Search

Purpose We propose an integrative model of how leaders (individual level) effectively relate to their social networks as a whole (network level). Additionally, we focus both on the leader constructs and the followers shared constructs about those networks. Design/methodology/approach Our conceptual paper uses the integration of literature from two main bodies of knowledge: individual and shared cognitions, fundamentally from psychology, and a structural perspective, mainly from sociology, organisational studies and social network analysis. We take a psycho-structural approach which allows the emergence of new perspectives on the study of leadership and more specifically on the study of relational leadership. Findings We propose a leader-network exchange (LNX) theory focussed on the behaviours and cognitions of leaders and followers as well as the relations between them. Research limitations/implications Our model represents a new perspective on leader–followers relationship by stressing the importance of both followers and leaders' cognitions. We highlight the importance of the relationships between followers on the creation of shared meaning about the leader. Practical implications Our model helps leaders and managers make sense of the cognitions and behaviours of their teams. By considering the teams characteristics, i.e. cognitions and network structure, it allows leaders to adopt the most appropriate behaviours for effective leadership. Leadership and management development programmes designed around our model will enhance the use of networking skills. Originality/value Contrary to the traditional view of LMX, our approach considers the social context of leaders and followers. It also adds a new layer of knowledge going beyond what members think of their leaders by considering the social networks of leaders and followers.

This study aims to analyze the relationship between psychological capital profiles and internal learning in teams. The participants in this study were 480 undergraduate students. We performed a cluster analysis using the SPSS and yielded four distinct psychological capital profiles. The student profile with the highest scores in self-efficacy, optimism, hope, and resilience (Profile 2-Fully PsyCap) exhibited also the highest scores of internal learning in teams. On the other hand, the student profile with the lowest scores in self-efficacy, optimism, hope, and resilience (Profile 1- Empty PsyCap) presented the lowest scores of internal learning in teams. It is also noteworthy that there was no significant relationship between the profile with a positive combination between self-efficacy and hope (profile 4) and the profile that presents the optimism as the only positive psychological capability (profile 3), in the way they relate to internal learning in teams, which led us to reject the second hypothesis of the study. This study reinforces the role of psychological capital in academic settings and suggests that psychological capital profiles can affect internal learning in teams differentially.