2.1. Leadership and the evolution of theories Various attempts have been proposed in order to trace the development of thinking and research on leadership and LMX theory. In this regard, Van Seters and Field (1990) divide the stages of theories of leadership in nine evolutionary eras: the personality, influence behavior, the situation of contingency, transactional, antiliderança, cultural and transformational (which would be the most promising). The division of the ages has the role to show how thinking about leadership has evolved over time. 2.2. The theory of exchange between Leader and Led Theories of leadership that the author described so far in LMX theory concerns about leaders that treat the same way to all his subordinates. But it's …show more content…
The relationships may vary exchanges which strictly related to the employment contract: low ratio LMX; to relations characterised by trust mutual, respect, same tastes and interplay: high quality LMX (Farndale, Van Ruiten, Kelliher and Hope‐Hailey, 2011). The LMX theory is one of the current approaches that studies the different relationships developed between leaders and followers, and their influence on organisational results. This theory has the concept that an effective leadership process occurs when leaders and followers are able to develop a mature relationship of partnership which also generates a number of benefits from this relationship (Chow, Lai and Loi, 2015). Results are effective when there is a positive influence between the parts (Dusterhoff, Cunningham and MacGregor, 2014). Research shows that the LMX theory has a significant correlation with several important results of an organisation. For example, LMX is negatively related to turnover positively related to organisational commitment and the assessments of superiors about work performance and satisfaction with the job (Hill, Kang and Seo, 2014). It is considered the importance of the results organisational to the success of an organisation and the assumption that employees satisfied tends to be more productive, creative and innovative, in …show more content…
More detailed from Burns's work was, describing the processes transformational in organisations and distinguishing transformational leadership, charismatic and Transactional (Lian, Ferris and Brown, 2012). First, Loi, Chan and Lam (2014) does not consider the lead transformational and transactional as opposed, but only different dimensions. Mathieu, Fabi, Lacoursiere and Raymond (2015) detailed the basic components of these two types of leadership and developed indicators quantitative for each component, providing elements for further research on the subject (Mallory, Rupp, Bauer and Erdogan,