden, R. C., Sparrowe, R. T., & Wayne, S. J. (1997). Leader–member exchange theory: The past and potential for the future. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 15, 47–119.

Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Zhao, H., & Henderson, D. (2008). Servant leadership: Development of a multidimensional measure and multi-level assessment. The leadership quarterly19(2), 161-177.

Lord, R. G. (1985). An information processing approach to social perceptions, leadership perceptions and behavioral measurement in organizational settings. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 7, pp. 85–128). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Lord, R. G., & Emrich, C. (2001). Thinking outside the box by looking inside the box: Extending the cognitive revolution of leadership research. The Leadership Quarterly, 11, 551–579.

Lord, R. G., & Maher, K. J. (1991). Leadership and information processing: Linking perceptions and performance. Boston, MA: Unwin Hyman.

Lord, R. G., & Maher, K. J. (1993). Leadership and information processing: Linking perceptions and performance. London: Routledge.

Marks ML. (2006). Workplace recovery after mergers, acquisitions, and downsizing: Facilitating individual adaptation to major organizational transformations. Organizational Dynamics, 35, 384–398.

Martin, R., Guillaume, Y., Thomas, G., Lee, A., & Epitropaki, O. (2016). Leader–Member exchange (LMX) and performance: A Meta-Analytic review. Personnel Psychology69(1), 67-121.

Martínez-Mesa, J., González-Chica, D. A., Duquia, R. P., Bonamigo, R. R., & Bastos, J. L. (2016). Sampling: how to select participants in my research study?. Anais brasileiros de dermatologia91(3), 326-330.

Neves, P., Almeida, P., & Velez, M. J. (2018). Reducing intentions to resist future change: Combined effects of commitment-based HR practices and ethical leadership. Human Resource Management57(1), 249-261.

Nie, D., & Lämsä, A. M. (2015). The leader–member exchange theory in the Chinese context and the ethical challenge of guanxi. Journal of Business Ethics128(4), 851-861.

Offermann, L. R., Kennedy Jr, J. K., & Wirtz, P. W. (1994). Implicit leadership theories: Content, structure, and generalizability. The Leadership Quarterly5(1), 43-58.

Oreg, S. (2006). Personality, context and resistance to organizational change. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 15, 73–101.

Paper D, Chang R. (2005). The state of business process reengineering: A search for success factors. Total Quality Management, 16, 121–133.

Quinn, R. W. (2007). Energizing others in work connections. In Jane E. Dutton, & Belle Rose Ragins (Eds.), Exploring positive relationships at work: Building a theoretical and research foundation (pp. 73−90). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Quinn, R. W., & Dutton, J. E. (2005). Coordination as energy-in-conversation. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 36−57.

SEO, M. G., Taylor, M. S., Hill, N. S., Zhang, X., Tesluk, P. E., & Lorinkova, N. M. (2012). The role of affect and leadership during organizational change. Personnel Psychology, 65(1), 121-165.

Shin, J., Taylor, M. S., & Seo, M. G. (2012). Resources for change: The relationships of organizational inducements and psychological resilience to employees' attitudes and behaviors toward organizational change. Academy of Management journal55(3), 727-748.

Sonenshein, S. (2010). We’re changing—or are we? Untangling the role of progressive, regressive, and stability narratives during strategic change implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 477–512.

Stanley, D.J., Meyer, J.P., & Topolnytsky, L. (2005). Employee cynicism and resistance to organizational change. Journal of Business and Psychology, 19, 429 – 459.

Tierney, P. (1999). Work relations as a precursor to a psychological climate for change: The role of work group supervisors and peers. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12, 120–133.

Topakas, A. (2011). Measurement of implicit leadership theories and their effect on leadership processes and outcomes. (Doctoral Dissertation). U.K.: Aston University.

Tram-Quon, S. (2013). An implicit measure of followership using the Implicit Association Test (IAT). Unpublished Manuscript.

Van Dam, K., Oreg, S., & Schyns, B. (2008). Daily work contexts and resistance to organisational change: The role of leader–member exchange, development climate, and change process characteristics. Applied Psychology, 57(2), 313-334.

van den Heuvel, M., Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2013). Adapting to change: The value of change information and meaning-making. Journal of Vocational Behavior83(1), 11-21.

Volmer, J., Spurk, D., & Niessen, C. (2012). Leader–member exchange (LMX), job autonomy, and creative work involvement. The Leadership Quarterly23(3), 456-465.

Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations (Vol. 3). Sage.

Weick, K. E., & Quinn, R. E. (1999). Organizational change and development. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 361–386.

Xu, B. D., Zhao, S. K., Li, C. R., & Lin, C. J. (2017). Authentic leadership and employee creativity: testing the multilevel mediation model. Leadership & Organization Development Journal38(3), 482-498.

Yang, J., Liu, H., & Gu, J. (2017). A multi-level study of servant leadership on creativity: The roles of self-efficacy and power distance. Leadership & Organization Development Journal38(5), 610-629.