nach oben

Journal of Business and Psychology

Erschienen in:

03.05.2016 | Original Paper

A Multilevel Examination of the Relationship Between Leader–Member Exchange and Work–Family Outcomes

verfasst von: Valerie J. Morganson, Debra A. Major, Michael L. Litano

Erschienen in: Journal of Business and Psychology | Ausgabe 4/2017

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Purpose

Recent work–family literature has identified leadership as an area for practical research inquiry. The purpose of the present study was to conduct a multilevel analysis that applies leader–member exchange (LMX) and conservation of resources theories as frameworks for optimizing subordinates’ work–family experiences.

Design/Methodology/Approach

Effects of the interaction between individual-level and workgroup-level LMX on work–family outcomes were examined using web-based survey data from 765 information technology workers in 79 workgroups.

Findings

High LMX was linked to reduced work interference with family, perceptions of managerial support, perceived career consequences, and organizational time demands. However, the benefits of high LMX were attenuated in the presence of low workgroup LMX for all outcomes except managerial support.

Implications

Findings suggest that an individual’s work–family experiences are influenced by both self and others’ supervisory relationships and provide further support for the efficacy of multilevel examinations of LMX. Results support LMX theory as a framework for enhancing work–family outcomes. Through individual and group-level LMX, supervisors may foster perceptions that shape work–family micro-climates within the same organization.

Originality/Value

This study focuses on a practical avenue for intervention (i.e., leadership) using a theoretically grounded approach. It uncovers a possible mechanism—high individual and group LMX—through which work–family outcomes can be improved. Additionally, this study answers calls in the work–family literature for research with implications for intervention and employs multilevel modeling.

Vorheriger Artikel Humor in Teams: Multilevel Relationships Between Humor Climate, Inclusion, Trust, and Citizenship Behaviors

Nächster Artikel Complementary Variable- and Person-Centered Approaches to the Dimensionality of Psychometric Constructs: Application to Psychological Wellbeing at Work

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

In response to a reviewer comment, we also tested workgroup LMX as a mean (instead of using the median). Using the mean, results were largely the same as reported for the median. Significant cross-level moderation was identified for Hypotheses 7 and 8. The interaction term for hypothesis 5, however, was non-significant (p = .06). Full results for the mean as the indicator of group LMX can be obtained by emailing the first author.

In response to a reviewer comment, we also tested our hypotheses using LMX differentiation (i.e., workgroup variance of LMX scores) as a control variable. Its inclusion did not impact whether or not our hypotheses were supported.

Adams, G. A., King, L. A., & King, D. W. (1996). Relationship of job and family involvement, family social support, and work–family conflict with job and life satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 411–420. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.81.4.411.CrossRef

Allen, T. D. (2001). Family-supportive work environments: The role of organizational perceptions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, 414–435. doi:10.1006/jvbe.2000.1774.CrossRef

Bagger, J., & Li, A. (2014). How does supervisory family support influence employees’ attitudes and behaviors? A social exchange perspective. Journal of Management, 40, 1123–1150. doi:10.1177/0149206311413922.CrossRef

Bernas, K. H., & Major, D. A. (2000). Contributors to stress resistance: Testing a model of women’s work–family conflict. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24, 170–178. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2000.tb00198.x.CrossRef

Boies, K., & Howell, J. M. (2006). Leader–member exchange in teams: An examination of the interaction between relationship differentiation and mean LMX in explaining team-level outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 246–257. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.02.004.CrossRef

Bragger, J. D., Rodriguez-Srednicki, O., Kutcher, E. J., Indovino, L., & Rosner, E. (2005). Work–family conflict, work–family culture, and organizational citizenship behavior among teachers. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20, 303–324. doi:10.1007/s10869-005-8266-0.CrossRef

Casper, W. J., Eby, L. T., Bordeaux, C., Lockwood, A., & Lambert, D. (2007). A review of research methods in IO/OB work–family research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 28–43. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.28.CrossRefPubMed

Cleveland, J. N. (2005). What is success? Who defines it? Perspectives on the criterion problem as it relates to work and family. In E. E. Kossek & S. J. Lambert (Eds.), Work and life integration: Organizational, cultural, and individual perspectives (pp. 319–345). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Crain, T. L., Hammer, L. B., Bodner, T., Kossek, E. E., Moen, P., Lilienthal, R., & Buxton, O. M. (2014). Work–family conflict, family-supportive supervisor behaviors (FSSB), and sleep outcomes. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 19, 155–167. doi:10.1037/a0036010.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Crawford, E. R., LePine, J. A., & Rich, B. L. (2010). Linking job demands and resources to employee engagement and burnout: a theoretical extension and meta-analytic test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 834–848. doi:10.1037/a0019364.CrossRefPubMed

Culbertson, S. S., Huffman, A. H., & Alden-Anderson, R. (2009). Leader–member exchange and work–family interactions: The mediating role of self-reported challenge- and hindrance-related stress. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 144(1), 15–36. doi:10.1080/00223980903356040.CrossRef

Dansereau, F., Graen, G. B., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role making process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 46–78. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(75)90005-7.CrossRef

Denison, D. R. (1996). What is the difference between organizational culture and organizational climate? A native’s point of view on a decade of paradigm wars. Academy of Management Review, 21, 619–654.

Dulebohn, J. H., Bommer, W. H., Liden, R. C., Brouer, R. L., & Ferris, G. R. (2012). A meta-analysis of antecedents and consequences of leader–member exchange: Integrating the past with an eye toward the future. Journal of Management, 38(6), 1715–1759.CrossRef

Eby, L. T., Casper, W. J., Lockwood, A., Bordeaux, C., & Brinley, A. (2005). Work and family research in IO/OB: Content analysis and review of the literature (1980–2002). Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 124–197. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2003.11.003.CrossRef

Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500–507. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.500.CrossRef

Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. (2005). From ideal to real: A longitudinal study of the role of implicit leadership theories on leader–member exchanges and employee outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 659–676.CrossRefPubMed

Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. (2013). Transformational–transactional leadership and upward influence: The role of relative leader–member exchanges (RLMX) and perceived organizational support (POS). The Leadership Quarterly, 24, 299–315.CrossRef

Ford, L. R., & Seers, A. (2006). Relational leadership and team climates: Pitting differentiation versus agreement. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 258–270. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.02.005.CrossRef

Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1997). Meta-analytic review of leader–member exchange theory: Correlates and construct issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 827–844. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.82.6.827.CrossRef

Golden, T. D. (2006). The role of relationships in understanding telecommuter satisfaction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 319–340. doi:10.1002/job.369.CrossRef

Gonzalez-Roma, V. (2015). Leader–member exchange and organizational culture and climate. In T. N. Bauer & B. Erdogan (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of leader–member exchange (pp. 311–331). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Graen, G. B., Novak, M. A., & Sommerkamp, P. (1982). The effects of leader–member exchange and job design on productivity and satisfaction: Testing a dual attachment model. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 30, 109–131. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(82)90236-7.CrossRef

Graen, G. B., & Scandura, T. A. (1987). Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing. In B. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 9, pp. 175–208). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Graen, G. B., Scandura, T. A., & Graen, M. R. (1986). A field experimental test of the moderating effects of growth need strength on productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 484–491.CrossRef

Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1991). The transformation of professionals into self-managing and partially self-designing contributions: Toward a theory of leader-making. Journal of Management Systems, 3, 49–54.

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. The Leadership Quarterly, 6, 219–247. doi:10.1016/1048-9843(95)90036-5.CrossRef

Grandey, A. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1999). The conservation of resources model applied to work–family conflict and strain. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 350–370.CrossRef

Greenhaus, J. H., & Brummelhuis, L. L. (2014). Models and frameworks underlying work-life research. In D. A. Major & R. Burke (Eds.), Handbook of work-life integration among professionals (pp. 205–224). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

Gutek, B. A., Searle, S., & Klepa, L. (1991). Rational versus gender-role explanations for work–family conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 560–568. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.76.4.560.CrossRef

Hammer, L. B., Kossek, E. E., Anger, W. K., Bodner, T., & Zimmerman, K. L. (2011). Clarifying work–family intervention processes: The roles of work–family conflict and family-supportive supervisor behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 134–150. doi:10.1037/a0020927.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Hammer, L. B., Kossek, E. E., Bodner, T., & Crain, T. (2013). Measurement development and validation of the family supportive supervisor behavior short-form (FSSB-SF). Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 18, 285–296. doi:10.1037/a0032612.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Hammer, L. B., Kossek, E. E., Yragui, N. L., Bodner, T. E., & Hanson, G. C. (2009). Development and validation of a multidimensional measure of family supportive supervisor behaviors (FSSB). Journal of Management, 35, 837–856. doi:10.1177/0149206308328510.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Hammer, L. B., Kossek, E. E., Zimmerman, K. L., & Daniel, R. (2007). Clarifying the construct of family-supportive supervisory behaviors (FSSB): A multilevel perspective. Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, 6, 165–204.CrossRef

Henderson, D. J., Liden, R. C., Glibkowski, B. C., & Chaudhry, A. (2009). LMX differentiation: A multilevel review and examination of its antecedents and outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 20, 517–534. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.04.003.CrossRef

Henderson, D. J., Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., Bommer, W. H., & Tetrick, L. E. (2008). Leader–member exchange, differentiation, and psychological contract fulfillment: A multilevel examination. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 1208–1219. doi:10.1037/a0012678.CrossRefPubMed

Hill, R. T., Matthews, R. A., & Walsh, B. M. (2015a). The emergence of family-specific support constructs: Cross-level effects of family-supportive supervision and family-supportive organization perceptions on individual outcomes. Stress and Health. doi:10.1002/smi.2643.PubMed

Hill, R. T., Morganson, V. J., Matthews, R. A., & Atkinson, T. (2015b). LMX, work–family conflict, breach perceptions, and wellbeing: A meditational model. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 150, 132–149. doi:10.1080/00223980.2015.1014307.CrossRef

Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44, 513–524. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.44.3.513.CrossRefPubMed

Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the nested-self in the stress process: Advancing conservation of resources theory. Applied Psychology, 50, 337–421.CrossRef

Hobfoll, S. E. (2011). Conservation of resource caravans and engaged settings. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 84, 116–122. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8325.2010.02016.x.CrossRef

Hobfoll, S. E., & Shirom, A. (2000). Conservation of resources theory: Applications to stress and management in the workplace. In R. T. Golembiewski (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior (2nd ed., pp. 51–81). New York: Deckker.

Hofmann, D., & Gavin, M. (1998). Centering decisions in hierarchical linear modeling. Journal of Management, 24, 623–641. doi:10.1177/014920639802400504.CrossRef

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, 19(1), 20–30. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.12.002.CrossRef

Ilies, R., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Leader–member exchange and citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 269–277. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.269.CrossRefPubMed

Johns, G. (2006). The essential impact of context on organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 31, 386–408. doi:10.5465/AMR.2006.20208687.CrossRef

Keller, T., & Dansereau, F. (1995). Leadership and empowerment: A social exchange perspective. Human Relations, 48, 127–145. doi:10.1177/001872679504800202.CrossRef

Kelly, E. L., Moen, P., Oakes, J. M., Fan, W., Okechukwu, C., Davis, K. D., & Casper, L. M. (2014). Changing work and work–family conflict: Evidence from the work, family, and health network. American Sociological Review, 79, 485–516. doi:10.1177/0003122414531435.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Kopelman, R. E., Greenhaus, J. H., & Connolly, T. F. (1983). Model of work, family and interrole conflict: A construct validation study. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 32, 198–215. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(83)90147-2.CrossRef

Kossek, E. E., Baltes, B., & Matthews, R. A. (2011a). How work–family research can finally have an impact in organizations. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: New Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 352–369. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2011.01353.x.CrossRef

Kossek, E. E., Lewis, S., & Hammer, L. B. (2010). Work-life initiatives and organizational change: Overcoming mixed messages to move from the margin to the mainstream. Human Relations, 63, 1–17. doi:10.1177/0018726709352385.

Kossek, E. E., Pichler, S., Bodner, T., & Hammer, L. B. (2011b). Workplace social support and work–family conflict: A meta-analysis clarifying the influence of general and work–family-specific supervisor and organizational support. Personnel Psychology, 64, 289–313. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2011.01211.x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Klein, K. J. (2000). A multi-level approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multi-level theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Lapierre, L. M., Hackett, R. D., & Taggar, S. (2006). A test of the links between family interference with work, job enrichment and leader–member exchange. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 55, 489–511. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2006.00234.x.CrossRef

Lawrence, E. R. (2011). The personal cost of being in the in-group: An examination of the relationship between leader–member exchange quality and work–family conflict (Doctoral dissertation). Doctor of Philosophy, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL.

Li, A., Schaffer, J., & Bagger, J. (2015). The psychological well-being of disability caregivers: Examining the roles of family strain, family-to-work conflict, and perceived supervisor support. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 20, 40–49. doi:10.1037/a0037878.CrossRefPubMed

Liden, R. C., Erdogan, B., Wayne, S. J., & Sparrowe, R. T. (2006). Leader–member exchange, differentiation, and task interdependence: Implications for individual and group performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 723–746. doi:10.1002/job.409.CrossRef

Liden, R. C., & Graen, G. B. (1980). Generalizability of the vertical dyad linkage model of leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 23, 451–465. doi:10.2307/255511.CrossRef

Liden, R. C., & Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader–member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of Management, 24, 43–72. doi:10.1016/s0149-2063(99)80053-1.

Loi, R., Ngo, H., Zhang, L., & Lau, V. P. (2011). The interaction between leader–member exchange and perceived job security in predicting employee altruism and work performance. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 84, 669–685.CrossRef

Major, D. A., & Cleveland, J. N. (2007). Strategies for reducing work–family conflict: Applying research and best practices from industrial and organizational psychology. In G. P. Hodgkinson & J. K. Ford (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology 2007 (Vol. 22, pp. 111–140). New York: Wiley.

Major, D. A., Fletcher, T. D., Davis, D. D., & Germano, L. M. (2008). The influence of work–family culture and workplace relationships on work interference with family: A multilevel model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 881–897. doi:10.1002/job.502.CrossRef

Major, D. A., Kozlowski, S. W., Chao, G. T., & Gardner, P. D. (1995). A longitudinal investigation of newcomer expectations, early socialization outcomes, and the moderating effects of role development factors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 418–431. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.80.3.418.CrossRef

Major, D. A., & Lauzun, H. M. (2010). Equipping managers to assist employees in addressing work–family conflict: Applying the research literature toward innovative practice. The Psychologist-Manager Journal, 13, 69–85. doi:10.1080/10887151003761275.CrossRef

Major, D. A., & Morganson, V. J. (2011a). Applying industrial-organizational psychology to help organizations and individuals balance work and family. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 4, 398–401.CrossRef

Major, D. A., & Morganson, V. J. (2011b). Coping with work–family conflict: A leader–member exchange perspective. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16, 126–138. doi:10.1037/a0021727.CrossRefPubMed

Matthews, R. A., Bulger, C. A., & Booth, S. M. (2013). Managing the work–family interface to the benefit of both subordinates and supervisors: Looking beyond supervisor support and focusing on leadership behaviors. In M. A. Paludi (Ed.), Psychology for business success (pp. 153–170). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger/ABC-CLIO.

Matthews, R. A., & Toumbeva, T. H. (2015). Lagged effects of family-supportive organization perceptions and supervision in relation to generalized work-related resources. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 20, 301–313. doi:10.1037/a0038377.

Mauno, S., Kiuru, N., & Kinnunen, U. (2011). Relationships between work–family culture and work attitudes at both the individual and the departmental level. Work & Stress, 25, 147–166. doi:10.1080/02678373.2011.594291.

O’Neill, J. W., Harrison, M. M., Cleveland, J., Almeida, D., Stawski, R., & Crouter, A. C. (2009). Work–family climate, organizational commitment, and turnover: Multilevel contagion effects of leaders. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74(1), 18–29.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Scandura, T., & Graen, G. B. (1984). Moderating effects of initial leader–member exchange status on the effects of a leadership intervention. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 428–436. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.69.3.428.CrossRef

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. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(1), 63–113. doi:10.1016/s1048-9843(99)80009-5.CrossRef

Schyns, B. (2006). Are group consensus in leader–member exchange (LMX) and shared work values related to organizational outcomes? Small Group Research, 37, 20–35. doi:10.1177/1046496405281770.CrossRef

Sherony, K. M., & Green, S. G. (2002). Coworker exchange: Relationships between coworkers, leader–member exchange, and work attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 542–548. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.542.CrossRefPubMed

Shockley, K. M., Thompson, C. A., & Andreassi, J. K. (2013). Workplace culture and work-life integration. In D. A. Major & R. Burke (Eds.), Handbook of work-life integration among professionals (pp. 310–333). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

Silveria, C. (2014). Statistics say we should take friday off from work. All the fridays, forever and ever, from http://www.upworthy.com/statistics-say-we-should-take-friday-off-from-work-all-the-fridays-forever-and-ever.

Sui, Y., Wang, H., Kirkman, B. L., & Li, N. (2015). Understanding the curvilinear relationships between LMX differentiation and team coordination and performance. Personnel Psychology, Pagination not specified.

Thomas, C. H., & Lankau, M. J. (2009). Preventing burnout: The effects of LMX and mentoring on socialization, role stress, and burnout. Human Resource Management: Human Resource Management, 48, 417–432. doi:10.1002/hrm.20288.CrossRef

Thompson, C. A., Beauvais, L. L., & Lyness, K. S. (1999). When work–family benefits are not enough: The influence of work–family culture on benefit utilization, organizational attachment, and work–family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 392–415. doi:10.1006/jvbe.1998.1681.CrossRef

Thompson, C. A., Jahn, E. W., Kopelman, R. E., & Prottas, D. J. (2004). Perceived organizational family support: A longitudinal and multilevel analysis. Journal of Managerial Issues, 16, 545–565.

Tummers, L. G., & Bronkhorst, B. A. C. (2014). The impact of leader–member exchange (LMX) on work–family interference and work–family facilitation. Personnel Review, 43, 573–591. doi:10.1108/pr-05-2013-0080.CrossRef

Vidyarthi, P. R., Liden, R. C., Anand, S., Erdogan, B., & Ghosh, S. (2010). Where do I stand? Examining the effects of leader–member exchange social comparison on employee work behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 849–861. doi:10.1037/a0020033.CrossRefPubMed

Wakabayashi, M., Graen, G. B., Graen, M., & Graen, M. (1988). Japanese management progress: Mobility into middle management. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 217–227. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.73.2.217.CrossRef

Wang, P., & Walumbwa, F. O. (2007). Family-friendly programs, organizational commitment, and work withdrawal: The moderating role of transformational leadership. Personnel Psychology, 60, 397–427. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00078.x.CrossRef

Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., & Liden, R. C. (1997). Perceived organizational support and leader–member exchange: A social exchange perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 82–111. doi:10.2307/257021.CrossRef

Titel: A Multilevel Examination of the Relationship Between Leader–Member Exchange and Work–Family Outcomes
verfasst von: Valerie J. Morganson
Debra A. Major
Michael L. Litano
Publikationsdatum: 03.05.2016
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Journal of Business and Psychology / Ausgabe 4/2017
Print ISSN: 0889-3268
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-353X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-016-9447-8

Springer Professional

Abstract

Purpose

Design/Methodology/Approach

Findings

Implications

Originality/Value

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2017

Complementary Variable- and Person-Centered Approaches to the Dimensionality of Psychometric Constructs: Application to Psychological Wellbeing at Work

Humor in Teams: Multilevel Relationships Between Humor Climate, Inclusion, Trust, and Citizenship Behaviors

Differential Effects of Task Performance, Organizational Citizenship Behavior, and Job Complexity on Voluntary Turnover

Crossover of Weekly Work Engagement Among Dual-Working Couples

The Usefulness of Tenacity in Spurring Problem-Focused Voice: The Moderating Roles of Workplace Adversity

A Meta-Analytic Investigation of Objective Learner Control in Web-based Instruction