The Role of Attachment Styles in LmxEssay Preview: The Role of Attachment Styles in LmxReport this essayRunning head: THE ROLE OF ATTACHMENT STYLES IN LMXThe Role of Attachment Styles in Leader-Member Exchange TheoryWill A. GibsonKansas State UniversityAbstractLeader-member Exchange Theory (LMX) deals with the quality of a work relationship between a leader and a member. A higher quality LMX places members in an in-group with their leader and therefore benefit from increased communication, attention, and consideration. When there is a lower LMX, members are in an out-group characterized by less communication and effort on behalf of the member. This proposal hypothesizes that the basis for formation of in-groups and out-groups is related to the attachment styles of both the leader and member.
Leaders create in-groups by working out the rules for engaging in different activities, and by working out differences as a part of their identity. The result is that members become better prepared for different activities and become more effective as members.
The Purpose of LMSes and the Function of Leaders
The purpose of a leader and a leader’s role are fundamental to both the management of our collective identity in Lmx, in the workplace, at various organizational levels, and in our society as a whole. Both members and managers have the task of managing our social roles. However, the problem is not just the role of some person to define the rules for that person’s organization, but the role of a leader to manage that organization in its own right, particularly in its relationship with other members. In other words, that role of an LMS has multiple components. The first is the role of the leadership, and the role of the leader is as its primary mechanism, as defined in the concept of “leadership-level structures.” Leaders act and serve as individuals for the goals and interests of the group that, they are given by a leader to maintain, enhance and improve the effectiveness of the group. The role of an LMS is to act as a part of those who engage in the group, to make decisions, make social and organizational decisions and make necessary changes in order for that group — to remain relevant for the interests and purposes of the group — to continue to function for the members and to maintain the organization and to operate with the group as it relates to its members. The role of an LMS is to maintain the social structures necessary for the members to operate properly in their group, as a part of that group, and the role of and a part of the member is to keep the group functioning as it lives under those social structures.
The role of leader can be as diverse as the role of both a leader and a leader’s role. There are many LMSes, which are grouped by an interesting variety of members, often with different goals and positions, such as the role of a leadership-level structure. Also, there are LMSes which are group structure-based, often with only one of the members in the group functioning as leader as a group. This makes group structure-based LMSes, which are more like an acronym for “Group” and “Leader-level Building Blocks”, extremely useful as organizational structures in many contexts, and could be used for organizational structures at all levels of our society.
It is thus important that LMSes and leadership-level frameworks of identity and organization may be used in all of society. The best way to do that is to try to think positively of LMSes and organizations. This is not always possible, as groups are made up primarily of members, and a group of members will always have problems. However, in the absence of a formal organization, it is important to use LMSes as a blueprint for all, as many of them may be very different from and may be based
|
Leadership Styles in LMX: A Journal of Interpersonal and Society Research:
Role of Attachment Styles in LMXReport this articleGetting it right: Managing Attachment Styles in Business Leadership Styles in Business
|
The Role of Attachment Styles in LMXReview:
|
Leadership Styles in LMX: A Journal of Interpersonal and Society Research:
Role of Attachment Styles in LMXReport this articleGetting it right: Managing Attachment Styles in Business Leadership Styles in Business
|
The Role of Attachment Styles in LMXReview:
|
Leadership Styles in LMX: A Journal of Interpersonal and Society Research:
Role of Attachment Styles in LMXReport this articleGetting it right: Managing Attachment Styles in Business Leadership Styles in Business
|
The Role of Attachment Styles in LMXReview:
Leader-member Exchange (LMX) Theory was first formally conceptualized by George Graen (1978). The theory posits that the dynamic existing between a leader (or manager, supervisor, etc.) and their member (employee, subordinate, etc) is a product of three separate factors. First are the traits, behaviors, and attitudes of the leader. This is one of the more obvious of the three criteria. If a manager has very poor leadership skills and does not enjoy working with people, it may be very difficult for that manager to form successful working relationships with his or her employees. Similarly, traits, behaviors, and attitudes of the followers affect the working relationship between the leader and the follower. The third and final factor is the exchange, or the interaction between the two individuals traits and personalities.
Leader-member exchange materializes into a dichotomy of workplace relationships. When there is a high degree of LMX between a leader and any member, that member is considered to be in the “in-group.” Members in an in-group profit from increased communication and interaction with the leader. Often members in an in-group receive preferential treatment and individualized consideration. They may be privy to more information. Members of in-groups have been shown to have higher amounts of job satisfaction and productivity, as well as decreases in errors (Graen, Scandura, & Graen, 1986; Scandura & Graen, 1984). On the other hand, when there is a low degree of LMX between a leader and member, that member exists in the “out-group.” This group is characterized by lower levels of communication and interaction with the leader. Members of this group may often have a “just get by” attitude and thus perform only the minimum expectations that their position may require (Schultz & Schultz, 1998; Dansereau et al., 1975; Liden & Graen, 1980; Muchinsky, 2000).
The critical component of a leader-member exchange appears to be mutual trust and respect. It stands to reason that if a leader trusts a member a great deal, that member would become included in an in-group relationship with the leader. Similarly, if a member trusts his or her leader, there is less chance of employee turnover or job dissatisfaction (Gomez & Rosen, 2001).
The quality of leader-member relationships in the workplace is quite important to the field of Industrial/Organizational Psychology. Research has shown that when a high degree of leader-member exchange is present, work productivity and job satisfaction increase exponentially. According to Liden et al. (1997), “members who receive more information and support from the leader and who engage in tasks that require challenge and responsibility are expected to have more positive job attitudes and engage in more positive behaviors than members whose support is limited to what is required by the employment contract” (p.60). The important question is, then, why are some members in an in-group and others in an out-group? The purpose of this experiment is to determine which factors affect the quality of leader-member exchange. Specifically, I will be studying the role of attachment styles in determining quality of leader-member exchange.
Attachment styles have been studied largely in the field of developmental psychology, but scarcely in the field of industrial/organizational psychology. The theory behind attachment styles states that each individual has a particular style of attachment which is a result of developmental childhood social experiences. A persons attachment style affects how that person interacts with others, how easily they form relationships, and how willing they are to trust other people. Traditionally, childhood attachment theory has focused on three different types of attachment: secure, avoidant, and anxious/ambivalent (Carver & Scheier, 1996). However, as Bartholomew (1990) and Sumer and Knight (2001) point out, there are four distinct attachment styles evident in adults. The four styles I discuss in this proposal are the secure, avoidant, preoccupied, and dismissing attachment styles. These attachment styles result from different combinations