Diverse Differentiation: Empirical Tests of an LMXD Configurations Framework

Abstract

Leader–member exchange differentiation (LMXD) refers to the degree to which leaders develop varying quality relationships with team members. Due to a plague of mixed empirical results and misalignment in the LMXD literature, Buengeler et al. (2021) proposes a conceptual framework that suggests there are different types of LMXD—separation, variety, and disparity—each having distinct effects on team outcomes. This framework has yet to be empirically tested, so we conduct two studies to examine its utility. In Study 1, we conduct a constructive reproduction of Cobb and Lau (2015), reanalyzing their data with LMX disparity (instead of separation) to better align with justice-based theorizing. In Study 2, we extend Kim et al. (2023) by testing whether LMX separation predicts team potency and performance more effectively than team median LMX. Across both studies, LMXD explained incremental variance beyond central tendency scores and showed negative effects on team outcomes. However, LMX disparity outperformed LMX separation—even when theoretically misaligned—raising concerns about the empirical distinctiveness of LMXD types. Our findings support the conceptual value of differentiating LMXD types and theory-measurement alignment, but we highlight challenges in operationalizing them.