| Course | IOP-7100 The Psychology of Leadership, Motivation, and Teamwork |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 2 |
| Paper type | Written assignment: leadership |
| Length | About 546 words, 4 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Thomas Edison State University |
| Program | Graduate Certificate in Industrial-Organizational Psychology |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for IOP 7100 Module 2
One Relationship at a Time: Leader-Member Exchange and Two Audit Managers
Student Name
Graduate Certificate in Industrial-Organizational Psychology, Thomas Edison State University
IOP-7100: The Psychology of Leadership, Motivation, and Teamwork
Mentor Name
Month Day, Year
One Relationship at a Time: Leader-Member Exchange and Two Audit Managers
Two Managers
Both managers lead audit teams of seven associates and seniors on similar clients. Over three years, one manager's team lost two people; the other's lost nine. Partner reviews of the first team's workpapers find fewer significant comments. Associates describe the first manager as someone who "explains why" and "gives you a chance to do the hard section." They describe the second as fair to his favorites, with everyone else "doing tickmarks."
Leader-Member Exchange
Under leader-member exchange theory, a leader forms a separate relationship with each follower, ranging from high-quality exchanges built on trust, support and mutual obligation to lower-quality exchanges limited to the formal requirements of the job. Graen and Uhl-Bien (1995) traced how the idea grew over a quarter century from describing in-groups and out-groups to prescribing that leaders offer every follower the chance at a strong partnership. Dulebohn et al. (2012) pooled studies of what builds these bonds and what follows from them, finding that stronger bonds went with better work, more satisfaction and commitment, a stronger sense of fair treatment and less intention to leave. They also found that leader behaviors, such as contingent reward and transformational behavior, and follower characteristics both contributed to relationship quality.
The second manager's team shows what happens when a few associates enjoy high-quality exchanges and the rest do not. The favored associates get the interesting sections and the coaching that comes with them; the others receive routine work and little contact, and they leave. The first manager appears to build working relationships with everyone, through weekly check-ins and by rotating the challenging sections of each audit.
Leader Behaviors
Robbins and Judge (2014) describe leadership research moving from traits to behaviors, situations and relationships, and they note that behaviors such as consideration, which means caring about and valuing followers, and initiating structure, which means setting out roles and goals, both relate to follower satisfaction and performance. The first manager shows both: she sets clear expectations for each audit area and checks in on how people are doing. The second structures work well but shows consideration only to some.
Developing Managers
| Practice | What it builds | How the firm will support it |
|---|---|---|
| Weekly 15-minute one-to-one with each team member | Relationship quality with everyone | Calendar time protected during busy season |
| Rotating challenging audit areas | Fair access to growth | Engagement plan shows who leads which area |
| Explaining assignments and decisions | Fairness perceptions | Short script in manager training |
| Upward feedback twice a year | Awareness of uneven relationships | Anonymous survey of each manager's team |
Measuring Progress
Upward feedback scores and turnover by team will show whether the practices take hold. If scores on the item "my manager knows my development goals" rise across teams and turnover falls on the second manager's team, the program is working. If not, the firm should ask whether managers have the time the one-to-ones require during busy season.
Conclusion
The difference between the two teams lies less in the managers' talent than in how each builds relationships with the people they lead. Leader-member exchange research shows why that matters for performance and turnover, and practices such as regular one-to-ones and fair rotation of challenging work give every associate access to a strong relationship with their manager.
References
Dulebohn, J. H., Bommer, W. H., Liden, R. C., Brouer, R. L., & Ferris, G. R. (2012). A meta-analysis of antecedents and consequences of leader-member exchange: Integrating the past with an eye toward the future. Journal of Management, 38(6), 1715-1759. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311415280
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219-247. https://doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(95)90036-5
Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2014). Organizational behavior (16th ed.). Pearson.
IOP 7100 Module 2 instructions, in plain terms
Leadership is the second IOP-7100 module, and this page shows its written assignment, one of five worth 35 percent together. You will use research on leadership, traits, behaviors, situations, relationships or newer approaches, to explain a leadership situation in a real organization and recommend how leaders should act or be developed. Robbins and Judge's chapters on leadership are the base, and meta-analyses provide the evidence. Compare leaders where you can, since contrasts show what matters, and propose practices specific enough to be adopted. Use real observations of what leaders do, such as how often they meet with each person, as evidence. A table of practices with their purpose and support makes the plan easy to follow.
How this IOP 7100 Module 2 example is built
The paper compares two audit managers with similar teams and very different results in turnover and review quality, using associates' own descriptions. Leader-member exchange theory, supported by Dulebohn and colleagues' meta-analysis, explains how one manager's uneven relationships produce a favored few and a departing majority. Robbins and Judge's account of consideration and structure adds the behaviors behind the difference. Associates' own words are used throughout as evidence of how each relationship feels. A four-row table sets out development practices, and the conclusion credits relationships over personality. The development practices are chosen so that every associate, not only a favored few, has a strong working relationship with a manager. Upward feedback and turnover by team are named as the measures of progress.
IOP 7100 Module 2 rubric: what earns full marks
Marks reward leadership studies used correctly, a real situation explained clearly, practices a firm could adopt and APA form. Papers that use a specific theory to explain a contrast in outcomes show more than papers that list leadership styles. Reporting meta-analytic findings accurately shows care with evidence. Recommendations that translate research into routines, such as one-to-ones or rotation of work, show applied judgment. Recognizing that relationships can be uneven within a team shows understanding of the theory's main insight. Mentors also look for development plans with a way to check progress, such as upward feedback scores over time. Explaining why relationship quality varies within one team shows the theory's core insight.
IOP 7100 Module 2 help: mistakes that cost marks
Students lose points by describing a favorite leader in glowing terms, by listing leadership styles without applying one or by recommending generic leadership training. Compare two leaders or two periods, explain the difference with a research stream, cite what studies found and propose specific practices with support from the organization. A free first draft of your IOP-7100 Module 2 assignment can be written on the leaders in your workplace. Avoid describing leaders as simply good or bad; explain what they do differently and why research says it matters. Use pseudonyms when you compare real managers, and keep the comparison about behavior.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Thomas Edison State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More IOP 7100 and Graduate Certificate in Industrial-Organizational Psychology sample papers
- IOP 7100 Module 1: Written Assignment: What Motivates Associates Through Tax Season?
- IOP 7100 Module 3: Written Assignment: Turning a Tax Engagement Group Into a Team
- IOP 7100 Module 4: Written Assignment: Moods, Engagement and Performance in an Accounting Firm
- IOP 7100 Module 5: Final Paper: An Evidence-Based Intervention for Busy-Season Stress at an Accounting Firm
- IOP 6200 Module 2: Written Assignment: A Needs Assessment and Design for Deli Clerk Training
- IOP 6100 Module 8: Final Paper: An Integrated Plan to Select, Appraise and Keep Bus Operators
IOP 7100 Module 2 questions, answered
Where can I find a free IOP 7100 Module 2 sample paper?
The paper above compares two audit managers at an accounting firm through leader-member exchange research.
What is leader-member exchange?
The view that a manager's bond with each team member differs in depth, from close partnership to the bare job contract, and that these bonds shape how people do.
What did the LMX meta-analysis find?
In Dulebohn and colleagues' pooled data, stronger leader-follower bonds went with better performance, satisfaction and commitment and lower turnover intentions.
What are consideration and initiating structure?
Two classic leader behaviors: caring about followers as people, and laying out who does what toward which goals.
What textbook does IOP-7100 use?
Robbins and Judge's Organizational Behavior, sixteenth edition.