An investigation of relationships between communication style and leader‐member exchange

Abstract

In this research, the authors examine the relationships between findings from several potentially‐related literature streams including a prescriptive body of communication theory involving supervisor‐subordinate communication, contingency ideas involving use of coaching/directive vs counselling/participative leader communication styles, and leader‐member exchange (LMX) theory from the management literature. LMX suggests that supervisors may afford differing treatment, and thus possibly use different communications tactics, with subordinates in higherquality exchange relationships than with those in lower‐quality relationships. This literature, however, leaves unresolved whether supervisors should treat employees differently. In contrast, much of the communication literature has emphasised development of “best” practices which, presumably, should be used with all employees. In this research the authors consider whether there are consistencies between leader communication practices and the perceived quality of the leader‐member exchange. They report evidence that employees perceive differences, especially in the level of participation‐related communication, depending upon whether they believe they are in a higher‐ or lower‐quality LMX relationship. Moreover, they find weak evidence for congruence between supervisor and subordinate perceptions of the quality of the exchange and no significant evidence that similarity of the dyad influences the quality of the exchange.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 81 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.