Impact of Leader-Member Exchange on Job Satisfaction in Tehran Social Security Branches

Transcription

1 Impact of Leader-Member Exchange on Job Satisfaction in Tehran Social Security Branches Reza Rasouli * - Mehdi Haghtaali ** Abstract : Purpose- Relationship with immediate manager, sometimes called leader- Member Exchange (LMX) or Vertical Dyad Linkage (VDL) is one of the important factors affecting employee s job satisfaction. This relationship is a process that individualizes the relationship between leaders and followers, instead of applying one leadership style across the board to all followers. Manager-subordinate exchange relationship can be low and high quality, depending on type, frequency and value of exchanges among them. Design/methodology/approach- current quantitative research results among 184 employees in Tehran Social Security Branches showed that high quality of managersubordinate relationship leads to promotion of intrinsic, extrinsic, and general satisfaction. Finding-research results revealed that low quality LMX has only significant impact on extrinsic needs of employees. So even though the quality of a supervisor employee relationship is low, the other factors influencing extrinsic job satisfaction may be strong enough to prevent a low quality manager subordinate relationship from being a barrier to achieving job satisfaction. Key Words: Leadership, leader-member exchange, job satisfaction, Tehran social security branches. I TRODUCTIO One of the main bases of organizations is having a competent leader for influencing and affecting employees, and directing them toward the predetermined organizational goals(arkolan, 2006). Leadership is a process whereby one individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal (Northouse, 2001). Green et al. (2006) categorized leadership approaches into seven groups: character traits, leadership styles, situational leadership, contingency theory, path-goal theory, transformational leadership theory, leader-member exchange theory or LMX. Among these, LMX is a process that makes the relationship between a leader and a follower a unique case; therefore, this approach rejects using a general style for all followers and employees in all situations. * Assistant Professor, Payam-e-Noor University ** Master of public administration, Payam-e-Noor University Turkish Public Administration Annual, Vol , , p

2 56 Turkish Public Administration Annual In this approach, managers 1 deal with each employee in a different level of social interactions; that is, they do not treat their subordinates in the same way (Graen and Cashman, 1975, Wayne & Green, 1993). In fact, this approach emphasizes the special relationship that a manager has with his/her subordinate; and all of these interactions are unique and duad, which will result in loops in pairs (Northouse, 2001, Yukl, 2002). These connection loops of leader-member are formed into in-group and out-group. The in-group behaviors are those behaviors that firstly are desirable for followers and secondly, are more than employees job description (Northouse, 2001). This relationship is naturally bidirectional; that is, in order to gratify subordinates job and organizational commitment, a manager gives heed to them when allocating duties, gives them more information, gives more rewards (whether corporeal or spiritual); and when allocating more greater authorities, enhance their responsibility level (Green et al., 2006). Conversely, the out-group part includes conforming behaviors that prefer manager s job formal priorities. These employees do their work according to job description; and do not work more than regular duties. Therefore, managers expect subordinates to do the regular jobs as they are paid salary (Yukl, 2002). A number of studies have been done relating to LMX approach and its contents for different levels of organization. For instance, LMX studies have been done in some fields such as performance evaluation (Liden et al., 1993; Wayne & Ferris, 1990), labor productivity (Scandura & Graen 1984), organizational atmosphere (Kozlowski - Doherty 1989), organizational justice (Scandura, 1999; Bhal & Ansari, 2007); and organizational citizenship behavior (Deluga, 1994). Herein, job satisfaction as one of the important consequences, and of course considered in this research, is an emotional reaction to job that is created from comparing real outcomes with expected and desirable results. As Locke (1976) says, job satisfaction can be considered as a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one s job or job experiences. One of the factors which make an employee s experience good or bad is relations with his/her superior. Researchers believe that LMX high quality subordinates; not only receive external rewards and job promotion for their better performance; but also, they have inner satisfaction of independence and challenging works. Tanner et al. (1993) mention that job satisfaction and satisfaction of manager are two important consequences of interaction quality; and believe that a person who is enjoying high quality relationship, has greater satisfaction than an individual who suffers from low quality relationship, and in turn has minimum satisfaction of job and his/her manager. 1 The assumption here is that firstly, leadership and management is different; secondly, managers tend to play a leadership role in addition to their managerial role.

3 Impact of Leader-Member Exchange on Job Satisfaction in Tehran Social Security Branches 57 This research seeks to re-analyze the effect of LMX quality on employees job satisfaction levels in Tehran Social Security Branches. In other words, is there any evidence to prove that interaction and trade-off with managers cause the improvement of employees job satisfaction? Following this introduction, the structure of this article is that first literature of LMX, and then the relationship between these two constructs for developing research hypothesis are described. In the next section, research methodology is mentioned and then, collected data from statistics sample are analyzed. Finally, in addition to expressing research findings, some recommendations are proposed to researchers and those who are interested in this subject. RESEARCH THEORETICAL BASES 2-1- Leader-member exchange (LMX) approach which is sometimes called Vertical Dyad Linkage (VDL)-, is a leadership construct about which there is a lot of considerable research conducted in organizational behavior and management issues. Theoretical genesis of LMX approach is grounded in the Role theory (Katz and Kahn, 1978) and Social exchange theory (Blau, 1964). According to Role theory, a supervisor s role expectations and the extent to which a subordinate fulfills the expectations, form the connection climate of the exchange process. Considering the Role theory, (Graen & Scandura, 1987) introduced a three-phase model of LMX development: Role-taking, rolemaking, role-reutilization. For example, supervisors evaluate subordinates by various work duties, through a number of role-making events. In this process, the extent to which, subordinates fulfill the expected duties and earn their superior s trust; they will affect the kind of LMX the subordinates create themselves. On the other hand, LMX is determines the domain through which a manager can counter or atone the subordinates effort by using work resources such as information, challenging jobs, and independence. Align with this, managers and followers will create a two-way dependency-based role connection in regular and accepted roles; and subordinates performance in the role has a great affect on this role-making (Dienesch and Liden, 1986). In addition, the role-making process, is a process through which an individual, not only has a series of role episodes with a formal managers; but also, with others role group (including other members who inform important role information) (Sparrowe & Liden, 1997). Beside, unlike the role theory which is related to leaders and followers role, the social exchange theory is concentrated on the interaction and exchange between leaders and subordinates. The social exchange theory discusses how the power and influence between leaders and subordinates entails the capability of access to alternative exchange sources from which leaders and followers can acquire valuable resources. According to this perspective, Liden et al. (1997),

4 58 Turkish Public Administration Annual describe LMX development as a set of phases and steps which begins with initial exchange between a pair. This initial exchange continues through frequency and sequence of exchanges in which people assess (test) each other, and the possibility of emerging the relationship components (trust, respect, and the necessity of enhancing the interaction quality) is fulfilled (Uhl-Bien et al., 2000). If an accepted exchange behavior and both sides of the exchange are satisfied with the response, they will continue the interaction. If the answer to the exchange is not positive or there is no exchange, the opportunities of developing high-quality exchanges will be practically restricted and probably the relationships remain at lower level of LMX (Dienesch & Liden 1986; Uhl- Bien et al, 2000). Thus, it can be concluded that developing LMX entails exchange expectations and the satisfaction of both sides in a behavioral exchange (Kang and Stewart, 2007). Despite strong theoretical bases, the leader-follower issue facing some challenges such as analytical level and being multi-dimensional. While, most of the researchers still posit that LMX is predicted based upon existence of a manager who discriminates between his/her subordinates; Graen & Uhl-Bien (1995) have a noticeable shift from former researches and by describing LMX as an exchange concept; and by claiming the issue that leader and follower are no longer beneficiary; they declared that the main subject of analysis is relationship. Having criticized this claim, Dansereau et al. (1995) keep themselves away from this issue and introduce the concept of Individualized leadership. According to the model, each two persons who form a pair should be known separated from other pairs (i.e. each follower is independent from other followers; and each manager is considered unique). While there is still a relationship between managers and followers, the pair is independent from other pairs (quoted from Schriesheim et.al. 1999). Considering the role theory, Graen & Scandura (1987), describe the multidimensionality of LMX and mentioned two dimensions: Qualities and Coupling. Qualities dimension refers to the current approaches in exchange relationships (Loyalty, supporting, and trust between pair members); while, coupling is behavior-oriented (addressing, influence, allocation, freedom, innovation). Liden & Maslyn (1998) define the multi-dimension nature of LMX as professional respect that shows others job competencies; affect, that refers to a more emotional aspect of participation; Loyalty, that consists of tendency to defending other s performance; and perceived role that describes employees tendency to hard work for supervisors (quoted from Schyns, Birgit and Wolfram, 2008). Finally, according to Dienesch& Liden (1986), LMX construct is based upon three interaction flows: duties behaviors (cooperation and perceived role), Loyalty and turtledove to others (emotions). Perceived role

5 Impact of Leader-Member Exchange on Job Satisfaction in Tehran Social Security Branches 59 refers to interior job interaction; loyalty to social support; and emotions refers to friendship exchange and turtledove which is more than job situation. Leader-Follower Exchange and Job Satisfaction: Hypothesis The objectives of this research are to analyze the impact of LMX quality on individuals job satisfaction. Some research findings have shown that in a high quality LMX, followers have a trustful relationship with their managers (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995); they look for desirable and challenging jobs; receive more consideration and support from managers; they are persuaded to cooperate with their colleagues to compensate managers efforts; they have more commitment to organization; their positive attitudes, towards their job increase (Epitropaki & Martin, 2005; Dansereau et al., 1975; Graen, 1976; Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; Liden & Graen, 1980; Liden et al., 1993); and they have more effective exchange with their co-workers (Kramer, 1995); so all of these lead to employees job satisfaction, productivity and, in turn, organizational performance improvement. When employees have qualified relationship with their superiors, they enjoy some privileges such as two-way trust, supports and patronage, effective connection, consideration, respect and validity; and, in turn, in addition to job satisfaction, they have more endeavors, and help the organizational development. As the quality of manager-employee relationship improves, it is more likely that employees exterior needs to be fulfilled and because of that the barriers of employees satisfaction will disappear. Moreover, when the quality of manager-employee relationship increases; employees internal needs are fulfilled and finally it causes that the employee s overall satisfaction is accelerated (Stringer, 2006). All in all, if we define LMX as a two-way leader-member exchange, then it can be claimed that the continuity and severity of the two-way exchange will result in the emergence of a high-quality LMX; and indolence in making twoway leader-member exchange will lead to low-quality LMX. Conversely, proposing that the other situations are under control, as shown by other research (Gerstner & Day, 1997; Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; Liden et al, 1997; Liden & Maslyn, 1998; Tanner et al., 1993; Erdogan & Enders, 2007; Golden & Veiga, 2008; Vecchio & Gobdel, 1984; Harris et al., 2007; Hooper & Martin, 2008), may result in as increase in satisfaction. Unlikely, the low-quality of leadermember exchange will result in a decrease in members job satisfaction (Golden & Veiga, 2008). Considering these points, the following hypothesis can be developed that is shown in the figure 1: The qualities of LMX have meaningful effects on employees internal satisfaction.

6 60 Turkish Public Administration Annual The qualities of LMX have meaningful effects on employees internal satisfaction. The qualities of LMX have meaningful effects on employees overall satisfaction. Figure 1. Research Conceptual Model Internal Satisfaction Overall Satisfaction Leader-member exchange quality External satisfaction METHODOLOGY This research is an empirical research in terms of objectives; and it is a descriptive and field survey; and it is trying to generalize the conclusion and findings acquired using current status data which are collected from a significant volume of sample without interfering in the ongoing situation. Population and Sample The research population consists of all employees working in different branches of Tehran Social Security, in the time period from November 2008, to February The final sample of this research is about 184 persons of Tehran Social Security, which is determined using cluster sampling based upon Kockran formula. The sample characteristics, including age, sex, type of recruitment, education, and job experience are illustrated in the table 1. Most of the people in this research are in the age range between 25 to 35 years old; females are more than males; the educational level of most of the people are bachelor; most of the individuals have more than 14 years job experience; and finally, majority of people have formal recruitment.

7 Impact of Leader-Member Exchange on Job Satisfaction in Tehran Social Security Branches 61 Table 1. Characteristics of People Participated in the Research Age Sex Education Experience Recruitment range 25 or less or more Male Female Diploma Under-graduate Bachelor Master 2 or less or more Formal Contract Company Frequency Percentage Cumulated Measures or Instruments In order to measure individuals attitudes, two kinds of standard instruments were used in this research; the first one of which is allocated to job satisfaction and the second one to leader-member exchange (the questionnaires, both, are attached in appendix). The 20 statements Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (Weiss et al., 1967), is one of the best and most conventional instruments for satisfaction evaluation the traces of which can be see in most of the management studies. This standard questionnaire, divides satisfaction into three levels: internal, external, and general. In this questionnaire in which a sevenpoint Likert scale was used, the statements number 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 15, 16, and 20 were allocated to internal satisfaction; statements number 5, 6, 12, 13, 14, and 19, to external satisfaction, and finally, the collection of the statements was allocated to general satisfaction. Cronbach s Alpha was used to calculate the reliability of the instrument, which was equal to Furthermore, in order to assess the quality of LMX, the Liden and Maslyn (1998) twelve statements questionnaire was used; so that, if the sum of the scored given to the 12 statements is between 12 to 38, the leader-member exchange is considered as a low-quality one. And if the sum of the scores is between 39 to 60; so, the leader-member exchange is high-quality (Kritner & Kinicki, 1992). Cronbach s alpha is 0.851, which was used to analyze the reliability of the questionnaire including a five-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree, and 5=strongly agree). RESEARCH FI DI GS Mean, standard deviation, Cronbach s alpha coefficient, and correlations of the main variables of the research analyzed by SPSS 15 are shown in the table 2. As illustrated in the table, the mean of the leader-member exchange quality scores equals 4.51 (approximately aligned with statements) and its standard deviation is In addition, in the construct job satisfaction, the mean and

8 62 Turkish Public Administration Annual standard deviation of people s opinion about statements of internal satisfaction is 3.42 (propensity toward satisfied status) and 0.55; regarding external satisfaction it equals to 4.26 (higher than satisfied) and 0.71; and for overall satisfaction it is 3.20 and Finally, correlation of LMX quality and overall satisfaction is 0.574; and between internal and external satisfaction, correlation belongs to LMX quality and external satisfaction (r=0.613). Table 2. Mean, Standard Deviation, Correlations and Reliability of The Research Variables LMX quality Overall satisfaction Internal Satisfaction External Satisfaction means Standard deviation (0.966) (0.851) (0.902) (0.887) Since the target of the research is to find the causal relationships between independent variable (LMX quality) and dependent variable (job satisfaction), regression test was used. One of the suppositions considered in regression test is error independence (the difference between real values and the estimated values by regression equation) from each other. which is determined through Durbin- Watson test. If errors independence hypothes is rejected and errors have correlation with each other; regression cannot be used. Seeing the statistic of Durbin-watson test is (1.698) in the interval 1.5 to 2.5, the hypothesis of error independence is not rejected and regression test can be used. The results of regression test coefficients of the research variables are illustrated in table-3. Regarding the first hypothesis that is related to LMX qualities and internal satisfaction; it was realized that the standardized beta coefficient for high-quality LMX and low-quality LMX are respectively equals to (P<0.000) and (P<0.137); although the impact of low-quality LMX on internal satisfaction is not meaningful. On the subject of the second hypothesis, it was realized that the standardized beta coefficient for high-quality LMX and low-quality LMX was respectively equal to (P<0.000) and (P<0.014). Given that the significance level of the qualities of LMX, both, are less than 0.05; as a result, it can be accepted that leader-member exchange qualities has a positive and meaningful impact on the Tehran Social Security branches employees satisfaction.

9 Impact of Leader-Member Exchange on Job Satisfaction in Tehran Social Security Branches 63 As a final point, concerning the third hypothesis which refers to analyzing the impact of leader-member exchange on overall satisfaction; regression test results illustrated that the standardized beta coefficient for high-quality LMX and low-quality LMX is respectively equals to (P<0.000) and (P<0.071); however the impact of low-quality LMX on overall satisfaction is not meaningful. Table 3. Regression test results of research variables Overall Satisfaction External Satisfaction Internal Satisfaction High-quality LMX Low-quality LMX DISCUSSIO A D CO CLUSIO The LMX approach explains a manager s relationship with each of his/her subordinates according to dyad exchanges and interactions; that is, managers behaviors with their subordinate is different and it can be high-quality or lowquality based upon subordinates role and over-role endeavors. This perspective carries some purports of the role theory, the expectation theory, and the social exchange theory. In the role theory, managers job expectations from an employee, as well as the extent to which the employee fulfills the expectations, it forms the relationship climate of the exchange process. The expectation theory is based on the fact that an individual is persuaded to behave in a specific way when firstly, he receives a reward, and secondly, the reward is useful and valuable for him/her. Lastly, according to the social exchange theory, people are looking for equilibrium and balance in their social interactions with others. Considering these concepts, this research seeks to find out the impact of leadermember exchange quality on the subordinates satisfaction level (as one of the potential consequences). This research findings show the positive and meaningful impact of highquality leader-member exchange on employees job satisfaction level. That is, the more exchanges and interaction a manager has with his/her subordinates, the more the subordinates satisfaction grows. Moreover, the observations show that high-quality LMX has more impact on external satisfaction than internal one. According to these facts, it can be concluded from that the manageremployee exchange causes an employee feels satisfaction from leadership style, job rewards and incentives, job policies and procedures, earning salary amount,

10 64 Turkish Public Administration Annual job development opportunities, and the manager s competencies and abilities in making decisions. For example, because of the interactions a person has with his/her manager, he/she can approve the manager s competencies and abilities (whether real or unreal), align him/herself with the manager s job policies and procedures, ignore some of his/her complaints and discontents in favor of their manager, and because of the attention the manager pays to him/her, the employee will be paid more rewards, meanwhile, promoted to higher positions; and in turn, will have more job satisfaction. The results of this research are similar to and aligned with other researches findings (Epitropaki & Martin, 2005; Erdogan & Enders, 2007; Stringer, 2006; Gerstner & Day, 1997; Liden & Maslyn, 1998; Vecchio & Gobdel, 1984; Mardanov et al., 2007). For instance, having studied fire fighting employees in the east United States, Stringer (2006) found that the low and high-quality of leader-member exchange, has a positive relationship with job satisfaction level. In that research, there was a positive and strong correlation between leadermember exchange and employees overall satisfaction level in the level of P<0.01. In addition, he realized that the correlation coefficient of leadermember exchange quality and employees internal satisfaction was equal to (in the level P<0.01); and the correlation coefficient of leader-member exchange quality and the external satisfaction was equal to (in the level P<0.01). Mardanov et al. (2007) by conducting research among the employees working in restaurant industry inferred that there is a significant impact of leader-member exchange on employees satisfaction. Through doing a study among the production and services employees of Britain, Epitropaki & Martin, 2005 discovered that leader-member exchange quality correlation and job satisfaction is equal to Lastly, Erdogan and Enders (2007), from a sample of 210 workers, reached to this conclusion that the correlation coefficient of leader-member exchange quality and job satisfaction is equal to Finally, some traces of the job satisfaction theory can be observed in the findings of this research. To Herzberg et al. (1959), job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction are two quite different fields of work situation, so each of them is overshadowed by different factors. The external needs or hygiene needs pertain to work place and are affected by the factors such as supervising, inter-personal relationship, physical work situations, fair payment, advantages, job security, and so on; while, the internal needs or motivation needs refer to the nature and the consequence of a work, and they are overshadowed by some factors such as success, responsibility, and promotion. When a manager enhance his/her relationship quality with their employees through maintaining a good work environment, respecting others emotions, creating trust feeling, making an open and effective connections, special consideration and attentions, providing training, supporting employees, and transferring confidence feeling to

11 Impact of Leader-Member Exchange on Job Satisfaction in Tehran Social Security Branches 65 employees; then he/she can be hopeful that at least, they removed the potential barriers to employees job satisfaction. When the employees external needs are fulfilled, then there will be a high-quality relationship between a manager and an employee, and the possibility that the manager respect employees effort, allocate responsibilities, and creates job promotion opportunities will be increased. On the other hand, if the employees internal needs are fulfilled, the possibility that employees obtain higher job satisfaction from their job, will increase. Nevertheless, managers need to remember that if they failed in respecting employees emotions, in creating an open and trustful relationship, in achievement of training needs, and supporting and creating confidence feeling; subsequently it would not necessarily lead to recognition of employees efforts, providing job promotion opportunities, and allocating responsibilities. Non meaningfulness of the relations of low-quality LMX with overall job satisfaction and internal job satisfaction, and the meaningful relations of lowquality LMX with external satisfaction, can be justified by using the job satisfaction theory. As Stringer (2006) inferred, the low quality of LMX has no role in achievement of an employee s internal needs; and the consequence would not necessarily be job satisfaction or dissatisfaction; but, it can be a quite neutral and dispassionate status. Therefore, the employees who have lowquality relationship with their manager, it is possible that they have only a superficial and sketchy dependency to the organization; and they may try to do only necessary jobs and duties which such a situation would result in increasing the possibility of employees dissatisfaction from their job, and consequently escalating the possibility of alienation, atrophy, tendency to absence at work and leaving the job. Regarding the reason of the positive relation of low-quality LMX with external satisfaction, it should be mentioned that: although it may be low-quality a manager s relationship with an employee, it is possible that the employees still look at the manager as a competent manager and then consider his/her behavior as fair behavior. Furthermore, in spite of a low-quality relationship, employees may still enjoy the work physical situations, other coworkers, wages and salary, and job security. For this reason, even although the manager-employee exchange is a low-quality one, other factors affecting on employees external satisfaction can be strong enough to block the impact of low-quality manager-employee relationship on employees satisfaction. The main content of this research for the managers of organizations is that most of the shortcomings and incompetence imposed upon employees can be removed through work interactions and personal consideration and attention (just under professional frameworks); and on the other hand, if an employee observes that the manager pays attention to his/her job and personality, and considers him/her in performance scoring, with no doubt, the employee will be drived not only to do the regular jobs correctly, but also to show ownership of

12 66 Turkish Public Administration Annual of his/her role. All of these cases entail to the fact that firstly, the manager understands and respects the his/her subordinate s competencies and abilities, secondly, to be a supporter and a protector for employees and do not leave them as they are; thirdly, to understand feelings and emotions of the subordinates and tries to attract their internal moods trough drawing friendship and social plans; and lastly, by being aware of the level of effort the subordinates do for him/her, he/she tries to compensate the efforts by giving rewards and better performance scores. In this research, only the employees opinion was analyzed, and in order to prevent common method variance (CMV) (Podsakoff et al., 2003) or peoples tendency to intentional distribution of opinions weight among different parts of questionnaire, it would be better firstly, to ask managers opinion on their interactions quality with their employees; secondly, by using some techniques such as Haman s single-factor test, the inflation level in relationships among variables to be analyzed; however, Spector (2006) believes that the issue deviation of common method is not so important and a problem maker factor. Moreover, it is recommended for the future research that by implementing multi variables analysis, first analyze the effects of the variables affecting on leadermember exchange such as personal traits, organizational justice and support, and job characteristics; and then the other consequences of leader-member exchange such as turnover, organizational commitment, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The impact of the leadership style of leader-member exchange on job satisfaction is also recommended to be analyzed and compared with other leadership styles (e.g. transformational leadership and transactional leadership style). REFERE CES Arkalan, Ümit (2006), Siyasal Liderlikte Karizma Olgusu: Recep Tayyip Erdoğan Örneğinde Teorik ve Uygulamalı Bir Çalışma, Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Yıl 2006, Sayı 16, s Bhal, K.. - Ansari, M. (2007), Leader-Member Exchange-Subordinates Outcomes Relationship: Role of Voice and Justice, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 28, pp Blau, P. (1964), Exchange and Power in Social Life, Wiley, New York, NY. Dansereau, F. - Graen, G. - Haga, W. (1975), A Vertical Dyad Approach to Leadership Within Formal Organizations, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 13, pp Dansereau, F. - Yammarino, F. J. - Markham, S. E. - Alutto, J. A. - Newman, J. - Dumas, M. - Nachman, S. - Naughton, T. - Kim, I. - Al-Kelabi, S. - Lee, S. - Keller, T. (1995), Individualized Leadership: A New Multiple Level Approach, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 6, pp

13 Impact of Leader-Member Exchange on Job Satisfaction in Tehran Social Security Branches 67 Deluga, R. J. (1994), Supervisor Trust-Building, Leader-Member Exchange and Organizational Citizenship Behavior, Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, Vol. 67, pp Dienesch, R. M. - Liden, R. C (1986), Leader-Member Exchange Model Of Leadership: A Critique and Further Development, Academy of Management Review, vol. 11, pp Epitropaki, O. - Martin, R. (1999), The Impact of Relational Demography on The Quality of Leader-Member Exchanges and Employees' Work Attitudes and Well- Being, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, vol. 72, pp Erdogan, B. - Enders, J. (2007), Support From The Top: Supervisors' Perceived Organizational Support as a Moderator of Leader-Member Exchange To Satisfaction And Performance Relationships, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 92, pp Gerstner, C. R. - Day, D. V. (1997), Meta-Analytic Review of Leader-Member Exchange Theory: Correlates and Construct Đssues, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 82, pp Golden, T. D. - Veiga, J. F. (2008), The Impact Of Superior Subordinate Relationships On The Commitment, Job Satisfaction, And Performance Of Virtual Workers, The Leadership Quarterly, vol. 19, pp Graen, G. (1976), Role-Making Processes Within Complex Organizations, Đn Dunnette, M. D. (Ed), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Rand McNally, Chicago, IL, pp Graen, G. - Cashman, J. (1975), A Role-Making Model Of Leadership Đn Formal Organizations: A Developmental Approach, in Hunt, J. G. - Larson, L. L. (Eds), Leadership Frontier, Kent State University Press, Kent, OH, pp 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, Vol. 6, pp Graen, G. B. - Scandura, T. A. (1987), Toward A Psychology Of Dyadic Organizing, Đn Cummings, L.L. and Staw, B. (Eds), Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 9, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp Green, C. B. - Graven, A. E. - Scott, J. - Gonzales, L. G. (2006), Exploration Of The Relationship Between LMX And Demographic Variables, Journal of Business & Economics Research, Vol.4, No.12, pp Hackett, R.D. and Lapierre, L.M. (2004), A Meta-Analytical Explanation Of The Relationship Between LMX and OCB, Academy of Management Proceedings, OB, pp. T1-T6. Harris, K. - Harris, R. B. - Eplion, D. M. (2007), Personality, Leader-Member Exchanges, And Work Outcomes, Institute of Behavioral and Applied Management.

14 68 Turkish Public Administration Annual Herzberg, F, Mausner, B. - Snyderman, B. (1959), The Motivation to Work, New York: Wiley. Hooper, D. T. - Martin, R. (2008), Beyond Personal Leader Member Exchange (LMX) Quality: The Effects Of Perceived LMX Variability On Employee Reactions, The Leadership Quarterly, vol. 19, pp Kang, D. S. - Stewart, J. (2007), Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory Of Leadership And HRD Development Of Units Of Theory And Laws Of Đnteraction, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 28, No. 6, pp Katz, D. - Kahn, R. L. (1978), The Social Psychology of Organizations, Wiley, New York, NY. Kozlowski, S. W. J. - Doherty, M. L. (1989), Integration Of Climate And Leadership: Examination Of A Neglected Đssue, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 74, pp Kramer, M. W. (1995), A Longitudinal Study of Superior-Subordinate Communication During Job Transfers, Human Communication Research, Vol. 22, pp Kritner, R and Kinicki, A (1992), Organizational Behavior, Irwin Inc, United States. Liden, R. C. - Wayne, S. J. - Stilwell, D. (1993), A Longitudinal Study On The Early Development Of Leader-Member Exchange, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 78, pp Liden, R. C. - Maslyn, J. M. (1998), Multidimensionality of Leader-Member Exchange: An Empirical Assessment Through Scale Development, Journal of Management, Vol. 24, pp Liden, R. C. - Graen, G. (1980), Generalizability Of The Vertical Dyad Linkage Model Of Leadership, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 23, pp Locke, E. A. (1976), The Nature And Causes Of Job Satisfaction, In Dunnette, M. D. (ed), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Chicago: Rand McNally, pp Mardanov, I; Sterrett, J and Baker, J. (2007), Satisfaction With Supervision And Member Job Satisfaction Đn Leader-Member Exchange, Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, Vol.12, No.3, pp Northouse, P. G. (2001), Leadership Theory And Practices (2nd edition), Thousand Oaks, California: Sage. Podsakoff, P. M. - MacKenzie, S. B. - Lee, J. Y. - Podsakoff, N. P. (2003), Common Method Biases Đn Behavioral Research: A Critical Review Of The Literature And Recommended Remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88, pp Scandura, T.A. (1999), Rethinking Leader-Member Exchange: An Organizational Justice Perspective, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 25, pp Scandura, T. A. - Graen, G. B. (1984), Moderating Effects of Initial Leader-Member Exchange Status on The Effects of a Leadership Intervention, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 69, pp

15 Impact of Leader-Member Exchange on Job Satisfaction in Tehran Social Security Branches 69 Schriesheim, C. A. - Castro, S. L. - Cogliser, C. C. (1999), Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Research: A Comprehensive Review Of Theory, Measurement, And Data- Analytic Practices, Leadership Quarterly, vol. 10, pp Schyns, Birgit and Wolfram, Hans-Joachim (2008), The Relationship Between Leader- Member Exchange And Outcomes As Rated By Leaders And Followers, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 29 No. 7, pp Sparrowe, R. T. - Liden, R.C. (1997), Process And Structure Đn Leader-Member Exchange, Academy of Management Review, vol. 22, pp Spector, P. E (2006), Method Variance in Organizational Research: Truth or Urban Legend?, Organizational Research Methods, vol. 9, no. 2, pp Stringer, L (2006), The Link Between The Quality Of The Supervisor Employee Relationship And The Level Of The Employee s Job Satisfaction, Public Organization Review, vol. 6, pp Tanner, J. F. Mark,D. - Lawrence, C. (1993), Vertical Exchange And Salesperson Stress, Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, III, Spring, pp Uhl-Bien, M. - Graen, G. - Scandura, T. (2000), Implications Of Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) For Strategic Human Resource Management Systems: Relationships As Social Capital For Competitive Advantage, in Ferris, G.R. (Ed.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, Vol. 18, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp Vecchio, R. P. - Gobdel, B.C (1984), The Vertical Dyad Linkage Model Of Leadership: Problems And Prospects, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 34, pp Wayne, S. J. - Ferris, G. R. (1990), Influence Tactics, Affect, and Exchange Quality Đn Supervisor-Subordinate Đnteractions: A Laboratory Experiment And Field Study, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 75, pp Wayne, S. J. - Green, S. A. (1993), The Effects of Leader-Member Exchange on Employee Citizenship and Đmpression Management Behavior, Human Relations, Vol. 46, pp Weiss, D. J. - Dawis, R. V. - England, G. W. - Lofquist, L. H. (1967), Manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Industrial Relations Center. Yukl, G. (2002), Leadership in Organizations (5th ed.), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

16 70 Turkish Public Administration Annual Strongly Satisfied APPE DĐX: QUESTĐO AĐRE Job Satisfaction Questionnaire (Weiss et al. 1967) Satisfied o Opinion Dissatisfied Strongly Dissatisfied Being able to keep busy all the time. The chance to work alone on the job. The chance to do different things from time to time. The chance to be somebody in the community. The way my boss handles his/her employees. The competence (ability and knowledge) of my supervisor in making decisions. Being able to do things that don t go against my religious beliefs. The way my job provides for steady employment. The chance to be of service to people. The chance to tell others what to do. The chance to do something that makes use of my abilities. The way company policies are put into practice. My pay and the amount of work I do. The opportunities for advancement on this job. The freedom to use my own judgment. The chance to try my own methods of doing the job. The physical surroundings where I work. The way my co-workers get along with each other. The praise I get for doing a good job. The feeling of accomplishment I get from the job. Leader-member exchange questionnaire (Liden & Maslyn, 1998) Completely Mostly Slightly o Slightly Mostly Completely Agree Agree Agree Opinion Disagree Disagree Disagree I like my supervisor as a human. My Supervisor is a person with whom everybody tends to have friendship. I feel pleasure when working with my superior. My boss, he/she supports me to his/her superiors, even if he/she doesn t have enough information of my activities. When other criticizing me, my boss helps and defends me. If I make an unintentional mistake, my boss protects me against others. I am ready to do more than my regular work just in favor of my superior. I am ready to have higher endeavor to fulfill my manager s objectives than the usual end expected duties. I am ready not to give up my hard work and high effort just for my boss. I am overshadowed by my superior s professional knowledge. I respect my manager s knowledge, merit and competency at my work. I admire my superior s professional and job skills.