The purpose of this article is to investigate how and when leader–member exchange (LMX) differentiation influences employees’ voice behavior by examining trust as a psychological process and two types of leader power as opposite moderators. Based on a sample of 61 teams from an energy corporation in China, we tested a moderated mediation model using multilevel structural equation modeling. The results show that LMX differentiation is negatively related to employees’ trust in leaders and, in turn, reduces employees’ voice behavior. Moreover, leader reward power negatively moderates the influence of LMX differentiation on employees’ trust in leaders such that the relationship is stronger when leader reward power is low but not significant when leader reward power is high. Leader coercive power positively moderates the relationship such that it is stronger when leader coercive power is high but not significant when leader coercive power is low. Furthermore, these two types of power moderate the indirect relationship between LMX differentiation and employees’ voice via their trust in leaders. This study is the first to unpack the mechanism that links LMX differentiation and voice behavior and the conditions under which LMX differentiation can exert influence. This study delineates a resource-based process with conservation of resources theory through which employees appraise the social stressor (LMX differentiation), perceive the value of future resource investment (trust), strategically respond to resource signals (leader power), and finally make resource investment decisions (voice behavior).

No abstract

Drawing upon a developmental perspective, we investigated the differences in power acquisition (i.e., rank at work and leader role occupancy in university) between only and non-only children as well as the mediating role of cooperative and competitive orientations and the moderating role of dependency on parents. To test our hypotheses, we conducted two field studies in 155 part-time Master of Business Administration (MBA) students (Study 1) and 375 senior students (Study 2). Results showed that: (1) non-only children were more likely to achieve higher rank at work than only children; (2) only children were less likely than non-only children to acquire power in organizations because they scored lower in cooperative orientation; however, the mediating effect of competitive orientation was not significant; (3) the difference in cooperative orientation between only and non-only children was smaller when dependency on parents was high, whereas it became larger when dependency on parents was low. Our research contributes to the understanding of how family structure influences individual power acquisition.