Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

Lider-üye etkileşimi faktörlerinin liderler ve astlar tarafından karşılıklı algılanması: Bir perakende işletmesi çalışanları üzerinde araştırma

Mutual perceptions of the leader member exchange factors by leaders and followers: A research on employees of a retail company

Journal Name:

  • İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2014

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
There are two main purposes of this research. The first one is to analyze the reciprocity in leader member relations. Leader member exchange theory proposes a dyadic devotion between leader and members. Members who are volunteer in undertaking tasks and responsibilities exceed their standard role definitions; in exchange they get their leaders support and protection. Most of the researches dealing with leader member exchange focus on the devotion and extra role taking behavior of the members. The relations have been analyzed among fairness, performance, personality characteristics, satisfaction, commitment, teamwork and membership whether in or out-group. But researches focusing on and analyzing the strength of the dyadic relations among leaders and members are relatively few. The second purpose of this study is to analyze the main differences between in-group and out-group members. In multidimensional analyzes of the leader member exchange four dimensions has been used as affect, loyalty, contribution and professional respect in multidimensional analyzes of the leader member exchange. Within this research, the main differences among these dimensions have also been analyzed either from the perspective of leader and the members. Results reveal that there are statistically significant relationships between the perceptions of LMX leaders and members on affect, contribution, loyalty and professional respect. In mutual relationships (as dyad), individuals assessed himself in “in-group” and individuals assessed himself in “out-group” were compared by leaders and members perspectives separately. According to the t-test results there are statistically significant differences on all of the LMX perceptions (affect, contribution, loyalty, professional respect). There isn’t any statistically significant difference in the context of demographic variables.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu çalışmanın iki temel amacı bulunmaktadır. Bunlardan ilki lider–üye etkileşim modelinde belirtilen ilişkilerin karşılılık boyutunun analiz edilmesidir. Lider üye etkileşim modelinde karşılıklı vefakârlık söz konusudur. Üyeler liderleri için fazladan görev ve sorumluluk üstlenmeye gönüllüdürler, bunun karşılığı olarak liderler de üyelerine standart görev tanımlarının üzerinde destek verir ve onları savunur. Lider üye etkileşimi ile ilgili yapılan çalışmaların büyük bölümü üyelerin fedakârlığı açısından konuyu ele almışlardır. Üyelerin iç ya da dış grup üyesi olmaları durumunun adalet, performans, kişilik özellikleri, tatmin, bağlılık ve ekip çalışması gibi faktörlerle ilişkisi araştırılmıştır. Ancak üyeler ile lider arasındaki fedakârlığın derecesinin karşılıklı olarak analiz edildiği araştırmalar nispeten az sayıdadır. Araştırmanın ikinci amacı iç ya da dış grup üyeleri arasındaki farklılıkları analiz etmektir. Lider üye etkileşimini çok boyutlu olarak inceleyen araştırmalarda etki, katkı, vefa ve profesyonel saygı olmak üzere dört faktör kullanılmaktadır. Çalışmada bu faktörlerin hem liderin astlarına ilişkin algılamaları hem de üyelerin liderlerine ilişkin algılamaları açısından iç grup ve dış grup olmaları arasındaki farklılıkları t-testti ve Anova testi ile analiz edilmektedir. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre, liderler ve astlar arasında algılanan etki, katkı, vefakârlık ve profesyonel saygı boyutlarında istatistikî olarak anlamlı ilişkiler tespit edilmiştir. Karşılıklı ikili ilişkilerinde lider ve astlar açısından ayrı ayrı olmak üzere, kendisini iç grup üyesi olarak değerleyenlerle dış grup üyesi olarak değerleyenler karşılaştırılmıştır. T-testi sonuçlarına göre, algılanan lider üye etkileşiminin tüm (etki, katkı, vefakârlık, profesyonel saygı) boyutlarında anlamlı farklılıklar olduğu belirlenmiştir. Demografik değişkenler bağlamında LÜE’nin hiç bir boyutunda istatistikî olarak anlamlı bir farklılık tespit edilememiştir.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-lider-uye-etkilesimi-faktorlerinin-liderler-astlar-tarafindan-karsilikli-algilanmasi-bir-perakende-isletmesi-calisanlari-uzerinde-arastirma.pdf
  • 1
120
135
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

[1] C.R. Gerstner, D.V. Day, Meta-Analytic Review of Leader-Member Exchange Theory: Correlates and Construct Issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 6, 827-844 (1997).
G. Ordun, H. Aktaş / İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi 43, 1, (2014) 120–135 © 2014
133
[2] J.H. Dulebohn, W.H. Bommer, R.C. Liden, R.L. Brouer, G.R. Ferris, A Meta-Analysis of Antecedents and Consequences of Leader-Member Exchange: Integrating the Past with an Eye toward the Future. Journal of Management, 38, 6, 1715-1759 (2012).
[3] R.J. Deluga, Supervisor Trust Building, Leader-Member Exchange and Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 67, 315-326 (1994).
[4] S.M. Murphy, S.J. Wayne, R.C. Liden, B. Erdogan, Understanding Social Loafing: The Role of Justice Perceptions and Exchange Relationships. Human Relations, 56, 1, 61-84 (2003).
[5] R. Martin, G. Thomas, K. Charles, O. Epitropaki, R. McNamara, The Role of Leader-Member Exchanges in Mediating The Relationship Between Locus of Control and Work Reactions. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 78, 141-147, (2005).
[6] R.M. Dienesch, R.C. Liden, Leader-Member Exchange Model of Leadership: A Critique and Further Development. Academy of Management Review, 11, 618-634 (1986).
[7] G.B. Graen, M. Uhl-Bien, Relationship-based Approach to Leadership: Development of Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory of Leadership over 25 Years: Applying a Multi-Level Multi-Domain Perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 6, 219-247 (1995).
[8] T.A. Scandura, E.K. Pellegrini, Trust and Leader-Member Exchange A Closer Look at Relational Vulnerability. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 15, 2, 101-110 (2008).
[9] K.E. Sherman, D.M. Kennedy, M.S. Woodard, S.A. McComb, Examining the “Exchange” in Leader-Member Exchange, Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 19, 4, 407-423 (2012).
[10] F. Dansereau, G. Graen, W. Haga, A Vertical Dyadic Linkage Approach to Leadership within Formal Organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role making process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 46-70 (1975).
[11] R. Case, Leader Member Exchange Theory and Sport: Possible Applications. Journal of Sport Behavior, 21, 4, 387-396 (1998).
[12] R.C. Liden, J.M. Maslyn, Multidimensionality of Leader-Member Exchange: An Empirical Assessment through Scale Development. Journal of Management, 24, 1, 43-72 (1998).
[13] R.C. Liden, R.T. Sparrow, S.J. Wayne, Leader-Member Exchange Theory: The Past and Potential Empowerment on the Relations Between The Job, Interpersonal Relationships, and Work Outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 3, 407-41 (1997).
[14] G.B. Graen, T.A. Scandura, Toward a Psychology of Dyadic Organizing. Research In Organizational Behavior, 9, 175-208 (1987).
[15] R.C. Liden, G. Graen, Generalizability of the Vertical Dyad Linkage Model of Leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 23, 3, 451-465 (1980).
[16] F. Karcıoğlu, C. Kahya, Lider-Üye Etkileşimi ve Çatışma Yönetim Stili İlişkisi. Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 15, 2, 337-352 (2011).
G. Ordun, H. Aktaş / İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi 43, 1, (2014) 120–135 © 2014
134
[17] K. Sherony, S.G. Green, Coworker exchange: Relationships between coworkers, leader-member exchange, and work attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 87,3, June 2002, 542-548 (2002).
[18] R.T. Sparrowe, R.C. Liden, Two Routes to Influence: Integrating Leader-Member Exchange and Social Network Perspectives. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 505-535 (2005).
[19] C.A. Schriesheim, S.L. Castro, C.C. Cogliser, Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Research: A Comprehensive Review of Theory, Measurement, and Data Analytic Practices. Leadership Quartely, 10, 1, 63-113 (1999).
[20] G.J. Greguras, J.M. Ford, An Examination of the Multidimensionality of Supervisor and Subordinate Perceptions of Leader-Member Exchange. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79, 433-465 (2006).
[21] T. Baş, N. Keskin, İ.S. Mert, Lider Üye Etkileşimi (LÜE) Modeli ve Ölçme Aracının Türkçe’de Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Analizi. Ege Akademik Bakış/Ege Academic Review, 10, 3, 1013-1039 (2010).
[22] S. Aryee, Z.X. Chen, Leader-Member Exchange In a Chinese Context: Antecedents, The Mediating Role of Psychological Empowerment and Outcomes. Journal of Business Research, 59, 793-801 (2006).
[23] N.T. Duarte, J.R. Goodson, N.R. Klich, How Do I Like Thee? Let Me Appraise The Ways. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14, 239-249 (1993).
[24] N.T. Duarte, J.R. Goodson, N.R. Klich, Effects of Dyadic Quality and Duration on Performance Appraisal. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 499-521 (1994).
[25] G.B. Graen, M. Novak, P. Sommerkamp, The Effects of Leader-Member Exchange and Job Design on Productivity and Job Satisfaction: Testing a Dual Attachment Model. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 30, 109-131 (1982).
[26] S.G. Green, S.E. Anderson, S.L. Shivers, Demographic and Organizational Influences on Leader-Member Exchange and Related Work Attitudes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 66, 2, 203-214 (1996).
[27] K.J. Dunegan, M. Uhl-Bien, D. Duchon, LMX and Subordinate Performance: The Moderating, Effects of Task Characteristics. Journal of Business Psychology, 17, 2, 275-285 (2002).
[28] O. Epitropaki, R. Martin, The Impact of Relational Demography on the Quality of Leader-Member Exchanges and Employees’ Work Attitudes and Well-Being. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72, 237-240 (1999).
[29] R.P. Vecchio, B.C. Gobdel, The Vertical Dyad Linkage Model of Leadership: Problems and Prospects. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34, 5-20 (1984).
[30] C.A. Schriesheim, C.C. Gardiner, “An Exploration of The Discriminant Validity of The Leader-Member Exchange Scale (Lmx7) Commonly Used in Organizational Research”, in M. Schnake (Ed.), Proceedings of The Southern Management Association, Valdosta, GA: Southern Management Association Meeting, New Orleans, LA., 91-93 (1992).
[31] D. Duchon, S.G. Green, T.D. Taber, Vertical Dyad Linkage: A Longitudinal Assessment of Antecedents, Measures and Consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 56-60 (1986).
G. Ordun, H. Aktaş / İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi 43, 1, (2014) 120–135 © 2014
135
[32] S.J. Wayne, S.A. Green, The Effects of Leader-Member Exchange on Employee Citizenship and Impression Management Behavior. Human Relations, 46, 12, 1431-1440 (1993).
[33] R.P. Vecchio, W.R. Norris, Predicting Employee Turn over from Performance, Satisfaction, and Leader-Member Exchange. Journal of Business and Psychology, 11, 118-125 (1996).
[34] R.P. Vecchio, A Further Test of Leadership Effects Due to Between-Group and Within-Group Variation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 200-208 (1982).
[35] V.R. Krishnan, Leader-Member Exchange, Transformational Leadership, and Value System. Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies, 10, 1, 14-21 (2005).
[36] C.A. Schriesheim, L.L. Neider, T. Scandura, Delegation and Leader-Member Exchange: Main Effects, Moderators, and Measurement Issues. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 298-318 (1998).
[37] S.J. Wayne, R.C. Liden, M.I. Kraimer, I.K. Graf, The Role of Human Capital, Motivation and Supervisor Sponsorship in Predicting Career Success. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 577-595 (1999).
[38] J.D. Nahrgang, F.P. Morgeson, R. Ilies, The Development of Leader-Member Exchanges: Exploring How Personality and Performance Influence Leader and Member Relationships Over Time. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108, 256-266 (2009).
[39] B. Erdogan, R.C. Liden, M.L. Kraimer, Justice and Leader-Member Exchange: The Moderating Role of Organizational Culture. The Academy of Management Journal, 49, 2, 395-406 (2006).
[40] J. Johnson, D.M. Truxillo, B., Erdogan, T.N. Bauer, L. Hammer, Perceptions of Overall Fairness: Are Effects on Job Performance Moderated by Leader-Member Exchange?. Human Performance, 22, 432-449 (2009).
[41] R.C. Liden, B. Erdogan, S.J. Wayne, R.T. Sparrowe, Leader-Member Exchange, Differentiation, and Task Interdependence: Implications for Individual and Group Performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 723-746 (2006).
[42] B. Kuvaas, R. Buch, A. Dysvik, T. Haerem, Economic and Social Leader-Member Exchange Relationships and Follower Performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 23, 756-765 (2012).
[43] P.M. Le Blanc, V. González-Romá, A Team Level Investigation of The Relationship Between Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Differentiation, and Commitment and Performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 23, 534-544 (2012).
[44] B. Erdogan, M.L. Kraimer, R.C. Liden, Person-Organization Fit and Work Attitudes: The Moderating Role of Leader-Member Exchange. Academy of Management Proceedings & Membership Directory, OB: F1-6 (2002).
[45] D. Sluss, B.S. Thomson, Socializing the newcomer: The Mediating Role of Leader-Member Exchange. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 119, 114-125 (2012).

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com