Introduction
In their focal article, Kooij et al. (Reference Kooij, Zacher, Wang and Heckhausen2020) propose that changes at macro (environmental and social factors), meso (organizational factors, workgroup factors, and job factors), and micro levels (personal factors) can serve as antecedents of perceived fit and self-regulation processes. Our commentary explores the role of the workgroup factor of leadership in the process model of successful aging at work and extends the conceptualization of aging at work to incorporate other outcomes. Specifically, in the focal article, the authors briefly discuss the research on participative and transformational leadership as being supportive of the process model. We propose an important factor to consider, beyond participative and transformational leadership, is the quality of the relationship between a leader and their followers, founded in leader-member exchange theory (LMX).
A recent meta-analysis by Martin et al. (Reference Martin, Guillaume, Thomas, Lee and Epitropaki2016) demonstrated that LMX has a positive relationship with task and organizational citizenship performance as well as a negative relationship with counterproductive behavior. Beyond the positive outcomes associated with LMX and performance, it is important to consider and examine the role of LMX for a few theoretical reasons.
LMX theory is based on the idea that through a series of exchanges, leaders differentiate between followers, leading to different quality relationships between leaders and their subordinates. Relationship dyads can be considered high-quality LMX relationships (or in-group relationships) or low-quality LMX relationships (or out-group relationships), also known as LMX differentiation (Dansereau et al., Reference Dansereau, Graen and Haga1975; Graen & Cashman, Reference Graen, Cashman, Hunt and Larson1975). The literature supports that LMX differentiation exists in nearly 90% of all work groups and is characterized by a difference in allocation of information, resources, and emotional support by the leader amongst subordinates (Liden et al., Reference Liden, Sparrowe, Wayne and Ferris1997). The variance in LMX relationship quality serves as a mechanism supporting the proposed model in two ways: (1) the differential capability for individuals to engage in proactive goal (dis)engagement and (2) the experience of age bias at work.
The differential capability for individuals to engage in proactive goal (dis)engagement
Our first contribution pertains to the relationship between LMX and anticipated goal engagement. As mentioned earlier, LMX theory holds that leaders develop relationships of varying quality across team members. The self-regulation process described by Kooij et al. (Reference Kooij, Zacher, Wang and Heckhausen2020) holds that behavioral pathways to person–environment fit maintenance and achievement are elicited by either experienced misfit (adaptive goal (dis)engagement) or anticipated misfit (proactive goal (dis)engagement). Since a defining feature in LMX relationship quality is the amount and value of information shared between leader and follower, individuals who have a high-quality LMX relationship with their leader would be more informed than their low-quality LMX counterparts and are thus better positioned to preempt misfit. This rationale is further substantiated by meta-analytic findings by Chiaburu et al. (Reference Chiaburu, Smith, Wang and Zimmerman2014) that support a relationship between LMX relationship quality and proactive behavior. Thus, LMX relationship quality as a meso-level factor aligns with the focal model in that individuals with a high-quality LMX are better prepared and more likely to engage in proactive goal (dis)engagement than those with low-quality LMX relationships who would be more likely to find themselves adapting to (rather than preempting) misfit. Given the body of existent research supporting the relationship between proactive behavior and positive work outcomes including job performance and career success (Crant, Reference Crant2000), the extent to which employees have the informational resources to adopt adaptive goal (dis)engagement strategies is an important factor to consider.
Providing employees with support and opportunities to develop will determine the effort employees will reciprocate. Leaders help form a positive age diversity climate through providing older employees with the same opportunities as younger employees (Van Dam et al., Reference Van Dam, Van Vuuren and Kemps2017). A leader in a high-quality LMX relationship is more likely to know an individual employee’s current needs and provide the employee with resources to fulfill their needs. Specifically, for older employees, a leader will continue supplying the resources needed as an employee continuously ages because the leader and employee have a high-quality LMX relationship. Van Dam et al. (Reference Van Dam, Van Vuuren and Kemps2017) suggest supervisors in an age-supportive climate may engage in individual discussions with employees to determine how their jobs can be changed.
The experience of age bias at work
Similarly, the focal model is further supported through consideration of LMX relationship quality as a mechanism for explaining experienced age-bias at work. Leaders’ implicit or explicit preferences for an age range can affect the quality of the relationships with their subordinates and relegate individuals to the out-group based on age (Furunes et al., Reference Furunes, Mykletun, Einarsen and Glasø2015). According to the proposed model, individuals would experience misfit as a product of differential treatment by the leader and thus attempt to adopt a goal strategy to remedy this misfit. In this way, the LMX relationship quality serves as an antecedent of experienced fit.
Taking the above examples together demonstrates how LMX relationship quality is a potent antecedent within the proposed model. Employees who are in the upper- and lower-quartile age groups with low-quality LMX relationships are more vulnerable to experiencing negative outcomes of misfit over time; they are also less informationally equipped to anticipate additional sources of misfit and adopt proactive goal strategies to avoid future negative outcomes down the road.
Other outcomes for successful aging at work
Beyond the outcomes on successful aging proposed by the Kooij et al. (Reference Kooij, Zacher, Wang and Heckhausen2020), we consider how other indicators may be important to understand successful aging at work, as they may vary with time. The quality of LMX relationship has been shown to be related to perceived career opportunities and improved health and well-being (Anand et al., Reference Anand, Hu, Liden, Vidyarthi, Bryman, Collinson, Grint, Jackson and Uhl-Bien2011; Martin et al., Reference Martin, Guillaume, Thomas, Lee and Epitropaki2016). Maintaining physical and mental health over time should be a priority for employees of all ages, and improving the relationship between a leader and follower can contribute to this. Enabling older employees to continue performing successfully, a key indicator of successful aging, is characterized by the health, well-being, and perceived career opportunities of employees. Thus, it is important for future research to consider indicators beyond performance to truly understand successful aging, along with the role of LMX in this process.
Conclusion
In this commentary, we have examined the model proposed in the focal article through the lens of LMX and provided two arguments as support: how LMX can aid in understanding the differential capability for individuals to engage in proactive goal (dis)engagement and the experience of age bias at work. We advocate for the development of the relationship between leaders and followers (LMX) to be viewed as a key indicator of self-regulation and person–environment fit, which the model shows as directly affecting an individual’s ability to successfully age in the workforce. In addition, we discuss a few outcomes with which LMX has been associated, such as health and well-being, and the importance of these outcomes as additional measures of success. Our commentary aims to elaborate on the focal article by discussing the importance for leaders to develop quality relationships with all employees, which will help support successful aging in the workplace.
You have
Access
Introduction
In their focal article, Kooij et al. (Reference Kooij, Zacher, Wang and Heckhausen2020) propose that changes at macro (environmental and social factors), meso (organizational factors, workgroup factors, and job factors), and micro levels (personal factors) can serve as antecedents of perceived fit and self-regulation processes. Our commentary explores the role of the workgroup factor of leadership in the process model of successful aging at work and extends the conceptualization of aging at work to incorporate other outcomes. Specifically, in the focal article, the authors briefly discuss the research on participative and transformational leadership as being supportive of the process model. We propose an important factor to consider, beyond participative and transformational leadership, is the quality of the relationship between a leader and their followers, founded in leader-member exchange theory (LMX).
A recent meta-analysis by Martin et al. (Reference Martin, Guillaume, Thomas, Lee and Epitropaki2016) demonstrated that LMX has a positive relationship with task and organizational citizenship performance as well as a negative relationship with counterproductive behavior. Beyond the positive outcomes associated with LMX and performance, it is important to consider and examine the role of LMX for a few theoretical reasons.
LMX theory is based on the idea that through a series of exchanges, leaders differentiate between followers, leading to different quality relationships between leaders and their subordinates. Relationship dyads can be considered high-quality LMX relationships (or in-group relationships) or low-quality LMX relationships (or out-group relationships), also known as LMX differentiation (Dansereau et al., Reference Dansereau, Graen and Haga1975; Graen & Cashman, Reference Graen, Cashman, Hunt and Larson1975). The literature supports that LMX differentiation exists in nearly 90% of all work groups and is characterized by a difference in allocation of information, resources, and emotional support by the leader amongst subordinates (Liden et al., Reference Liden, Sparrowe, Wayne and Ferris1997). The variance in LMX relationship quality serves as a mechanism supporting the proposed model in two ways: (1) the differential capability for individuals to engage in proactive goal (dis)engagement and (2) the experience of age bias at work.
The differential capability for individuals to engage in proactive goal (dis)engagement
Our first contribution pertains to the relationship between LMX and anticipated goal engagement. As mentioned earlier, LMX theory holds that leaders develop relationships of varying quality across team members. The self-regulation process described by Kooij et al. (Reference Kooij, Zacher, Wang and Heckhausen2020) holds that behavioral pathways to person–environment fit maintenance and achievement are elicited by either experienced misfit (adaptive goal (dis)engagement) or anticipated misfit (proactive goal (dis)engagement). Since a defining feature in LMX relationship quality is the amount and value of information shared between leader and follower, individuals who have a high-quality LMX relationship with their leader would be more informed than their low-quality LMX counterparts and are thus better positioned to preempt misfit. This rationale is further substantiated by meta-analytic findings by Chiaburu et al. (Reference Chiaburu, Smith, Wang and Zimmerman2014) that support a relationship between LMX relationship quality and proactive behavior. Thus, LMX relationship quality as a meso-level factor aligns with the focal model in that individuals with a high-quality LMX are better prepared and more likely to engage in proactive goal (dis)engagement than those with low-quality LMX relationships who would be more likely to find themselves adapting to (rather than preempting) misfit. Given the body of existent research supporting the relationship between proactive behavior and positive work outcomes including job performance and career success (Crant, Reference Crant2000), the extent to which employees have the informational resources to adopt adaptive goal (dis)engagement strategies is an important factor to consider.
Providing employees with support and opportunities to develop will determine the effort employees will reciprocate. Leaders help form a positive age diversity climate through providing older employees with the same opportunities as younger employees (Van Dam et al., Reference Van Dam, Van Vuuren and Kemps2017). A leader in a high-quality LMX relationship is more likely to know an individual employee’s current needs and provide the employee with resources to fulfill their needs. Specifically, for older employees, a leader will continue supplying the resources needed as an employee continuously ages because the leader and employee have a high-quality LMX relationship. Van Dam et al. (Reference Van Dam, Van Vuuren and Kemps2017) suggest supervisors in an age-supportive climate may engage in individual discussions with employees to determine how their jobs can be changed.
The experience of age bias at work
Similarly, the focal model is further supported through consideration of LMX relationship quality as a mechanism for explaining experienced age-bias at work. Leaders’ implicit or explicit preferences for an age range can affect the quality of the relationships with their subordinates and relegate individuals to the out-group based on age (Furunes et al., Reference Furunes, Mykletun, Einarsen and Glasø2015). According to the proposed model, individuals would experience misfit as a product of differential treatment by the leader and thus attempt to adopt a goal strategy to remedy this misfit. In this way, the LMX relationship quality serves as an antecedent of experienced fit.
Taking the above examples together demonstrates how LMX relationship quality is a potent antecedent within the proposed model. Employees who are in the upper- and lower-quartile age groups with low-quality LMX relationships are more vulnerable to experiencing negative outcomes of misfit over time; they are also less informationally equipped to anticipate additional sources of misfit and adopt proactive goal strategies to avoid future negative outcomes down the road.
Other outcomes for successful aging at work
Beyond the outcomes on successful aging proposed by the Kooij et al. (Reference Kooij, Zacher, Wang and Heckhausen2020), we consider how other indicators may be important to understand successful aging at work, as they may vary with time. The quality of LMX relationship has been shown to be related to perceived career opportunities and improved health and well-being (Anand et al., Reference Anand, Hu, Liden, Vidyarthi, Bryman, Collinson, Grint, Jackson and Uhl-Bien2011; Martin et al., Reference Martin, Guillaume, Thomas, Lee and Epitropaki2016). Maintaining physical and mental health over time should be a priority for employees of all ages, and improving the relationship between a leader and follower can contribute to this. Enabling older employees to continue performing successfully, a key indicator of successful aging, is characterized by the health, well-being, and perceived career opportunities of employees. Thus, it is important for future research to consider indicators beyond performance to truly understand successful aging, along with the role of LMX in this process.
Conclusion
In this commentary, we have examined the model proposed in the focal article through the lens of LMX and provided two arguments as support: how LMX can aid in understanding the differential capability for individuals to engage in proactive goal (dis)engagement and the experience of age bias at work. We advocate for the development of the relationship between leaders and followers (LMX) to be viewed as a key indicator of self-regulation and person–environment fit, which the model shows as directly affecting an individual’s ability to successfully age in the workforce. In addition, we discuss a few outcomes with which LMX has been associated, such as health and well-being, and the importance of these outcomes as additional measures of success. Our commentary aims to elaborate on the focal article by discussing the importance for leaders to develop quality relationships with all employees, which will help support successful aging in the workplace.