The Impact of Leader-member Exchange (LMX) and Empowerment on Employee Voice Behavior

Open access


This study examines the impact of leader-member exchange (LMX) and the moderating role of empowerment on employee voice behavior. A sample of 314 supervisor-subordinate dyadic exchanges was collected from a manufacturing firm in Mainland China. The results provided support the view that LMX and empowerment were both significantly associated with employee voice behavior. The positive relationship between LMX and employee voice behavior was stronger when employees received higher levels of empowerment. Theoretical and managerial implications of the research are discussed.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Conger J. A. & Kanungo R. N. (1988). The empowerment process: Integrating theory and practice. Academy of Management Review 13 (3) 471-482.

  • Cropanzano R. & Mitchell M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management 31 (6) 874-900.

  • Detert J. R. & Burris E. R. (2007). Leadership behaviour and employee voice: Is the door really open? Academy of Management Journal 50 (4) 869-884.

  • Dienesch R. M. & Liden R. C. (1986). Leader-member exchange model of leadership: A critique and further development. Academy of Management Review 11 (3) 618-634.

  • Gao L. Janssen O. & Shi K. (2011). Leader trust and employee voice: The moderating role of empowering leader behaviors. Leadership Quarterly 22 (4) 787-798.

  • Gerstner C. R. & Day D. V. (1997). Meta-analytic review of leader-member exchange theory: Correlates and construct issues. Journal of Applied Psychology 82 (6) 827-844.

  • 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 6 (2) 219-247.

  • Graham J. W. & Van Dyne L. (2006). Gathering information and exercising influence: Two forms of civic virtue organizational citizenship behaviour. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 18 (2) 89-109.

  • Harris K. J. Wheeler A. R. & Kacmar K. M. (2009). Leader-member exchange and empowerment: Direct and interactive effects on job satisfaction turnover intentions and performance. Leadership Quarterly 20 (3) 371-382.

  • Ilies R. Nahrgang J. & Morgeson F. (2007). Leader-member exchange and citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis Journal of Applied Psychology 92 (1) 269-277.

  • Janssen O. & Van Yperen N. W. (2004). Employees’ goal orientations the quality of leadermember exchange and the outcomes of job performance and job satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal 47 (3) 368-384.

  • LePine J. A. & Van Dyne L. (2001). Voice and cooperative behavior as contrasting forms of contextual performance: Evidence of differential relationship with big five personality characteristics and cognitive ability. Journal of Applied Psycholog 86 (2) 326-336.

  • Liden R. C. Wayne S. J. & Sparrowe R. T. (2000). An examination of the mediating role of psychological empowerment on the relations between the job interpersonal relationships and work outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology 85 (3) 407-416.

  • Liden R. C. Wayne S. J. & Stillwell D. (1993). A longitudinal study on the early development of leader-member exchanges. Journal of Applied Psychology 78 (4) 662-674.

  • Liu W. Zhu R. & Yang Y. (2010) I warn you because I like you: Voice behavior employee identifications and transformational leadership. Leadership Quarterly 21 (1) 189-202.

  • Morrison E. W. & Milliken F. I. (2000). Organizational silence: A barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world. Academy of Management Review 25 (4) 705-725.

  • 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 69 (3) 428-436.

  • Scandura T. A. Graen G. B. & Novak M. A. (1986). When managers decide not to decide autocratically: An investigation of leader-member exchange and decision influence. Journal of Applied Psychology 71 (4) 579-584.

  • 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 10 (1) 63-113.

  • Seibert S. E. Crant J. M. & Kraimer M. L. (1999). Proactive personality and career success. Journal of Applied Psychology 84 (3) 416-427.

  • Seibert S. E. Silver S. R. & Randolph W. A. (2004). Taking empowerment to the next level: A multiple-level model of empowerment performance and satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal 47 (3) 332-349.

  • Sparrowe R. T. & Liden R. C. (2005). Two routes to influence: Integrating leader-member exchange and network perspectives. Administrative Science Quarterly 50 (4) 505-535.

  • Spreitzer G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions measurement and validation. Academy of Management Journal 38 (5) 1442-1465.

  • Spreitzer G. M. Kizilos M. A. & Nason S. W. (1997). A dimensional analysis of the relationship between psychological empowerment and effectiveness satisfaction and strain. Journal of Management 23 (5) 679-704.

  • Tangirala S. Green S. & Ramanujam R. (2007). In the shadow of the boss's boss: Effects of supervisors' upward exchange relationships on employees. Journal of Applied Psychology 92 (2) 309-320.

  • Tangirala S. & Ramanujam R. (2008). Exploring nonlinearity in employee voice: The effects of personal control and organizational identification. Academy of Management Journal 51 (6) 1189-1203.

  • Thomas K. W. & Velthouse B. A. (1990). Cognitive elements empowerment: An “interpretive” model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of Management Review 15 (4) 666-681.

  • Van Dyne L. & LePine J. A. (1998). Helping and voice extra-role behaviors: Evidence of construct and predictive validity. Academy of Management Journal 41 (1) 108-119.

  • Zhou J. & George J. M. (2001). When job dissatisfaction leads to creativity: Encouraging the expression of voice. Academy of Management Journal 44 (4) 682-696.