career growth (OCG) is a new construct within the careers literature to focus on ... Benefits of higher OCG include increased organisational commitment, reduced.
Stream 11 - Organisational Behaviour Competitive Session The Influence of Interpersonal Relationships on Organisational Career Growth in the Workplace Adam Robertson & Herman H. M. Tse Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia RESEARCH PURPOSE Over the last several decades, leader-member exchange (LMX) theory (i.e. the dyadic relationship between employees and their leader) has emerged as a prominent leadership style within the organisational and management literature. In particular, LMX has been found to be an effective predictor of important work outcomes, such as job performance, job satisfaction, innovation, organisational citizenship behaviour and overall career progress. Significant scholarly interest has also led to a continued evolution of LMX theory from individual exchange relationships to a system of networked assemblies. One extension in particular is leader-leader exchange (LLX) (i.e. the dyadic relationship between supervisors and their bosses), which has been described as a linking-pin connecting the resources and support from upward exchange relationships with the lower level LMX relationships in workgroups. Within the literature LLX has been found to act as a critical boundary condition impacting the strength and direction of LMX on outcome variables. Although LMX has undergone significant development over the last few decades, its relationship and influence on an employee’s perception of career growth within the current organisation remains unknown. Career growth perceptions are important as they form the self-narrating process that affects how individuals choose to find motivation for career and other work-related choices. Organisational career growth (OCG) is a new construct within the careers literature to focus on these individual growth perceptions. Benefits of higher OCG include increased organisational commitment, reduced turnover intention and higher levels of positive employee voice behaviour. Recently, a call in the literature requested the examination of leadership style on the development of OCG. A leader-member approach to leadership may provide a richer and nuance understanding of employee OCG development in different organisations. Research Question 1: Is there a relationship between Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) and Organisational Career Growth? Research Question 2: Does Leader-Leader Exchange (LLX) have a moderating impact on the relationship between LMX and Organisational Career Growth?
METHOD Quantitative survey data was collected from 252 travel industry employees and 27 supervisors at a large Canadian travel management company. Participants were asked to complete an online selfreported questionnaire, which contained a set of questions related to LMX, OCG and LLX. All items were rated using five-point Likert-type scales, which were previously established and validated within the literature. **Please see Correlation & Regression results tables RESULTS Consistent with my expectations, the results indicated that LMX was both significantly and positively related to the OCG dimensions of career goal progress (OCG A) (p < 0.01), professional ability development (OCG B) (p < 0.01) and organisational rewards (OCG C) (p < 0.01). Unfortunately, in contrast to my expectations, I was unable to accurately test the moderating role of LLX on the LMXOCG relationship, thus providing an unconfirmed result. This was due to a smaller than expected survey response size, which limited that amount of between-group variance visible amongst the dependent variables, OCG dimensions A, B and C. IMPLICATIONS It can be concluded that through a high-quality LMX relationship an employee is more likely to perceive their career growth within the current organisation as positive. Theoretically, the current study fills a gap in the literature connecting social exchange relationships and an employee’s perception of career growth. Practically, it provides organisations an understanding on how to increase this growth within their workforce through higher quality LMX relationships. This can benefit organisations by providing them with a more committed workforce that is less likely to leave whilst also displaying greater levels of positive voice behaviours. Although the role of LLX as a critical boundary condition remains unconfirmed, specific ideas and connections within literature were put forth providing justification for a future study into the relationships. Figure 1: The Relationship between LMX, OCG and LLX
2
Table 1: Means, Standard Deviations, Reliabilitiesa, and Correlations among Study Variables Variables
N
M
SD
1
2
3
-.15
--
4
5
6
7
8
9
Level 1 (Individual) Variables: 1. Gender of employees b
138
.12
.321
--
138
48.53
11.36
.08
138
1.96
138
127.23
116.00
-.21*
.38**
-.06
--
138
124.05
123.33
-.11*
.37**
-.13
.57**
--
6. LMX
138
4.00
.79
-.05
-.09
-.12
-.04
-.11
(.94)
7. OCG Dimension A
138
3.64
.66
.05
-.05
-.12
-.09
-.07
.45**
(.93)
8. OCG Dimension B
138
3.72
.85
.03
-.03
-.13
-.01
.02
.43**
.54**
(.94)
9. OCG Dimension C
138
2.58
.65
.02
-.02
-.12
-.07
-.08
.40**
.60**
.57**
21
.29
.46
--
21
51.71
7.87
-.03
--
21
2.19
.81
.38
-.18
--
21
121.10
94.10
-.04
-.04
.24
--
5. Position Tenure e
21
60.29
59.96
.11
.07
.27
.35
--
6. LLX
21
4.03
.60
-.03
-.21
.17
.01
.16
2. Age of employees 3. Education of employee 4. Organisational Tenure 5. Position Tenure
c
d
e
.62 .0 -.09
--
Level 2 (Group) Variables: 1. Gender of supervisors b 2. Age of supervisors 3. Education of supervisor 4. Organisational Tenure
a
d
c
(.86)
Internal consistency reliabilities appears in parentheses along diagonal. Gender of employee/supervisor was coded: Female = 0, Male = 1 c Education of employee/supervisor was coded: Other = 0, High School = 1, College Diploma = 2, Bachelor’s Degree = 3, Master’s Degree = 4 d Organisational Tenure is in months *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed) **. Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed) b
(.89)
Table 2: Regression Results Steps and Variables Demographic Control Variables Gendera Age Level of Educationb Tenurec Position Tenurec Main Effects LMX R2 Adjusted R2 ΔR2
OCG A
OCG B
OCG C
Model 1 β SE
Model 2 β
SE
Model 1 β SE
Model 2 β
SE
Model 1 β SE
Model 2 β
SE
0.070 -0.002 -0.143 0 0
0.184 0.006 0.093 0.001 0.001
0.131 0 -0.073 0 0
0.167 0.005 0.085 0.001 0.001
0.081 -0.005 -0.182 0 0
0.237 0.007 0.120 0.001 0.001
0.158 -0.002 -0.094 0 0.001
0.216 0.007 0.11 0.001 0.001
0.002 0 -0.139 0 0
0.180 0.006 0.091 0.001 0.001
0.055 0.002 -0.078 0 0
0.167 0.005 0.085 0.001 0.001
0.028
0.369**
0.067
0.466**
0.086
0.067
0.200 0.163 0.179
0.323**
0.213 0.177 0.185
0.174 0.136 0.150
-0.009
0.021 -0.016
0.024 -0.013
Note: a
Gender: 1 = male, 0 = female
b
Level of education: 0 = Other 1 = high school, 2 = College Diploma, 3 = bachelor degree
c
Tenure is measured in month(s)
** p < .05
** p < .01
