Numerous explanations for understanding the nature of superior-subordinate relationships are available in the leadership literature. Although these arguments differ, a common feature is that each view is based implicitly on particular levels of analysis. The purpose of the current study was to conceptualize and test alternative perspectives of superior-subordinate relationships by explicitly incorporating multiple levels of analysis in hypothesis generation and testing. Data from matched reports of superiors and subordinates were analyzed using Within and Between Analysis (WABA). Results from a sample of retail sales associates and their supervisors indicated that on the dimensions of attention, job latitude, satisfaction with performance, and job congruence, superior-subordinate relationships differed from one interpersonal relationship to another. In a sample of insurance agents and their managers, however, findings indicated that there were individual differences on these dimensions for superiors and subordinates. Implications of these different views of superior-subordinate relationships for future leadership research are discussed.
ADAMS, J. S.Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2). New York: Academic Press, 1965, pp. 266-300.
2.
AVOLIO, B. J., & YAMMARINO, F. J.Operationalizing charismatic leadership using a levels of analysis framework. Leadership Quarterly, 1990, 1, 193-208.
3.
AVOLIO, B. J., YAMMARINO, F. J., & BASS, B. M.Identifying common methods variance with data collected from a single source: An unresolved sticky issue. Journal of Management, 1991, 17, 571-587.
4.
BASS, B. M.Bass and Stogdill's handbook of leadership. New York: Free Press, 1990.
5.
BERSCHEID, E.Interpersonal attraction. In G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology. New York: Random House, 1985, pp. 413-484.
6.
BYRNE, D.The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press, 1971.
7.
COMER, J. M., & DUBINSKY, A. J.Managing the successful sales force. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1985.
8.
DANSEREAU, F.A multiple level of analysis perspective on the debate about individualism. American Psychologist, 1989, 44, 959-960.
9.
DANSEREAU, F., & MARKHAM, S. E.Levels of analysis issues in personnel and human resources management. In K. M. Rowland and G. R. Ferris (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 5). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1987, pp. 1-50.
10.
DANSEREAU, F., & MARKHAM, S. E.Superior-subordinate communication: Multiple levels of analysis. In F. Jablin, L. Putnam, K. Roberts, and L. Porter (Eds.), Handbook of organizational communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1987, pp. 343-388.
11.
DANSEREAU, F., GRAEN, G., & HAGA, W. J.A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role-making process. OQganizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1975, 13, 46-78.
12.
DANSEREAU, F., ALUTTO, J. A., MARKHAM, S. E., & DUMAS, M.Multiplexed leadership and supervision: An application of within and between analysis. In J. G. Hunt, U. Sekaran, and C. A. Schriesheim (Eds.), Leadership: Beyond establishment views. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 1982, pp. 81-103.
13.
DANSEREAU, F., ALUITO, J. A., & YAMMARINO, F. J., Theory testing in organizational behavior: The varient approach. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1984.
14.
EDEN, D., & LEVIATAN, U.Implicit leadership theory as a determinant of the factor structure underlying supervisory behavior scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975, 6O, 736-741.
15.
GLICK, W. H., & ROBERTS, K. H.Hypothesized interdependence, assumed independence. Academy of Management Review, 1984, 9, 722-735.
16.
GRAEN, G., NOVAK, M., & SOMMERKAMP, P.The effects of leader-member exchange and job design on productivity and satisfaction: Testing a dual attachment model. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1982, 30, 109-131.
17.
GREEN, S. G., & MITCHELL, T. R.Attributional processes of leaders in leader-member interactions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1979, 23, 429-458.
18.
HEIDER, F.The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley, 1958.
19.
HOLLANDER, E. P.Conformity, status, and idiosyncrasy credit. Psychological Review, 1958, 65, 117-127.
20.
HOLLANDER, E. P.Leadership and power. In G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology. New York: Random House, 1985, pp. 485-537.
21.
KERR, S., & JERMIER, J.Substitutes for leadership: Their meaning and measurement. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1978, 22, 375-403.
22.
LARSON, J. P.Cognitive mechanisms mediating the impact of implicit theories of leader behavior on leader behavior ratings. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1982, 29, 129-140.
23.
LERNER, D. (Ed.). Parts and wholes. New York: Free Press, 1963.
24.
LORD, R. G., FOTI, R. J., & DeVADER, C. L.A test of leadership categorization theory: Internal structure, information processing and leadership perceptions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1984, 34, 343-378.
25.
MARKHAM, S. E.Pay-for-performance dilemma revisited: Empirical example of the importance of group effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1988, 73, 172-180.
26.
MEINDL, J. R., & EHRLICH, S. B.The romance of leadership and the evaluation of organizational performance. Academy of Management Journal, 1987, 30, 91-109.
27.
MILLER, J. G.Living systems. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1978.
28.
PEDHAZUR, E. J.Multiple regression in behavioral research. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1982.
29.
PHILLIPS, J. S., & LORD, R. G.Causal attributions and perceptions of leadership. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1981, 28, 143-163.
30.
PULAKOS, E. D., & WEXLEY, K. N.The relationship among perceptual similarity, sex, and performance ratings in manager-subordinate dyads. Academy of Management Journal, 1983, 26, 129-139.
31.
ROBERTS, K. H., HULIN, C. L., & ROUSSEAU, D. M.Developing an interdisciplinary science of organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1978.
32.
ROBINSON, W. S.Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals. American Sociological Review, 1950, 15, 351-357.
33.
RUSH, M. C., THOMAS, J. C., & LORD, R. G.Implicit leadership theory: A potential threat to the internal validity of leader behavior questionnaires. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1977, 20, 93-110.
34.
SCHRIESHEIM, C. A., & KERR, S.Theories and measures of leadership: A critical appraisal of current and future directions. In J. G. Hunt and L. L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership: The cutting edge. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 1977, pp. 9-45.
35.
WALDMAN, D. A., YAMMARINO, F. J., & AVOLIO, B. J.A levels of analysis investigation of training needs. Personnel Psychology, 1990, 43, 811-835.
36.
WEXLEY, K. N., ALEXANDER, R. A., GREENWALT, J. P., & COUCH, M. A.Attitudinal congruence and similarity as related to interpersonal evaluations in manager-subordinate dyads. Academy of Management Journal, 1980, 23, 320-330.
37.
YAMMARINO, F. J.Individual- and group-directed leader behavior descriptions. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1990, 50, 739-759.
38.
YAMMARINO, F. J., & BASS, B. M.Transformational leadership and multiple levels of analysis. Human Relations, 1990, 43, 975-995.
39.
YAMMARINO, F. J., & BASS, B. M.Person and situation views of leadership: A multiple levels of analysis approach. Leadership Quarterly, 1991, 2, 121-139.
40.
YAMMARINO, F. J., & DUBINSKY, A. J.Salesperson performance and managerially controllable factors: An investigation of individual and work group effects. Journal of Management, 1990, 16, 87-106.
41.
YAMMARINO, F. J., & MARKHAM, S. E.On the application of within and between analysis: Are absence and affect really group-based phenomena?Journal of Applied Psychology, 77. In press.
42.
YAMMARINO, F. J., & NAUGHTON, T. J.Time spent communicating: A multiple levels of analysis approach. Human Relations, 1988, 41, 655-676.
43.
YAMMARINO, F. J., DUBINSKY, A. J., & HARTLEY, S. W.An approach for assessing individual versus group effects in performance evaluations. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 1987, 60, 157-167.
