y are highly efficient, getting things done, and also have more opportunity to new internal job as well as which is the most favored by management team. Overall, Susan and her in-group members have same goals and more egalitarian , the most important, they have a reciprocal influences to each other.
众所周知，苏珊非常注重任务和效率。在她的领导下，她喜欢看到表现出高度组织公民行为的员工。正因为如此，她的一部分员工适应了她的风格或完成工作的意愿，形成了一个团队。在领导者-成员交换领导理论中，有兴趣与领导者协商他们愿意为团队做什么的追随者可以成为团队中的一员。与此同时，领导者更喜欢向追随者提供更多的信息、机会和权利。这是因为LMX将二元关系的概念作为领导过程的核心。它关注的是领导者和追随者的观点。这样，追随者也会更加关注，表现出更多的信任，为他们的领导者提供更多的支持。如前所述，这种双向理论将形成良性循环。换言之，它将促进高质量的领导人-成员交流。Graen和Uhl-Bien认为，随着时间的推移，领导力的形成分为三个阶段：（1）陌生人阶段，（2）熟人阶段，以及（3）成熟的伙伴关系阶段。在Susan的案例中，她和她的团队成员正处于第三阶段，他们效率很高，完成了任务，也有更多的机会从事新的内部工作，这也是管理团队最喜欢的。总的来说，苏珊和她的团队成员有着相同的目标，更加平等，最重要的是，他们相互影响。
On the other hand, Susan’s leader style is focus on task and job requirements. She does not like to sitting down and asking’why’. Because of this, a number of members who are oppose to Susan’s leading method become an out-group. followers in the out-group are less compatible with the leader and usually just come to work, do their job, and go home (Northouse 2017, p139). In this case study, Johnson Fellows who is a member of out-group start to absent demonstrations of company products, morning teas and so on. After Susan hear about this, she just uses a transactional & technical approach and never solved emotional states. Therefore, this situation become worse and worse. Susan and out-group members are in the stranger phase. The interactions in the leader-follower dyad generally is rule bound, relying heavily on contractual relationships. They have lower-quality exchanges. The motives of the follower during the stranger phase are directed toward self-interest rather than toward the good of the group (Graen & Uhl-Bien 1995 ).
另一方面，苏珊的领导风格是专注于任务和工作要求。她不喜欢坐下来问“为什么”。正因为如此，一些反对苏珊领导方式的成员变成了一个局外人。外部群体中的追随者与领导者不太兼容，通常只是来上班，做他们的工作，然后回家。在这种情况下，小组成员Johnson Fellows开始缺席公司产品、早茶等的演示。Susan听说这件事后，她只是使用了交易和技术方法，从未解决过情绪状态。因此，这种情况变得越来越糟。苏珊和小组外的成员处于陌生人阶段。领导者-追随者二元关系中的互动通常是受规则约束的，在很大程度上依赖于契约关系。它们的交换质量较低。在陌生人阶段，追随者的动机是为了自身利益，而不是为了群体的利益。
Because of Susan’s leadership style, the out-group members are increasingly demonstrating. The LMX theory also has some criticisms, one of the most important drawback is the theory runs counter to the basic human value of fairness. it gives the appearance of discrimination against the out-group. (Northouse 2017 ,p147) It is perhaps the mean reason why Johnson does not attend to some meeting hostile to other staff. The felling about unfair will cause conflict and deteriorate relationship between leader and members. This situation would tend to low staff morale even to increasing the rote of staff turnover.
由于苏珊的领导风格，小组外的成员越来越多地表现出来。LMX理论也有一些批评，其中一个最重要的缺陷是该理论违背了公平的基本人类价值。它表现出对外部群体的歧视。这也许是约翰逊没有参加一些对其他员工怀有敌意的会议的刻薄原因。这种不公平的感觉会引起领导和成员之间的冲突，恶化领导和成员的关系。这种情况往往会降低工作人员的士气，甚至会增加工作人员的流动率。
Question2 问题2
In Ridgeway case, there are several problems. In the first place, staff is divided into two organize under Susan’s leading. In addition, because of Susan used modulating the emotional strategy during her work and does not acknowledge her staff’s feeling as valid also not going to work to alleviate them. It causes that out-group members are dissatisfied to her. Furthermore, as mentioned earlier, some staff who have worked for Ridgeway for more than 10 years miss and hope to the high-quality LMX.
在Ridgeway 的案例中，有几个问题。首先，工作人员分为两部分，在苏珊的领导下组织起来。此外，由于苏珊在工作中使用了调节情绪的策略，她不承认员工的感觉是有效的，也不去上班来缓解情绪。这导致小组成员对她不满意。此外，如前所述，一些在Ridgeway工作了10多年的员工怀念并希望获得高质量的LMX。
To the first problem, Followers in the in-group receive more information, influence, confidence, and concern from their leaders than do out-group followers (Northouse2017, p139), so that, out-group members have no chance to communicate with their manager, and also the manager would not waste time on contribute a high-quality LMX with members. After that, the relationship between Susan and out-group will be worse. The solution to this problem Susan shoul
