Multidimensionality of leader-member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale development

Leadership research in Asia: A brief assessment and suggestions for the future

“…For example, Schaubroeck and Lam (2002) found that employees of the same multinational bank in Hong Kong and the United States did not differ in their perceptions of LMX. Similarly, in a study conducted in mainland China (Wang, Law, Hackett, Wang, & Chen, 2005), mean levels of LMX dimensions were similar and correlations between LMX and both performance and organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) were positive and significant just as found in samples from Western countries (Gerstner & Day, 1997;Ilies, Morgeson, & Nahrgang, 2007;Liden & Maslyn, 1998;Sin, Nahrgang, & Morgeson, 2009).…”

“…However, because the boundaries of these constructs were established in the United States, it is possible that some portions of the domain are missing. For example, Liden and Maslyn (1998), in the development of the LMX-MDM, conducted critical incident interviews with United States employees to assess the LMX dimensions identified when describing relationships between leaders and followers. Involving respondents representing other cultures would enable researchers to develop measures that include items capable of transcending national cultures.…”

The distinctive effects of dual-level leadership behaviors on employees’ trust in leadership: An empirical study from China

“…Transformational supervisors engage in establishing mutual goals with the followers by transmitting organizational vision and values. Then their efforts to transforming followers (e.g., intellect stimulation, role modeling of sharing information and resources) will be more likely to be regarded as the contributions to achieving the mutual goals (Liden & Maslyn, 1998). The mutual goals could also result in interpersonal attraction.…”

“…Similarity, attraction theory (Williams & O'Reilly, 1998) addresses that people with similar background, values, and aims tend to attract each other. Liden and Maslyn (1998) also argued the leader and member could frequently interact, and become friends simply because they enjoy their company. Besides articulating the mutual goals, the individual consideration is another key factor on building affective connection.…”

“…Although LMX theory explicitly emphasizes the imperative role of trust for LMX (Liden & Maslyn, 1998), the causal link between the two remains ambiguous. For instance, some studies conceptually or empirically separated LMX from trust in supervisor, while others treated trust in supervisor as a sub-dimension of LMX (for a review, see Maslyn & Uhl-Bien, 2001;Schriesheim, Castro, & Cogliser, 1999).…”