Your relationship with your manager: quality exchanges without pandering
Does working better with your manager mean winning their favour? Research on leader–member exchange offers a more demanding answer.
What the relationship measures
George Graen and Mary Uhl-Bien (1995, Leadership Quarterly) present the leader–member relationship as an exchange developed over time, based on trust, respect and reciprocal obligations. Their synthesis organises a field of research; it does not, on its own, demonstrate causality.
Consistent associations
James Dulebohn and his colleagues (2012, Journal of Management) link a higher-quality relationship to satisfaction, commitment and performance through meta-analysis. Many studies remain correlational: good results can also improve the relationship.
The risk of pandering
Turning this research into advice to pursue personal closeness confuses a working relationship with favour. A robust relationship allows disagreement, clarifies expectations and makes contributions visible without depending on personal affinity. (our executive and employee training programmes)
What can be improved
Three practices are observable: restating priorities, flagging obstacles early and asking for an explicit decision when two expectations conflict. They reduce ambiguity without promising a perfect relationship.
A practical implication to test in Bern
At the end of each of the next three exchanges, separately write down the priority as understood and the decision expected, then compare these with the manager. Repeated discrepancies reveal a problem with the relational employment contract, not with personality. To go further: explore the Building an Effective Relationship with Your Manager training in Bern in the canton of Bern, or browse our executive and employee training programmes in Switzerland.
In pictures: Building an Effective Relationship with Your Manager in Bern
- building an effective relationship with your manager
- Bern
- research
- training bern