Maintenance Communication in Superior-Subordinate Work Relationships

Abstract

In a series of two studies, this research (a) identifid strategic situations in which superiors and subordinates felt the need to maintain their relationships, (b) delineated communication tactics and strategies that supervisors and subordinates consciously enacted to maintain their relationships, and (c) investigated how superiors and subordinates in different kinds of relutionship exchanges employed maintenance communication behaviors and activities in strategic maintenance situations. Findings indicated that upptoximately 50% of the maintenance situations that respondents ldent$ed concerned deteriorating interactional contexts, 25% concerned escalating situations, and 25% concerned routine situations. In addition, results suggested that although there may be similaritles ucross situations with respect to the overall strategies that superiors andsubordinates use to maintain their relationships, how they enact those strategies is fairly unique depending on the situation and the quality of the leader-member relationships (us perceived by subordinates). elationship maintenance is an inherent part of relationship trajectory. As Wilmot (1981) claimed, human dyadic relation-R ships (social systems) progress through "stages of initiation, maintenance, and dissolution" (p. 90). Moreover, as Dindia and Baxter (1987) argued, it is likely that people spend most of their time in the process of maintaining, rather than developing or terminating, relationships. Thus communication scholars have recently engaged in exploring the process of relationship maintenance (e.g. Pearson, 1986). As an emerging area of research, however, the study of relationship maintenance has been explored mostly in nonwork relationships (i.e., relatively intimate or close social relationships; Waldron, 1991). In brief, Iaesub Lee is an assistant professor of communication at the University of Houston. Fredric M. Iablin is E. Claibome Robins Chair in Leadership Studies in the Jepson School of Leadership Studies at the University of Richmond. A previous version of this article was presented at the 1994 annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Sydney, Australia. The authors would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments.

Employee satisfaction with meetings: A contemporary facet of job satisfaction

“…They also provide opportunities for members to demonstrate and make sense of their roles in relation to the roles others are playing (Boden, 1994;Cooren, 2007). Relatedly, meetings would also appear to be salient and tangible sites of peer and superior-subordinate interaction through which perceptions of qualities of the organization and the job are developed and reinforced (Fulk & Collins-Jarvis, 2001;Hodgkinson, Whittington, Johnson, & Schwarz, 2006;Lee & Jablin, 1995;Weick & Meader, 1992).…”

A multi-level analysis of team climate and interpersonal exchange relationships at work

“…Individual-Level involvement in decision making and related matters, cooperative and receptive information sharing, and person-oriented message exchanges that determine their communication satisfaction (Baker & Ganster, 1985;Kacmar, Witt, Zivnuska, & Gully, 2003;Lee & Jablin, 1995). Thus the focus of communication between employees in high-quality LMX relationships moves from work-related issues (i.e., low-quality economic exchange) to an increased sharing of feelings, emotions, and opinions about the work environment (high-quality social exchange).…”

Perbezaan Faktor Demografi ke Atas Komunikasi Pegawai-Subordinat, Kualiti Jalinan Hubungan, Tekanan Kerja dan Kepuasan Komunikasi di Jabatan Penjara Malaysia

“…Bagi menjelaskan lagi hubungan ini, terdapat keperluan untuk meneliti sama ada umur mempunyai kesan terhadap komunikasi pegawai-subordinat (Oshagbemi 2004;Collins, Hair & Rocco 2009 Anderson & Tolson 1991;Fairhurst 1986Fairhurst , 1993Fairhurst , 2001Fairhurst & Chandler 1989;Lee 1997Lee , 2001Lee , 2005Lee & Jablin 1995) di dalam bidang gelagat organisasi dan juga komunikasi organisasi dijalankan berdasarkan kepada model LMX. Malah model LMX ini telah diperakui secara sah sebagai suatu operasi dalam kajian perilaku organisasi (Liden & Graen 1980;Graen & Uhl-Bien 1995;Schriesheim, Castro & Cogliser 1999).…”