Examining Communication Style and Leader-Member Exchange: Considerations and Concerns for Managers

Abstract

In this research, we examine the relationships between findings from two related literature streams: a prescriptive body of communication theory involving supervisor-subordinate communication, 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 higher quality 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 emphasized development of best practices which, presumably, should be used with all employees. In this research we consider whether there are consistencies between leader communication practices and the perceived quality of the Leader-Member exchange. We find evidence that employees perceive differences, especially in level of participation-related communication, depending upon whether they believe they are in a higher or lower quality LMX relationship. Moreover, we find some 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. Introduction This study represents an initial effort to investigate relationships between two distinct literature streams within the areas of communication and management. Our specific focus is upon the communication literature dealing with perceptual congruence and the management leadership literature involving leader-member exchange (LMX). In this study, we ask whether the LMX literature can be used to aid in understanding any variations which may exist in the ways managers communicate with different employee types and whether there are differences between subordinates perceiving that they obtain higher or lower quality exchanges with their supervisors. The Communication Literature Historically, the communication literature has had a prescriptive orientation and, in the area of superior-subordinate communication, has been concerned with identifying best communication styles, tactics, and behaviors. Note, especially Jablin's (1979) literature review which refers to Redding's (1972) findings that communication-mindedness, empathetic listening, persuasion rather than telling, sensitivity, and openness characterize better supervisors. Moreover, Pettit, Goris, and Vaught (1997) have shown that the quality of several aspects of communication could be used to predict job satisfaction. The underlying idea is that best behaviors can be identified and, if used by the manager, will improve the manager's effectiveness. If this is the case, how may deviations from theideal be understood? One perspective coming from the literature proposes that perceptual differences between supervisors and subordinates may distort communications, suggesting that perceptual differences held by a subordinate may cause distortions to the supervisor's message. Conversely, of course, the distortion may be the supervisor's. This is especially true if the supervisor believes the message was ideally sent. Of interest are numerous studies (Boyd & Jensen, 1972; Schnake, Dumler, Cochran, & Barnett, 1990; Tompkins, 1989; Wexley, Alexander, Greenwalt, & Couch, 1980; White, 1977) which have indicated that superiors and subordinates have differing perceptions of factors which may affect their relationships. Furthermore, similarities-especially those related to demographics, attitudes, and/or values-have been shown to reduce the potential for distortion (Cheryl, Ravlin & Meglino, 1996; DiSalvo & Larsen, 1987; McCroskey, Richmond, & Daly, 1975; Schnake et al., 1990). Within the management/perception literature, a number of comparable findings have been reported (See especially Kolb, 1995; Webber, 1970). …