Abstract
PURPOSE: Drawing upon self-categorization theory and the comparative literature on public and private sectors, the purpose of this study is to examine whether leader-follower extraversion congruence is positively related to leader-member exchange (LMX) and whether congruence at high levels of extraversion results in higher LMX than congruence at low levels. Furthermore, the study aims to investigate the moderating role of sectoral difference in the relationship between extraversion fit and LMX. METHODS: Participants were 320 leader-follower dyads (53 leaders and 320 followers) from various public and private sectors in the Chinese cultural context. The extraversion part of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and leader-member exchange multidimensional measure (LMX-MDM) were used to measure extraversion and LMX, respectively. Hypotheses were tested using cross-level moderated polynomial regression and response surface analysis. RESULTS: Leader-follower extraversion congruence was not significantly associated with LMX, and there was no significant difference in LMX between congruence at high levels of extraversion and congruence at low levels. However, sectoral difference moderated the relationship between extraversion fit and LMX. Specifically, in the public sector, leader-follower extraversion congruence was positively related to LMX, and LMX was higher when leader and follower extraversion were both at a high level compared to when they were at a low level. In the private sector, this fit effect vanished. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The results suggest that, in the public sector, when organizations deal with the deployment of staff, taking leader-follower extraversion fit into account may mitigate possible later relationship conflicts. However, in the private sector, by not emphasizing extraversion fit, organizations can focus resources on more crucial factors. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: By considering sectoral difference as the boundary condition of leader-follower extraversion fit, this study extends the comparative literature on public and private sectors and supports self-categorization theory.