Leader-member exchange and leader identification: comparison and integration

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to compare and integrate leader-member exchange (LMX) and leader identification (LID) as concurrently functioning mediators between three leadership styles (individual-focused transformational, contingent reward, and benevolent paternalistic) and two citizenship behaviors (helping and taking charge).Design/methodology/approachData included 395 stable, independent leader-follower dyads from numerous Chinese organizations. Partial least squares structural equation modeling and relative weight analysis were used in data analyses.FindingsIn established, steady-state leader-member alliances, LMX was the dominant explanation between various leadership styles and helping; whereas LID explained leadership effects on taking charge. Three-stage indirect effects of leadership-LMX-LID-taking charge were found. Also, LMX and LID related to the three focal leadership styles in distinct ways.Research limitations/implicationsLimitations include cross-sectional data. Strengths include a large, multi-source field sample. Implications include that LMX and LID provide different prosocial motivations; LMX indirectly engenders stronger other-orientation through LID; and the nature of indirect leadership effects via LID is more sensitive to the nature of the focal leadership styles. LMX and LID together provide a package of prosocial motivations.Practical implicationsLeaders interested in increasing employees’ helping vs taking charge behaviors can be more effective by understanding the different motivational potentials of LMX vs LID. Leaders also need to choose appropriate behavioral styles when they activate LMX vis-à-vis LID.Originality/valueThis study integrates multiple leadership theories to provide a nuanced account of how social exchange and self-concept explain leadership at the interpersonal level when leadership styles, LMX, and LID are stable.