Do intelligent leaders differentiate exchange relationships intelligently? A functional leadership approach to leader-member exchange differentiation.

The burgeoning literature on leader-member exchange (LMX) differentiation indicates that differentiating LMX relationships within groups has both benefits and costs when it comes to group effectiveness. Although some clarity is emerging surrounding the null total effect of LMX differentiation on group performance, we still know little about how leaders themselves shape the differentiation process. In this article, we extend theory to suggest that some leaders may differentiate more effectively than others. Drawing from functional leadership theory, we first identify a potential approach available to leaders likely to enhance their functional effectiveness-strategically investing in and developing stronger social exchange relationships with subordinates who can best help them fulfill the task functions (via task performance-based differentiation) and group maintenance functions (via contextual performance-based differentiation) specified within functional leadership theory. Embedding this potential approach within the ability-motivation-opportunity framework, we then develop a theory for which leaders are best positioned to recognize and pursue strategic relationship development this way. Specifically, we posit that leaders with stronger cognitive abilities (g) are more likely to recognize the value of such an approach, and those high in core self-evaluation are more likely to believe in their capabilities to successfully process, execute on, and persist with the approach. The results from two studies-a multisource study of leaders and team members in newly formed teams as well as a preregistered online vignette study using a sample of current and former supervisors-largely supported our predictions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Motivated to "roll the dice" on trust: The relationships between employees' daily motives, risk propensity, and trust.

Models of trust have focused on the notion that an employee's trust in a coworker is based on that coworker's trustworthiness and the employee's trust propensity-a generalized tendency to believe others are trustworthy. Although these models capture the general assessment of risk associated with trusting a particular coworker, they provide insufficient insight into why an employee might take the risk associated with trust on a particular day. Bringing the concept of risk propensity-the tendency to accept or avoid risk-from the decision-making literature into the trust literature, we build a model of trust that suggests employees' trusting behaviors stem from both their calculated assessment of risk (encapsulated in trustworthiness and trust propensity) and their tendency to take those risks. We draw on motivated reasoning theory (Kunda, 1990) and the decision-making literature to suggest that employees' daily strivings for achievement, affiliation, stimulation, and security induce a biased reasoning process that influences employees' risk propensity that day. Our test of this theoretical model demonstrates that generalized work motives have an indirect effect on employees' trust in their coworkers, through risk propensity, that goes above and beyond established bases of trust. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

What does it cost you to get there? The effects of emotional journeys on daily outcomes.

Scholarly understanding of emotions and emotion regulation rests on two incompatible truths-that positive emotions are positively beneficial and should be pursued, and that changing emotions may come at a cost. With both perspectives in mind, to really conclude that pursuing higher positive affect (PA) is a worthy journey, we must take into account the cost of that journey itself. We build from the affect shift literature and draw on self-regulation theories to argue that, although end-states characterized by more positive (and fewer negative) emotions will be beneficial, the emotional changes required to "get there" will have consequences for employee regulatory resources and subsequent behavior. In Study 1, we use experience sampling methodology to track employee emotional journeys-changes in emotions in terms of directionality (e.g., toward pleasure and away from pain) and distance (i.e., magnitude of change in terms of intensity changes within-emotions as well as magnitude of change in activation/valence level between emotions)-that capture the amount of emotion regulation preceding emotion end-states. Teasing apart variance attributable to the end-state versus the journey, we demonstrate that steeper daily PA trajectories (steeper increases in intensity of positive, activated emotions) and valence trajectories (steeper movement away from more negative emotions toward more positive emotions) lead to psychological depletion, ultimately triggering interpersonal counterproductive work behaviors and harming citizenship and performance. In Study 2, we test our core propositions in a lab experiment, demonstrating that different emotional journeys "leading up" to the same affective end-state can change the meaning of that end-state. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

To and fro: The costs and benefits of power fluctuation throughout the day.

Power is a ubiquitous element of organizational relationships. Historically in the organizational and social sciences, power has most commonly been evaluated statically. Although this approach has been beneficial thus far, it may be inconsistent with the realities that most individuals face in organizations. Rather, we suggest that individuals' sense of power changes, even within a given day. Thus, we introduce the concept of power fluctuation to better explain the phenomenon that one's sense of power varies over time. We position power fluctuation as a form of micro role transition and draw from the social distance theory of power to posit that such fluctuation throughout the day has both positive and negative consequences. Specifically, we suggest that daily power fluctuation (day-to-day, within-person variance in power fluctuation) as well as general power fluctuation (person-to-person, between-person variance in power fluctuation) increase perspective taking and contribution to team performance, but those benefits come at an emotional cost (i.e., frustration and emotional exhaustion). The results of our multilevel experience sampling study of 845 matched-responses from 103 employee-coworker dyads largely support our predictions of the manifestation and consequences of power fluctuation. The implications of power fluctuation for theory and practice are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Exchanging one uncertainty for another: Justice variability negates the benefits of justice.

Although the importance of organizational justice is without question, our theoretical and empirical knowledge of the justice phenomenon is focused almost exclusively on mean levels of fair treatment, ignoring whether those mean levels are achieved in a consistent or inconsistent manner. This exclusive focus on average levels of justice is not surprising given the implicit assumption in the justice literature that day-to-day variations in justice are glossed over or reinterpreted by individuals. Building upon recent research demonstrating that variability in justice can be as important as average levels of fair treatment, we leverage tenets of uncertainty management theory to provide a conceptual bridge that integrates justice variability into the group engagement model. Our theoretical model proposes justice variability (arising from fluctuations in one's fair treatment over time) negates the very benefits that average levels of interpersonal justice provide. Results of 2, week-long experience sampling studies (one of 111 employees and one of 352 employees nested in 104 groups), used to construct assessments of day-to-day justice variability, largely supported our predictions regarding interactive effects between average levels of justice and justice variability on judgments of pride in the group and, ultimately, cooperative behavior, providing important takeaways for theory, research, and practice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Not all fairness is created equal: A study of employee attributions of supervisor justice motives.

A large body of research demonstrates that employee perceptions of fair treatment matter. The overwhelming focus of these investigations has been on how employees react to whether or not they perceive their supervisor behaved in a fair manner. We contend, however, that employees not only question and react to whether they are treated fairly, but also to why they believe their supervisor acted fairly in the first place. To do so, we consider how employee attributions of supervisor motives for fair treatment influence the cognitive and affective mechanisms by which fair treatment influences employee reactions to fairness. Drawing from the justice actor model, we focus on both cognitive (establishing fairness, identity maintenance, and effecting compliance) and affective (positive affect) motives underlying supervisors' fair treatment. Relying on theory and research on motive attribution and leader affect, we develop predictions for how employees' perceptions of these motives as a result of short-term exchanges over time influence supervisor-directed citizenship behavior through both cognitive (trust in the supervisor) and affective (positive affect) mechanisms. Our experience sampling study of 613 weekly fair events (from 171 employees) largely supported our predictions, demonstrating that attribution of supervisor motives is a meaningful component of an employee's justice experience. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Ethical leadership as a substitute for justice enactment: An information-processing perspective.

Why do employees perceive that they have been treated fairly by their supervisor? Theory and research on justice generally presumes a straightforward answer to this question: Because the supervisor adhered to justice rules. We propose the answer is not so straightforward and that employee justice perceptions are not merely "justice-laden." Drawing from theory on information processing that distinguishes between automatic and systematic modes, we suggest that employee justice perceptions are also "ethics-laden." Specifically, we posit that employees with more ethical supervisors form justice perceptions through automatic processing with little scrutiny of or attention paid to a supervisor's justice acts. In contrast, employees with less ethical supervisors rely on systematic processing to evaluate their supervisor's justice enactment and form justice perceptions. Thus, we propose that ethical leadership substitutes for the supervisor's justice enactment. Our results demonstrate support for the interactive effect of supervisor justice enactment and ethical leadership on employee justice perceptions, and we further demonstrate its consequences for employees' engagement in discretionary behaviors (citizenship and counterproductive behaviors). Our findings highlight an assumption in the justice literature in need of revision and opens the door to further inquiry about the role of information processing in justice perceptions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Personality similarity in negotiations: Testing the dyadic effects of similarity in interpersonal traits and the use of emotional displays on negotiation outcomes.

We build on the small but growing literature documenting personality influences on negotiation by examining how the joint disposition of both negotiators with respect to the interpersonal traits of agreeableness and extraversion influences important negotiation processes and outcomes. Building on similarity-attraction theory, we articulate and demonstrate how being similarly high or similarly low on agreeableness and extraversion leads dyad members to express more positive emotional displays during negotiation. Moreover, because of increased positive emotional displays, we show that dyads with such compositions also tend to reach agreements faster, perceive less relationship conflict, and have more positive impressions of their negotiation partner. Interestingly, these results hold regardless of whether negotiating dyads are similar in normatively positive (i.e., similarly agreeable and similarly extraverted) or normatively negative (i.e., similarly disagreeable and similarly introverted) ways. Overall, these findings demonstrate the importance of considering the dyad's personality configuration when attempting to understand the affective experience as well as the downstream outcomes of a negotiation. (PsycINFO Database Record