Jovita Saras Putri

1611011030

Dyadic Relationship and Follower

Dyadic is an individual relationship between the leader and followers of each work unit.
Dyadic theory focuses on the development and effects of separate dyadic relationships
between leaders and followers. Dyadic theory is a leadership approach that tries to explain
why leaders vary in their behavior to followers. A single leader will form different
relationships with different followers (heterogeneous relationships).

A common theme in dyadic leadership is the notion of "self-support" given by leaders to

followers, and the performance of returns provided by followers to leaders. Support for self is
defined as the support of a leader for followers 'actions and ideas, building followers' trust in
and / or their abilities, integrity, and motivation, and paying attention to the feelings and
needs of followers.

Vertical Dyadic Linkage (VDL) Theory

VDL describes a situation where a leader forms an in-group dyadic relationship with several
followers and an out-group dyadic relationship with other followers. Therefore, the vertical
dyadic linkage (VDL) theory examines how leaders form one-on-one relationships with
followers, and how to often create in-groups and out-groups in the leader's work unit.

That includes in-group followers with strong social ties to their leaders in supportive
relationships characterized by high mutual trust, respect, loyalty, and influence. leaders
mainly use experts, referrals, and award power to influence in-group members.

Out-groups include followers with little or no social ties to their leaders, task-oriented.
Relationships are characterized by low exchanges and top-down influences. Most leaders use
gifts, as well as legitimate and coercive power, to influence these outside group members. To
fulfill the requirements of an exchange relationship, out-group followers only need to fulfill
formal roles (such as duties, rules, standard procedures, and legitimate directions from the
leader). As long as compliance is done, out-group followers receive standard benefits for
work (such as salary) and no more.

In-group members are invited to participate in important decision making, be given additional
responsibilities, and have greater access to leaders. out-group members are managed
according to the terms of the contracted work. They receive little inspiration, encouragement,
or recognition. in terms of influence and support, in-group members experience greater
support and positive influence from the leader, while out-group members tend not to
experience positive relationships and influences. Group status in VS outside groups also
reveals elements of reciprocity or exchange in relationships. Treat special leaders to group
members in exchange for extraordinary loyalty, commitment and performance. This creates
mutual reinforcement based on common needs and interests. In the end, this formation
creates strong social ties in groups and between groups. Thus, individuals will
more likely to share with members of their own group (in-group) compared to other group
members (out-group).

"Leader-Member Exchange" Theory (LMX)

Leader–member exchange (LMX) theory is the foremost dyadic theory in the leadership
literature (Erdogan & Liden, 2002; Liden, Sparrowe, & Wayne, 1997). Whereas
contemporary leadership theories, such as transformational, servant, or authentic leadership
theories, are focused on the effects of leader behaviors on employee attitudes, motivation, and
team outcomes, LMX theory views the dyadic relationship quality between leaders and
members as the key to understanding leader effects on members, teams, and organizations.
According to the LMX approach, leaders are closer, friendlier, more inclusive, and more
communicative with some members who report to them. In other words, leaders form high-
quality, trust, affect, and respect-based relationships with a subset of their team, whereas they
tend to have a lower-quality exchange that is limited to the employee and the leader’s job
description with other members.

In high-quality LMX relationships, followers tend to receive better social support, more
resources, and more guidance for career development. Relationships are characterized by
greater input of followers in greater decision-making and negotiation. Low-quality LMX
relationships are characterized by lack of support, more formal supervision, and little or no
involvement in decision making. Therefore, leader-member exchange (LMX) is defined as
the quality of the exchange relationship between employees and leaders. LMX theory and
research offer an alternative way of examining organizational leadership, on the grounds that
quality
social exchanges between leaders and followers will be more predictive of performance and
followers' behavior or behavior of superiors.

Leader Attributions about Subordinates

How a leader acts toward a subordinate varies depending on whether the subordinate is
perceived as competent and loyal, or incompetent and untrustworthy. The assessment of
competence and dependability is based on interpretation of the subordinate’s behavior and
performance. Attribution theory describes the cognitive processes used by leaders to
determine the reasons for effective or ineffective performance and the appropriate reaction
(Green & Mitchell, 1979; Martinko & Gardner, 1987; Mitchell, Green, & Wood, 1981; Wood
& Mitchell, 1981).

Two-Stage Attribution Model

Green and Mitchell (1979) described the reaction of a manager to poor performance as a two-
stage process. In the first stage, the manager tries to determine the cause of the poor
performance; in the second stage, the manager tries to select an appropriate response to
correct the problem. Several studies confirm the major propositions of the model (see review
by Martinko, Harvey, & Douglas, 2007). Managers attribute the major cause of poor
performance either to something internal to the subordinate (e.g., lack of effort or ability) or
to external problems beyond the subordinate’s control (e.g., the task had inherent obstacles,
resources were inadequate, information was insufficient, other people failed to provide
necessary support, or it was just plain bad luck). An external attribution is more likely when
(1) the subordinate has no prior history of poor performance on similar tasks; (2) the
subordinate performs other tasks effectively; (3) the subordinate is doing as well as other
people who are in a similar situation; (4) the effects of failures or mistakes are not serious or
harmful; (5) the manager is dependent on the subordinate for his or her own success; (6) the
subordinate is perceived to have other redeeming qualities (popularity, leadership skills); (7)
the subordinate has offered excuses or an apology; or (8) evidence indicates external causes.
Managers with prior experience doing the same kind of work as the subordinate are more
likely to make external attributions, perhaps because they know more about the external
factors that can affect performance (Crant & Bateman, 1993; Mitchell & Kalb, 1982).
Manager traits such as internal locus of control orientation (see Chapter 6) can also influence
attributions (Ashkanasy & Gallois, 1994).

Guidelines for Correcting Performance Deficiencies

a) Gather information about the performance problem.

b) Try to avoid attribution biases.
c) Provide corrective feedback promptly.
d) Describe the deficiency briefly in specific terms.
e) Explain the adverse impact of ineffective behavior.
f) Stay calm and professional.
g) Mutually identify the reasons for inadequate performance.
h) Ask the person to suggest remedies.
i) Express confidence that the person can improve.
j) Express a sincere desire to help the person.
k) Reach agreement on specific action steps.
l) Summarize the discussion and verify agreement.

Impression Management by Leaders and Followers

Impression management tactics that seem especially relevant for the study of leadership in
dyads are exemplification, ingratiation, and self-promotion.

a) Exemplification: This tactic involves behavior intended to demonstrate dedication

and loyalty to the mission, to the organization, or to followers. Exemplification
tactics used to influence bosses include arriving early and staying late to work extra
hours, demonstrating effective behavior when you know the person is watching, and
doing voluntary tasks that are highly visible (“organizational citizenship behaviors”).
Exemplification tactics used to influence subordinates or peers include acting in a way
that is consistent with espoused values (“walking the talk”) and making self-sacrifices
to achieve a proposed objective, change, or vision.
 b) Ingratiation: This tactic involves behavior intended to influence the target person to
like the agent and perceive the agent as someone who has desirable social qualities
(e.g., friendly, considerate, caring, charming, interesting, attractive). Ingratiating
behavior can take many different forms. Some examples include providing praise,
agreeing with the target person’s opinions, showing appreciation for the target’s
accomplishments, laughing at the target’s jokes, showing an interest in the target’s
personal life, and showing deference and respect for the target person.
c) Self-Promotion: This tactic involves behavior intended to influence favorable
impressions about your competence and value to the organization. The behavior may
take the form of informing people about your achievements and talking about your
skills. A more subtle form of self-promotion is to display diplomas, awards, and
trophies in one’s office or workspace for others to see. An indirect form of self-
promotion that is similar to a coalition tactic is to get other people to talk about your
skills and loyalty.

FOLLOWERSHIP

When talking about careers, the assumption is a position that continues to climb. This uphill
position is always associated with the increasing number of subordinates. So leadership is
considered the key to smoothing the career path.

Leader and follower is like two sides of one currency. We take the example of a manager in
an organization. Its function as a leader is when it relates to the supervisors who are at the
level below. The supervisor who reports to him is structurally the organization. On the other
hand, he is also a follower for the director of the organization. He followed orders from the
director who became his boss..

Followership Style

The style of these followers is categorized according to two dimensions. The first dimension
is quality independent, "critical thinking" versus dependent, "not critical thinking"

Think critically: think independently and know the effects of one's own thoughts and other
people's behavior in achieving the organization's vision.

Don't think critically: fail to consider the possibility of going beyond what is told; accept
leaders' ideas without thinking.

The second dimension of followership style is "active vs. passive behavior". Individual who
actively participates fully in an organization, engages in behavior that is outside the boundary
of work. A passive individual is characterized by the need for constant supervision and
encouragement by superiors.

While Robert E. Kelly divides follower types into five types:

 a) First is the passive type and sheep (sheep). Its characteristics are passive, dependent,
and not critical in thinking. This type of follower only executes orders from the
leader.
b) Second, is the type of "yes people" or conformist follower. Followers of this type are
always around "boss", trying to anticipate every step, ready to open the door for their
boss. Followers with this type have characteristics: the approach is active, but
thinking is not critical and not free.
c) Third is alienated follower. Characteristics are independent in thinking and passive in
the approach. They often feel disappointed with their leaders. They do not give all
their energy and commitment to their leaders.
d) Fourth is a type of pragmatic or survivor. A follower who has the fourth quality
(alienated, effective, passive, conformist), depends on the style according to the
general situation. This type is a person who can survive all forms of reorganization
and is always used. They can adapt to all kinds of conditions, tides and events that
happen to the organization.
e) Fifth is the type of effective follower. Their character is similar to the character of the
leader. Its characteristics are active, independent, and critical thinking approaches.
They will express their opinions about the ideas that the leader presents as well as
convey their ideas. They have a high commitment to the organization and the tasks
assigned to it. Well, this last type will be a valuable asset for the organization.

Guidelines for Followers

a) Find out what you are expected to do.

b) Take the initiative to deal with problems.
c) Keep the boss informed about your decisions.
d) Verify the accuracy of information you give the boss.
e) Encourage the boss to provide honest feedback to you.
 f) Support efforts to make necessary changes.
g) Show appreciation and provide recognition when appropriate.
h) Challenge flawed plans and proposals made by bosses.
i) Resist inappropriate influence attempts by the boss.
j) Provide upward coaching and counseling when appropriate.
k) Learn to use self-management strategies.

Sources:

Bauer, Talya N., and Berrin Erdogan. The Oxford Handbook of Leader-Member Exchange.
Oxford University Press, 2016.

Yukl, Gary A. Leadership in Organizations. Pearson Education, Inc., 2013.