Words: 2323
In recent years the concept of Leader-Member Exchange theory has gained greater prominence in the field of contemporary management practices. Using evidence from management research consider the extent to which LMX theory may be useful when applied to the role of the Manager of the Student Center. Although Leader-member exchange (LMX) has its limitations, when applied to the role of the Student Centre Manager it is extremely useful. LMX is a relationship based theory of leadership based on the interactions between a supervisor and an employee.
It recognizes the ability of high quality relationships to create job satisfaction, commitment and innovation. In the case of the Student Centre Manager, the role requires that staff are satisfied, effective relationships are built between staff, students and academics, and that the Student Centre offers the highest and latest quality service. To analyze how LMX can aid the role of Student Centre Manager, the position will be examined from three areas most vital to performing the role successfully. These are stakeholder management, performance management and innovation. Background
Firstly, LMX and the role of the Student Center Manager will be explained. LMX theory has evolved over the last 25 years. It was first introduced by George Graen and his colleagues, as Vertical Dyad Linkage (Dansereau, Graen, & Haga, 1975), where leaders were discovered to develop differentiated relationships with their direct reports. According to Graen and Ulh-Bien (1995), today LMX theory states that effective leadership processes occur when leaders (managers) and followers (employees) are able to develop mature relationships. Leaders and followers engage in a role-making process to establish working partnerships.
These partnerships or dyads are either high-quality exchanges characterized by mutual trust, respect, and obligation or low quality relationships of low trust, respect and obligation. High quality relationships are beneficial to the manager and the employee. Less supervision is required, workers can be relied upon and are more likely to go beyond normal job expectations. Employees benefit from extra support, access to greater information and resources and are generally more satisfied and motivated. LMX developed as research began to investigate the nature of these relationships and the implications they have on organizations.
However, LMX theory has limitations that have hindered its wide acceptance. For instance, LMX research has used a variety of measuring scales and classification of LMX relationship, whether it is uni-dimensional or multidimensional (Dienesch & Liden, 1986) is still debatable. This has caused problems replicating results and being able to draw conclusive evidence about the benefits of LMX. However, as will be demonstrated, LMX has many strengths that are highly useful to the role of the Student Services Manager. Role of Manager of Student Centre
Before applying LMX, a detailed understanding of the role of the Student Centre Manager is necessary. With the introduction of the Melbourne Model came the development of the ‘one stop shop’ student centres to provide quality student centric services. The Student Centre Manager is responsible for the delivery of excellent, comprehensive and integrated student services through this single point of interaction with students (job description, 325-101 assignment guidelines, 2008). The manager will oversee many service areas including recruitment, student information and course advice, teaching services and professional practice.
As such the manager will need to build quality relationships with staff and students to ensure all parties are satisfied with the service provided. As previously stated, LMX’s usefulness will be demonstrated by looking at three key responsibilities of the Student Center Manager. Stakeholder Management A major role of the Manager of the Student Centre is to build effective relationships with staff, students, academics, executive faculty members and foster a team atmosphere. By generating job satisfaction, staff will provide higher quality service, greater commitment to the University, creating a happier more effective work environment.
Job satisfaction is a key performance indicator for the Student Centre Manager and is defined by the degree to which an individual feels positively about work (Schermerhorn, Hunt & Osborn, 2001). Further, job satisfaction is closely related to organizational commitment and job involvement. LMX can aid a manager in helping to create staff satisfaction. LMX is shown to be positively related to employee job satisfaction. In a literacy analysis conducted by Gerstner and Day (1997), 79 studies were reviewed to examine LMX and its correlates.
Satisfaction was measured through several different types of surveys and correlation coefficients were calculated to measure the size of effects. The results showed significant positive correlations between LMX and satisfaction. This indicates that having high quality relationships with staff can affect the entire work experience in a positive manner. The strength of this study lies in its method design. A particular correlate was not included unless it was recorded in 5 other studies. This was to ensure the study was large enough to draw generalisable conclusions.
In a further study by Stringer (2006) a sample of firefighters were given two self-administered surveys, the first an LMX questionnaire and the second on job satisfaction. Surveys were collated and it was found that high quality supervisor-employee relationships have a significant positive relationship with job satisfaction. Employees in high quality relationships experience greater mutual trust, improved support and communication. This then leads to better esteem and job satisfaction where the employee accomplishes more and helps the organization flourish.
This is consistent with, Gardenswartz and Rowe (as cited in Stringer, 2005), statement ‘when employees perceive that they are valued and respected, the organization’s promotional system is fair, and resources are spent on developing staff, they often stay and tell others about it’. In terms of the Student Centre Manager, fostering high quality staff relations will be likely to lead to satisfied staff leading to a better connectedness, community atmosphere, higher quality service and improved staff retention. There are limitations to both these studies that should be noted.
The literacy analysis was based on samples which used different surveys and measurement scales which can make comparisons more dangerous. In the firefighter study, the sample consisted of only 57 firefighters, a relatively small sample. Also, firefighting is a highly specialized role and therefore the study can not be generalized to other organisations. Further, firefighting is known to be meaningful and exciting work which may also contribute to job satisfaction. However, these are not the only studies which support a positive correlation between job satisfaction and LMX.
Performance Management The Student Center Manager must ensure that high quality, responsive student services are provided within the centre. This requires managing staff to achieve their optimal individual and team performances. Optimal performance would be when prospective and current students receive quality individual support and advice regarding courses and wellbeing services and effective relationships between academic and the centre staff are built. Central to performance is motivation, the drive to excel.
LMX has regularly been shown to enhance motivation and therefore individual, team and hence organizational performance. According to the study conducted by Deluga and Perry (1994), high quality LMX relationships lead to enhanced performance as subordinates can be relied upon to excel and complete important tasks. These results were from a study of 152 dyads across a broad spectrum of employment. Both employees and supervisors completed surveys, allowing for more valid and impartial results. Further, sampling across different organisations limits the effects of extraneous variables associated with any one organisation.
While generalizing to the role of Student Centre Manager should be done with caution, many of the roles performed by the sample subjects were similarly customer service focused. This indicates that the Student Centre Manager, by using LMX will have more motivated subordinates who will be likely to excel and achieve organisational goals. This will create mutual trust, allowing for less direct supervision and permitting the manager in a time pressured environment, to focus on other tasks such as resource planning and development.
Looking specifically at the student centre, it is considered a complex service-orientated organistation as the service provided is relationship-driven and must be tailored to meet individual needs. According to Klein and Kim (cited in Dunegan, Uhl-Bien & Duchon, 2002) high role ambiguity acts as an obstacle to performance by preventing employees from fully utilizing their abilities. Dunegan, Uhl-Bien and Duchon (2002), studied how the LMX/performance link was affected by role ambiguity, role conflict and intrinsic satisfaction. Questionnaire data from 146 hospital lab workers was collected.
Information regarding the contingency variables and LMX quality were obtained from employees, while performance data was obtained from supervisors. It was found that high ambiguity and intrinsic satisfaction are conditions that enhance the LMX/performance relationship. The student center is a very different context to the hospital, however there will be a comparable role ambiguity as each individual will have very differing needs and requests. For example, a student wanting to go on exchange to a country not involved in the partnership program may need specialized help to try and establish a new study abroad program.
Supported and highly informed staff will be better placed to go beyond the students expectations and seek out possible answers. Therefore by the manager using LMX to support, communicate effectively and regularly keep staff informed this barrier to performance can be minimized so staff are better positioned to deal with any uncertainty that may arise. Further, in Den Hartog and Verburg’s (2002) very large study involving 3500 service employees in the fast-food industry, manager behaviour was correlated to employees’ willingness to provide excellent service.
Conducted from the employee’s opinion, this study provides incite into how a manager’s behaviour affects the commitment of employees to providing quality service. It was found that the more managers provided direct support and information the more responsible employees felt to provide good service. It could be argued that due to the high turnover and generally unqualified workers in fast-food outlets this experiment is not applicable however, taken in the context of the face-to-face service provided, many of the skills such as communication, creating a friendly environment and willingness to help are alike.
Hence, the Student Service Manager for high quality service should provide regular support and feedback to employees, all of which are components of LMX. Innovation The Melbourne model is aiming to provide a distinctive experience for students and align the University with its international competitors. As such, for the Student Centre Manger to remain successful and effective, he/she must maintain a competitive advantage by being committed to continuous improvement. This is particularly important as the University becomes more integrated toward an electronic environment.
According to Amabile (as cited in Tierney, Farmer and Graen, 1999), individual creativity is the building block for organizational innovation. Therefore, it is the role of the Student Service Manager to encourage staff and student innovation to enhance the service of the centre and therefore the university. LMX has increasingly been shown to foster creativity. Innovation is usually considered part of ‘extra work’. That is, it is highly regarded but not part of formal job descriptions. Therefore inducing innovation must be done through a means other then formal authority.
Intuitively, LMX is such a means since high quality relationships create job satisfaction, mutual trust and motivation, employees will be more committed and therefore likely to go beyond their job requirements. Tierney et al (1999) studied 159 employees in the research and development sector of a chemical operation. Interviews and surveys were taken over a three month period. It was found that high interpersonal LMX relationships were associated with creative performance, particularly when supervisors where seen to have a true appreciation of creative work.
For example, when the Student Services Manager is working with the marketing team, high-quality LMX relationships will encourage and acknowledge input when brainstorming allowing more fertile ideas to emerge. This study is however limited as it was conducted in a pharmaceutical organizational and a highly specialized department. Also the measuring of creativity and innovation was subjective and therefore open to considerable bias. Further, there has not been many studies that could replicate similar results, however it does have interesting potential for future investigation. Conclusion
As demonstrated, LMX is highly useful to many of the key job requirements of the Student Center Manager. LMX can help create job satisfaction, effective relationships, optimal team and individual performance and innovation. These factors will benefit students and staff and ultimately the University. Although LMX has its limitations and perhaps further research is required, application of the theory to the Student Centre Manager highlights how useful it is. References: Deluga, R. J. , Perry, J. T. (1994). The role of subordinate performance and ingratiation in leader-member exchanges.
Group & Organisation Management, 19(1), 67-86. Den Hartog, D. N. , Verburg, R. M. (2002). Service excellence from the employees’ point of view: the role of the first line supervisors. Managing Service Quality, 12(3), 159-164. Dansereau, F. , Graen, G. B. , Haga, W. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership in formal organizations. Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 13, 46-78. Dienesch, R. M. , Linden, R. C. (1986). Leader-member exchange model of leadership: A critique and further development. Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 618-634. Dunegan, K. J. Uhl-Bien, M. , Duchon, D. (2002). LMX and the subordinate performance: the moderating effects of task characteristics. Journal of Business and Psychology, 17(2), 275-285. Gerstner, C. R. , Day, D. V. (1997). Meta-analytic review of leader-member exchange theory: correlates and construct issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(6), 827-844. Graen, G. B. , Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). 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(2), 219-247.
Job description, 325-101 assignment guidelines, 2008. Schermerhorn, J. R. , Hunt, J. G. , Osborn, R. N. (2001). Managing Organizational Behaviour, 2nd ed. , New York, United States of America: John Wiley & Sons. Stringer, L. (2006). The link between the quality of the supervisor-employee relationship and the level of employee job satisfaction. Public Organization Review, 6(2), 125-142. Tierney, P. , Farmer, S. M. , Graen, G. B. (1999). An examination of leadership and employee creativity: the relevance of traits and relationships. Personnel Psychology, 52, 591-620.