When LMX-Differentiation Based on Equity is Less Fair: The Role of Need and Type of Resource

Ingvild Andersen & Bård Kuvaas

Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies2025https://doi.org/10.1177/15480518251327608article
ABDC A
Weight
0.44

Abstract

The assumption that a leader's differentiation of resources is effective when based on equity or employees’ performance has received mixed support. Thus, it is critical to increase our understanding of how leaders can differentiate effectively. We do so by investigating the association between leader-member exchange differentiation (LMXD) and interactional justice and whether it depends on the type of resource that is differentiated (socioemotional vs. economic), and whether it is based on equity (i.e., performance or merit) or that of need . Additionally, we investigate whether these relationships are dependent on the employees´ exchange relationship with their leader. Using an experimental vignette study (N 1 = 200) and a cross-lagged field study (N 2 = 219), our findings demonstrate that leaders are perceived as fairer when differentiating socioemotional resources based on employees’ needs rather than equity. For economic resources, leaders are perceived as fairer when they differentiate based on equity rather than need.

3 citations

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/15480518251327608

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{ingvild2025,
  title        = {{When LMX-Differentiation Based on Equity is Less Fair: The Role of Need and Type of Resource}},
  author       = {Ingvild Andersen & Bård Kuvaas},
  journal      = {Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/15480518251327608},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

When LMX-Differentiation Based on Equity is Less Fair: The Role of Need and Type of Resource

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.44

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.32 × 0.4 = 0.13
M · momentum0.57 × 0.15 = 0.09
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.