Key findings Tools for encouraging collaboration • Employees most frequently use video conferences, chat, and cloud documents for collaboration. • Clear rules of collaboration are more important than the choice of provider. Techniques for encouraging social collaboration • Larger virtual team events online are ine.ective, virtual interactions lack spontaneity. • Employees desire in-person socializing. • O.ce hours are an e.ective way for exchanging knowledge and best practices. • Occasional informal team meetings facilitate easier connection among employees. Techniques for encouraging creative collaboration • Companies do not o.er programs that encourage virtual collaboration. • Companies should dedicate time to creative exchanges and approach them intentionally. • Creativity requires di.erently set goals; the company culture should allow for risk and failure. Key findings Independent routine work • Distributed work positively a.ects the e.ciency of independent work. • Fewer distractions and noise increase employees’ concentration. • Work e.ciency depends on the individual’s personal circumstances. Routine collaboration • Participants notice a general decline in collaboration. • Distributed work enables e.cient collaboration on routine tasks, but only when tasks are uncomplicated. • Collaboration on complex tasks remotely requires more time and planning. • There is a decrease in spontaneous interactions, with an increase in the number of formal interactions. Routine tasks • Distributed work increases the amount of routine administrative tasks and reporting. • Distributed work increases the number of meetings and negatively impacts their productivity. • Computer-based meetings allow multitasking and are less e.ective. • Including and educating new employees is more di.cult and takes longer in a virtual environment. • Building a work network, seeking help, exchanging knowledge, processes, and responses in a virtual environment takes longer. Creative collaboration • Creative interactions are less frequent and more di.cult in a virtual environment. • Overload and lack of personal interactions lead to decreased creativity. Creative tasks • Due to a lack of spontaneity, brainstorming in a virtual environment is di.cult. Social collaboration • Distributed work reduces the frequency of social-collaborative interactions. • Employees find it more challenging to form perceptions of their colleagues, leading to more conflicts. • In a virtual environment, opportunities for networking and informal connections are reduced. Social tasks • Virtual networking must be planned and intentional. • Lack of spontaneity demotivates employees. • Employees rely on networks built in o.ces. Person Company Gender Age Position Date of Interview Duration (minutes) 1 Microsoft F 30 Key Account Manager 28. 6. 2021 31 2 Salesforce F 29 New Customer Sales 18. 6. 2021 29 3 Facebook M 31 Key Account Manager 29. 7. 2021 26 4 Google F 27 Partner Manager 30. 7. 2021 30 5 Google F 26 Key Account Manager 4. 8. 2021 20 6 Microsoft M 33 Sales Specialist 1. 7. 2021 34 7 Google F 32 Customer Segment Manager 28. 7. 2021 28 8 Google M 41 Sales Team Leader 4. 8. 2021 32 9 Facebook F 47 Sales Team Leader 7. 7. 2021 30 10 Salesforce F 31 Marketing 29. 7. 2021 27 Synchronicity of communication Asynchronous communication Synchronous communication Duration of interaction Richness of the communication medium Message: short-term Written communication: long-lasting Written communication Multimedia communication Communication patterns” and “intensity of collaboration 1:1, intensive collaboration Email Documents Chat (messaging) Screen sharing Group collaboration Blogs, groups Shared web pages, databases, and instructions (wiki) Group chat (messaging), social networks Video conference Mass informing Websites, portals O.cial databases, reports, and instructions Microblog, social networks Video streaming content DISAGRREMENT_SUM AGREEMENT_SUM WEAKNESS_SUM ADVICE_WORK ADVICE_PERSONAL SYMPATHY_SUM IRONY_SUM RUDENESS_SUM HELP_WORK_SUM HELP_WORK_OTHERS_SUM FRIENDLY_U_SUM FRIENDLY_OTHERS_SUM ATTRACTIVE_TO_U_SUM DISAGRREMENT_SUM 1,000 0,348 -0,400 0,561 1,000 0,511 1,000** 0,192 ,678* 0,544 0,499 0,600 0,190 0,160 0,680 0,045 0,456 AGREEMENT_SUM 0,348 1,000 0,800 0,289 -0,400 0,359 0,500 ,642* 0,400 0,432 0,500 0,500 0,499 0,200 0,338 0,600 0,172 0,667 0,033 0,600 0,084 0,667 0,391 WEAKNESS_SUM -0,400 0,800 1,000 1,000** -1,000 0,086 -0,300 -1,000 1,000** 1,000** -0,092 0,600 0,200 0,872 0,624 0,813 ADVICE_WORK 0,561 0,289 1,000** 1,000 0,600 ,793** 0,400 0,362 1,000** ,627* 1,000** 1,000** 0,190 0,338 0,400 0,001 0,600 0,225 0,012 ADVICE_PERSONAL 1,000** -0,400 -1,000** 0,600 1,000 0,600 -0,500 -0,400 -1,000 -0,400 0,600 0,400 0,400 0,667 0,600 0,600 SYMPATHY_SUM 0,511 0,359 0,086 ,793** 0,600 1,000 0,700 0,362 0,400 ,626** 1,000** 0,588 0,160 0,172 0,872 0,001 0,400 0,188 0,247 0,600 0,002 0,219 HURT_SUM 0,300 -0,211 0,400 0,872 1,000** 0,203 0,700 0,316 -0,018 0,624 0,789 0,600 0,054 0,700 0,188 0,684 0,969 IRONY_SUM 1,000** 0,500 -0,300 0,400 -0,500 0,700 1,000 1,000 0,400 1,000 0,551 0,667 0,624 0,600 0,667 0,188 0,600 0,257 RUDENESS_SUM -1,000** 1,000** 1,000 -1,000 HELP_WORK_SUM 0,192 ,642* 1,000** 0,362 -0,400 0,362 0,400 1,000 0,400 ,708** -0,500 0,500 0,680 0,033 0,225 0,600 0,247 0,600 0,600 0,007 0,667 0,391 HELP_WORK_OTHERS_SUM 0,400 1,000** 1,000** -1,000** 0,400 1,000** 0,400 1,000 0,800 1,000 0,600 0,600 0,600 0,200 FRIENDLY_U_SUM ,678* 0,432 -0,092 ,627* -0,400 ,626** 0,551 -1,000** ,708** 0,800 1,000 -0,500 0,580 0,045 0,084 0,813 0,012 0,600 0,002 0,257 0,007 0,200 0,667 0,228 FRIENDLY_OTHERS_SUM 0,500 1,000** 1,000** -0,500 1,000** -0,500 1,000 1,000 0,667 0,667 0,667 ATTRACTIVE_TO_U_SUM 0,544 0,500 1,000** 0,588 0,500 0,580 1,000** 1,000 0,456 0,391 0,219 0,391 0,228 ATTRACTIVE_TO_OTHERS_SUM 0,211 0,866 -0,316 0,866 -0,632 1,000** 0,949 0,789 0,333 0,684 0,333 0,368 0,051 Argumentativeness Power Physical attractiveness Agreement Weakness in discussion Sympathy Attractive to you Height ,773** 0,093 1,000** 0,002 0,751 Weight ,669* -1,000** -0,101 -0,500 0,012 0,730 0,667 Live in town/village (1= town 2 = village) 0,364 -1,000** 0,387 0,000 0,222 0,172 1,000 Travel_abroad -0,025 0,866 ,598* 1,000** 0,935 0,333 0,024 # Country Number of Total Citations 1 United States 8671 2 The Netherlands 5871 3 United Kingdom 4344 4 Australia 3693 5 Canada 3137 6 China 2079 7 Germany 1647 8 Belgium 1593 9 Spain 1379 10 Norway 1145 # Country Number of Published Articles 1 United States 208 2 United Kingdom 113 3 The Netherlands 99 4 Australia 88 5 China 80 6 Germany 72 7 Canada 59 8 India 59 9 France 40 10 Norway 40 Author Total citations Number of published articles Bakker A.B. 2334 11 Demerouti E. 1332 9 Schaufeli W.B. 1072 7 Willmott H. 1043 2 Xanthopoulou D. 961 4 Bal P.M. 882 2 De Witte H. 815 7 Cabrera Á. 748 1 Collins W.C. 748 1 Salgado J.F. 748 1 Title Author(s) Source Total Citations Strength is ignorance; slavery is freedom: Managing culture in modern organizations Willmott (1993) Journal of Management Studies 974 Work engagement and financial returns: A diary study on the role of job and personal resources Xanthopoulou et al. (2009) Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 797 Determinants of individual engagement in knowledge sharing Cabrera et al. (2006) International Journal of Human Resource Management 748 Weekly work engagement and performance: A study among starting teachers Bakker & Bal (2010) Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 723 On the relations among work value orientations, psychological need satisfaction and job outcomes: A self-determination theory approach Vansteenkiste et al. (2007) Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 440 Job crafting and its relationships with person-job fit and meaningfulness: A three-wave study Tims et al. (2016) Journal of Vocational Behavior 374 Exploring nonlinearity in employee voice: The e.ects of personal control and organizational identification Tangirala & Ramanujam (2008) Academy of Management Journal 335 The employee-organization relationship, organizational citizenship behaviors, and superior service quality Bell & Menguc (2002) Journal of Retailing 315 The experience of powerlessness in organizations Ashforth (1989) Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 307 Conflict management, e.cacy, and performance in organizational teams Alper et al. (2000) Personnel Psychology 302 Interval x' Orientation f x' f 0–15 7.5 High proximity 66 495.0 16–30 22.5 Moderate proximity 99 2227.5 31–45 37.5 Moderate distance 51 1912.5 46–60 52.5 High distance 3 157.5 Total 219 4792.5 Statement Score (a) You prefer superiors who keep distant relationships with their subordinates. (b) You prefer superiors who initiate closer relationships with their subordinates. ………. ………. (10) (c) You feel awkward when superiors share personal issues with you. (d) You see conversations of a personal nature as something natural in superior-subordinate communication. ………. ………. (10) (e) You are deeply convinced that it is better for the organization if superiors and subordinates keep their relationships formal and objective. (f) You believe that close, informal relationships with superiors increase organizational e.ectiveness. ………. ………. (10) (g) In your opinion, work relationships, especially those with the superior, are an integral part of your personal and social life. (h) You prefer to distinguish your personal life and social contacts from your professional life. ………. ………. (10) (i) You stay alert when your boss asks you questions of a personal nature. (j) You are happy to share information about your personal life with your boss. ………. ………. (10) (k) You find the superiors’ interest in their subordinates’ private lives to be correct and necessary. (l) You believe that superiors’ interest in their subordinates’ private lives is inappropriate and violates human rights. ………. ………. (10) Variables Coe.cient SE 95% CI Secure -> emotional expressivity -> LMX 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.08 Preoccupation -> emotional expressivity -> LMX 0.04 0.03 0.01 0.11 Dismissive -> emotional expressivity -> LMX -0.03 0.02 -0.08 -0.01 Fearful -> emotional expressivity -> LMX -0.01 0.01 -0.03 0.01 Notes: n = 258. Standard error values are reported in parentheses. Variables Leader–member exchange Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Coe.cient p Coe.cient p Coe.cient p Coe.cient p 1. Gender -0.03(0.13) 0.83 -0.04(0.13) 0.79 -0.07(0.13) 0.57 -0.04(0.13) 0.73 2. Time with supervisor 0.01 (0.00) 0.00 0.01(0.00) 0.00 0.01 (0.00) 0.00 0.01(0.00) 0.00 3. Direct contact hours 0.02(0.02) 0.34 0.02(0.02) 0.51 0.02(0.03) 0.38 0.02(0.03) 0.53 4. Secure 0.26 (0.07) 0.00 5. Preoccupation 0.33 (0.09) 0.00 6. Dismissive -0.16(0.07) 0.02 7. Fearful 0.03(0.06) 0.63 8. Emotional expressivity 0.26(0.07) 0.00 0.33(0.09) 0.00 -0.16(0.07) 0.02 0.03(0.06) 0.63 R2 13.78% 13.40% 11.37% 10.35% Notes: n = 258. Standard error values are reported in parentheses. Variables Emotional expressivity Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Coe.cient p Coe.cient p Coe.cient p Coe.cient p 1. Gender -0.21(0.16) 0.18 -0.22(0.16) 0.16 -0.29(0.16) 0.07 -0.28(0.16) 0.08 2. Time with supervisor 0.01 (0.01) 0.15 0.01(0.00) 0.05 0.01(0.00) 0.03 -0.01(0.00) 0.04 3. Direct contact hours 0.01(0.03) 0.88 0.01(0.03) 0.87 -0.01(0.03) 0.85 -0.00(0.00) 0.98 4. Secure 0.30 (0.08) 0.00 5. Preoccupation 0.37 (0.11) 0.00 6. Dismissive -0.24(0.08) 0.00 7. Fearful 0.05(0.07) 0.40 R2 7.53% 6.97% 5.98% 3.10% Notes: n = 258. Standard error values are reported in parentheses. Variable Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 Gender 1.50 0.50 2 Length of stay with supervisor 2.79 2.64 -0.17** 3 Direct supervisor contact hours 20.03 19.11 -0.02 -0.12 4 Secure 4.56 0.97 -0.09 -0.08 0.20** 5 Preoccupation 4.55 0.71 -0.08 0.02 0.05 0.14* 6 Dismissive 3.94 0.97 -0.06 0.11 0.01 -0.07 0.01 7 Fearful avoidance 4.27 1.21 -0.15* 0.13* -0.04 -0.27** 0.35** -0.02 8 Emotional expressivity 4.68 1.29 -0.10 -0.01 0.13* 0.25** 0.22** -0.17** -0.04 9 Leader–member exchange 5.05 1.10 -0.06 0.02 0.26** 0.27** 0.23** -0.13* 0.03 0.21** 0.60** **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed). Label CSF-related statements from the questionnaire CSF-P1 BIM tools do not work as advertised by manufacturers. CSF-P2 There are too few guidelines and standards that explain the processes in BIM. CSF-P3 Privacy and security concerns of BIM models shared in the cloud. CSF-P4 There is not enough attention from management for BIM training of employees. CSF-P5 Upon first employment, graduates are not su.ciently qualified to work on BIM projects. CSF-P6 The cost of implementing BIM is very high and therefore only available to the largest organizations. CSF-K1 The dynamics of BIM and the fragmentation of the construction industry hinder the cooperation of BIM teams. CSF-K2 Members of BIM teams come from di.erent organizations, with di.erent organizational structures and hierarchies. CSF-K3 The varying level of understanding of BIM within the team hinders collaboration. CSF-K4 The di.erent level of understanding of BIM between individual project teams hinders collaboration. CSF-K5 If project team members are of di.erent nationalities and cultures, this hinders cooperation. CSF-K6 The dispersion of BIM team members across di.erent o.ces and locations hinders collaboration. CSF-K7 Individual team members in BIM projects do not share information. CSF-K8 Communication still takes place outside the BIM environment (telephone conversations, e-mails...). CSF-T1 The composition of BIM teams is mostly structured in unsuitable traditional form. CSF-T2 Teams participating in BIM projects operate in a closed manner and only care about their interests. CSF-T3 BIM project teams are reluctant to share their models with others due to restrictions related to intellectual property and ownership of the model. CSF-T4 BIM designers are reluctant to share models in the early design phase or before the final approval of models. CSF-T5 In many BIM projects, the entire BIM process is still managed by traditional project managers instead of dedicated managers/coordinators. CSF-T6 Due to the nature of a BIM project, which relies heavily on software tools and equipment, there are conflicts between project managers, IT managers, and BIM managers. CSF-S1 Requests for the introduction of BIM come from project clients. CSF-S2 The use of BIM on public projects creates a greater demand for these services in the market and thus encourages the adoption of BIM. CSF-S3 The implementation of BIM provides a competitive advantage and enables development. CSF-S4 The implementation of BIM increases the cost e.ciency of design and implementation. CSF-S5 The implementation of BIM improves the coordination of project documentation and implementation. CSF-S6 The implementation of BIM reduces project errors and construction costs. CSF-S7 The implementation of BIM improves predictability and traceability in planning. CSF-Z1 I know the BIM legislation in Slovenia well. CSF-Z2 The action plan for the introduction of digitization in the field of the built environment in the Republic of Slovenia is coordinated and considers all the key objectives of BIM introduction. CSF-Z3 The newly adopted BIM legislation is excessive and di.cult to implement in practice. CSF-Z4 BIM laws and guidelines are inadequate or not adopted. CSF-Z5 Ownership of the BIM model and copyright are legally and materially properly regulated. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal CONTENTS Volume 13, Number 1, May 2024 Editorial Jože Kropivšek....................................................................................................................................... 1 Key Success Factors of Implementation of Building Information Modeling in Slovenian Organizations Bojan Gorenc, Andrej Dobrovoljc......................................................................................................... 5 Impact of Subordinate Attachment Style on Leader–Member Exchange: The Mediating E.ect of Emotional Expressivity Rotumba Arachchige Ishanka Chathurani Karunarathne, S.S.Weligamage........................................... 19 Managing the Distance with the Superior: Toward a Resolution of a Subordinate Manager’s Dilemma Emil Nikolov Kotsev.............................................................................................................................. 37 The Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow of Employee Autonomy: A Bibliometric Review and Research Agenda Ljupcho Eftimov, Violeta Cvetkoska, Bojan Kitanovikj........................................................................... 53 Attractiveness, Power and Aggressiveness Networks: Using Manpower Employment Organization as an Illustration Maria Litsa, Aleksandra Bekiari, Koustelios Athanasios........................................................................ 71 E.ects of Shifting From In-Person to Distributed Work on Routine, Creative, and Social Collaboration Sara Rotter Šešok, Dejan Uršic, Amadeja Lamovšek, Anja Svetina Nabergoj........................................ 85 Author Guidelines................................................................................................................................ 105 Aims & Scope The Dynamic Relationships Management Journal is an international, double blind peer-reviewed bi-annual publication of academics’ and practitioners’ research analyses and perspectives on relationships management and organizational themes and topics. The focus of the journal is on management, organization, corporate governance and neighboring areas (including, but not limited to, organizational behavior, human resource management, sociology, organizational psychology, industrial economics etc.). Within these fields, the topical focus of the journal is above all on the establishment, development, main­tenance and improvement of dynamic relationships, connections, interactions, patterns of behavior, structures and networks in social entities like firms, non-profit institutions and public administration units within and beyond individual entity bound­aries. Thus, the main emphasis is on formal and informal relationships, structures and processes within and across individual, group and organizational levels. DRMJ articles test, extend, or build theory and contribute to management and organizational practice using a variety of empirical methods (e.g., quantitative, qualitative, field, laboratory, meta-analytic, and combination). Articles format should include, but are not restricted to, traditional academic research articles, case studies, literature reviews, method­ological advances, approaches to teaching, learning and management development, and interviews with prominent exec­utives and scholars. Material disclaimer Responsibility for (1) the accuracy of statements of fact, (2) the authenticity of scientific findings or observations, (3) expressions of scientific or other opinion and (4) any other material published in the journal rests solely with the author(s). The Journal, its owners, publishers, editors, reviewers and sta. take no responsibility for these matters. Information for Readers Dynamic Relationships Management Journal (ISSN 2232-5867 - printed version & ISSN 2350-367X - on-line version, available in (full text) at the DRMJ website) is published in 2 issues per year. For ordering the printed version, please contact the editor at matej.cerne@ef.uni-lj.si. Call for papers The Dynamic Relationships Management Journal (DRMJ) is inviting contributions for upcoming issues. The manuscript can be submitted per e-mail to the editor (matej.cerne@ef.uni-lj.si). Before the submission, authors should consult Author Guidelines. There is no submission or publication fee. Open Access statement This is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access. Please read »Copyright / licensing conditions« statement for addition info about legal use of published material. Copyright / licensing conditions Authors of the articles published in DRMJ hold copyright with no restrictions and grant the journal right of first publi­cation with the work. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.) Articles published in DRMJ are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0; http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). Under this license, authors retain ownership of the copyright for their content, but allow anyone to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute and/or copy the content for NonCommercial purposes as long as the original authors and source are cited. FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE SLOVENIAN ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT (2020-2024) Assis. Prof. Dr. Jože Kropivšek University of Ljubljana, Biotechnical Faculty Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 1 Dear reader, Four years ago, in Spring of 2020, the new ex­ecutive board of the Slovenian Academy of Manage­ment began to lead the Academy’s activities. The beginnings coincided exactly with the time of the first wave of the Covid-19 pandemic under special circumstances, which made our incipient activities special. The members of the Executive Committee at that time were Professor Dr Matej Cerne from the School of Economics and Business at the University of Ljubljana, Assistant Professor Dr Nina Tomaževic from the Faculty of Administration at the University of Ljubljana, Professor Dr Polona Šprajc from the Faculty of Organisational Sciences, University of Maribor, Rebeka Koncilja Žgalin from the School of Economics and Business, University of Ljubljana, and myself, Assistant Professor Dr Jože Kropivšek from the Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubl­jana, as President of the Academy. During our four-year mandate, we have contin­ued activities that had previously been successful: publishing journals, organising discussion evenings and scientific conferences, and taking care of termi­nology in the field of management and organisation. Let me briefly present the most important achieve­ments of the Academy’s individual activities during this period. In terms of journals, the Academy publishes the international academic journal “Dynamic Relation­ships Management Journal” and a more practice-orientated journal entitled “Izzivi managementu” (Management Challenges). In the Dynamic Relation­ships Management Journal (DRMJ), for which Pro­fessor Dr Matej Cerne serves as editor-in-chief, we have consistently pursued activities to raise the journal to an even higher level. In particular, we focus on research into management and organisa­tion in the context of dynamic relationships be­tween stakeholders (employees, organisations and companies). The quality of the journal is evidenced by its inclusion in the Scopus database. In recent years, we have received an increasing number of manuscripts from all over the world. We pride our­selves on our responsive editorial process (authors receive initial feedback from the editor within one day) and our e.cient editorial procedures. In addi­tion, there is a clear trend towards more and more article citations, which increases the journal’s influ­ence in the research field. However, the challenges related to the introduction of the online editorial process, including online submission, remain unre­solved. To solve this problem, we plan to link the journal’s publication with the University of Ljubljana Press in the near future. This strategic move will fur­ther enhance the journal’s reputation and visibility. The Slovenian journal “Izzivi managementu” (Management Challenges) has a new editor-in-chief, Professor Dr Zlatko Nedelko from the Faculty of Eco­nomics and Business of the University of Maribor, who took over from the former editor, Assistant Pro­fessor Dr Lidija Breznik, in 2022. The journal contin­ues to be practice-oriented and is primarily intended to help managers in their daily work, but also academics who want to learn more about the practical aspects of management and related fields. Both journals have also been recognised as being of high quality by the Slovenian Research and Innova­tion Agency (ARIS), which co-finances the publica­tion of the journals. One of the Academy’s main activities is also the organisation of scientific conferences, both interna­tional and local. The main purpose of international scientific conferences is to present the latest scien­tific findings in a particular field of management, to exchange opinions and to establish contacts be­tween participants. The purpose of the Slovenian sci­entific conferences is to connect the Slovenian professional public with researchers, i.e. to transfer knowledge into practise, which is the fundamental goal of the Academy. In 2021, we organised a scien­tific conference on “Organisational adaptation and management during the COVID-19 epidemic” in a virtual format. The conference was chaired by Assoc. Prof. Dr Melita Balas Rant. In 2022, we successfully organised an international conference entitled “In­tegrating Organisational Research: Individual, Team, Organisational, and Multilevel Perspectives”. The conference was originally planned for 2020, but was postponed due to the pandemic. It was organised by the Slovenian Academy of Management in coopera­tion with the Faculty of Economics of the University of Ljubljana and the Faculty of Economics of the Uni­versity of Zagreb and with the support of CEEMAN. The conference took place at the Faculty of Eco­nomics of the University of Ljubljana and in hybrid form via the Zoom platform. Prof. Dr Tomislav Her­naus was the chairman of the programme commit­tee, while Assoc. Prof. Dr Aleša Saša Sitar headed the organising committee. This year we are planning to organise the 7th International Scientific Conference on 20-21 June 2024 in Belgrade, in cooperation with the School of Economics and Business of the Univer­sity of Ljubljana and the Faculty of Economics and Business of the University of Belgrade. The theme of the conference is “Managing paradoxes in and across organizations”. One of the keynote speakers at the conference is Arnold Bakker, one of the most cited researchers in the field of organisational behaviour/organisational psychology. In addition, two other top researchers in the field of organisa­tional paradoxes will contribute to the conference in line with the overarching theme of the conference. Importantly, the conference will be held with the in­stitutional support and active participation of the global association, the Academy of Management, which is a great honour and recognition for the work of the Academy. Another activity of the Academy are the “Dis­cussion Evenings” organised by Assistant Professor Dr Nina Tomaževic. The purpose of these evenings is to organise more forms of social gathering focusing on formal and less formal debates and/or exchange of opinions, knowledge and experiences. In the early days of our mandate, it was a challenge to organise our meetings online due to the restrictions imposed by the pandemic. I must say that our contacts via the new media were very successful and never broke o.. The topics have always been very attractive and re­flect the current challenges. The last event, for ex­ample, was about artificial intelligence and its impact on management, which was very successful and well received by the large audience. The final, but no less important, activity of the Academy is taking care of terminology, in which our members meticulously study Slovenian technical terms related to management and organisation (e.g. corporate social responsibility, digitalisation and management in the digital age, creativity and inno­vation, and contemporary leadership theories). The group is compiling a dictionary that also includes recommended translations. This resource will help both the academic and professional community to express themselves in the Slovenian language, which is undoubtedly one of the most important tasks of the Academy. These activities are led by Assoc. Prof. Dr Judita Peterlin and Assist. Prof. Dr Dubravka Celinšek. In terms of organisation, content and finances, we are handing over the Academy to the new lead­ership in good shape. Nevertheless, challenges re­main, including increasing the (international) recognition of the Academy and active membership, especially among young people. As of this month, the Academy will be led by the following individuals: Professor Dr Metka Tekavcic from the School of Eco­nomics and Business at the University of Ljubljana, Professor Dr Nada Zupan from the School of Eco­nomics and Business at the University of Ljubljana, Assistant Professor Dr Nina Tomaževic from the Fac­ulty of Administration at the University of Ljubljana, Assistant Professor Dr Dubravka Celinšek from the Faculty of Management at the University of Pri­morska and Rebeka Koncilja Žgalin. Allow me to express my gratitude to the indi­vidual members of the Academy for their dedicated work in the realisation of all activities! With a strong desire to collaborate within the Academy and con­tribute to new content for the Dynamic Relation­ships Management Journal, I wish you many fresh scientific and professional insights. Assis. Prof. Dr. Jože Kropivšek 2 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 3 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 4 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 5 KEY SUCCESS FACTORS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING IN SLOVENIAN ORGANIZATIONS Bojan Gorenc Faculty of Organization Studies in Novo mesto Slovenia Andrej Dobrovoljc Faculty of Organization Studies in Novo mesto, Slovenia andrej.dobrovoljc@fos-unm.si The purpose of this research is to identify the main enablers and barriers to Building Information Modeling (BIM) im­plementation in Slovenia. The study involved a quantitative survey with an online questionnaire, covering a broad sample of Slovenian construction companies. The research revealed that the most significant enabler of BIM imple­mentation in Slovenia is the awareness that BIM improves project documentation coordination and construction pro­cesses. It was also found that legislative support for BIM adoption in Slovenia is not crucial. Earlier adoption of relevant legislation would be helpful but is not essential for the BIM adoption. The most important factors for BIM adoption in Slovenia are those that address the improvement of productivity and e.ciency. The study also confirmed that the high cost of BIM implementation is not an important barrier to BIM adoption in Slovenia. By using the exploratory analysis, we uncovered that the two most important enablers of BIM adoption in Slovenia are the awareness that BIM increases e.ciency and that this can be achieved by empowering people to work in a BIM environment. At the same time, we must overcome the biggest obstacle, which is the misunderstanding of the BIM concept. Keywords: building information modelling, critical success factors, BIM enablers, BIM barriers, BIM implementation 1INTRODUCTION In the age of widespread digitization and the evolution of Industry 4.0, the integration of infor­mation modeling into the construction sector is be­coming increasingly important. It is known under the acronym BIM (Building Information Modelling). BIM is not only information technology but also a work process that requires significant changes in the way of work (Abbasnejad et al., 2020). Despite the many advantages o.ered by BIM, its potential is still far from being exploited. Construction is a strategically important area of the economy. The European construction sector represents 9% of GDP (gross social product) and employs more than 18 million people. 95% of these people are employed in small and medium-sized enterprises. Compared to other sectors, it is the least digitized. Industry reports consistently highlight issues within the construction sector, including challenges in fostering collaboration and insu.cient invest­ments in technology, research, and development. The consequences are manifested in the ine.cient use of public money and greater financial risks. A 10% improvement in productivity would generate 130 billion € in savings (EUBIM Taskgroup, 2016). Governments and public sector organizations are taking proactive measures to achieve better re­sults for all stakeholders (clients, contractors, users). Working groups are being created within countries as well as at the European Union (EU) level. They promote the use of BIM by preparing strategic documents, legislation, manuals, active programs, and recommendations. The key goal is to create a uniform framework for BIM adoption in the construction sector, fostering the use of technology to unlock benefits across the supply chain (EUBIM Taskgroup, 2016). Due to the differ­ent levels of BIM implementation, cross-border project cooperation between countries is difficult. Latecomers face greater challenges in implement­ing BIM and adhering to the same standards than early adopters (Bakogiannis et al., 2020; Charef et al., 2019). According to the existing literature, it is not entirely clear what state the Slovenian construc­tion industry is in regarding the introduction of BIM. In research conducted by Charef et al., Slove­nia is classified in a group of very late adopters in the EU, with the conclusion that it does not even have a plan for the introduction of BIM at the na­tional level, according to which the use of BIM would be mandatory (Charef et al., 2019). Mean­while, another survey finds that the level of aware­ness of the importance of BIM in Slovenia is at a high level and compares it with the United King­dom, which is a leader in the field of BIM imple­mentation. Among the respondents, 75% were already BIM users, but they pointed out the need for a more active role of the government (Kiraly & Stare, 2019). The present research aims to explore the sta­tus of BIM implementation in Slovenia with a focus on identifying the primary enablers and barriers encountered by organizations in the country. Professional and scientific literature ex­tensively discusses the issue of BIM implementa­tion and identifies some common factors and best practices. However, there are no uniform an­swers as to which factors have a decisive influ­ence on the adoption of BIM in a specific country since there are differences in market size and ma­turity, regulations, technological development of the field, cultures, the number of construction companies, etc. 2LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1Building Information Modelling Construction projects encompass a wide vari­ety of contractors, professions, skills, and processes, which can result in substantial information fragmen­tation. Many of these challenges can be mitigated through e.ective digitization. In the construction sector, this kind of digital transformation can be achieved through BIM implementation, since infor­mation technology is one of the key building blocks of BIM. BIM connects several work areas and pro­cesses. It is used in the development, modeling, construction, maintenance, learning, and use of buildings. BIM can also be described as a process of creating and managing information about the object throughout its entire life cycle (Kiraly & Stare, 2019; Turk & Istenic Starcic, 2020; Wang et al., 2022). Con­sequently, it is a comprehensive database of the building (Hamil, 2022; Turk, 2016). BIM became a major industry trend around 2007. It introduced new approaches to the design and construction process, thereby enabling the cre­ation of higher added value than traditional Com­puter Aided Design (CAD) (Kiraly & Stare, 2019; Koutamanis, 2020; Zomer et al., 2020). BIM can be implemented in any construction company regard­less of its size. Companies primarily adopt BIM to stay competitive in the face of rising building com­plexity, tighter construction schedules, and cost con­straints. BIM also improves communication between project participants, which contributes to easier and higher quality decisions and fewer design errors. With an accurate model of the object, we can enable better process planning and reduce the causes of conflicts (Muńoz-La Rivera et al., 2019; Sacks et al., 2018). 2.2Enablers and barriers of BIM implementation The implementation of BIM represents a major challenge for the entire organization. Individual and team learning is required. It is necessary to change the way of work, which may face resistance from employees and can influence the cooperation with other stakeholders on projects (Hardin & McCool, 2015). This challenge is even greater if stakeholders use di.erent tools and data formats (Ahmed, 2018; Ariyachandra et al., 2022; Chan et al., 2018) or come from di.erent professional fields (Oraee et al., 2019). Even clients are not always in favor of changes, which represents an additional obstacle in BIM implemen­tation (Lindblad & Karrbom Gustavsson, 2021). In projects conducted through partnership co­operation, legal concerns may arise regarding data ownership within the model, licensing rights to in­formation, and the assignment of responsibility for errors throughout the project (Gha.arianhoseini et al., 2017; Liao & Ai Lin Teo, 2018; Ma et al., 2018). Besides, due to the high level of technological un­certainty and demanding communication, the par­ticipating companies must adapt their approaches in a coordinated manner (Mirhosseini et al., 2020). Therefore, it is of utmost importance to select the companies that will be included in the BIM imple­mentation project group (Mahamadu et al., 2020). To summarize, the success of BIM implementa­tion depends on numerous and various factors. They are categorized into enablers and barriers (Abbasne­jad et al., 2020; Amuda-Yusuf, 2018; Macloughlin & Hayes, 2019). By studying these factors, we can an­ticipate and mitigate risks as well as identify oppor­tunities arising from BIM implementation (Liao & Ai Lin Teo, 2018). The primary focus of our research is on factors that consistently appear in various re­search studies or are recognized as critical through multiple research methods. To date, the literature has described and studied over 40 such factors (Ab­basnejad et al., 2020; Antwi-Afari et al., 2018; Ozorhon & Karahan, 2017; Sinoh et al., 2020; Ugwu & Kumaraswamy, 2007). Based on a systematic review of scientific litera­ture, Abbasnejad et al. created a framework to help determine the role and importance of positive key success factors in BIM implementation. It is a com­prehensive overview of the key enablers, which are divided into seven groups: strategic initiatives, learn­ing capacity, cultural readiness, knowledge sharing, mutual relations, change management, process, and performance management (Abbasnejad et al., 2020). A similar framework, which systematically shows the key barriers to BIM implementation, separates the following five categories of factors: process barriers, contextual barriers, actor obstacles, team barriers, and obstacles arising from tasks (Oraee et al., 2019). 2.3 Research questions There are significant di.erences between coun­tries that adopt BIM as well as di.erent circum­stances at the time of BIM adoption. Consequently, the importance of some factors can vary between countries (Hochscheid & Halin, 2019). Our goal is to study what the main influencing factors on BIM adoption in Slovenia are. Slovenia is ranked among the late adopters of BIM, mainly because the use of BIM is not yet legally mandatory for public projects (Charef et al., 2019). Besides, in the survey by Kiraly et al., as many as 59% of respondents highlighted the lack of national guidelines in Slovenia (Kiraly & Stare, 2019). The question is therefore whether Slovenian legislation and guidelines provide adequate support for the in­troduction of BIM. The adoption of BIM is associated with high costs (costs refer to both infrastructure and ser­vices), which are often cited as an important factor in the literature. We are interested in how big this influence is in the case of Slovenia. In Slovenia, there are mostly small and medium-sized construc­tion companies (MGRT, 2019). Research shows that this factor is more important in smaller com­panies (Amuda-Yusuf, 2018). In our study, we will check if high costs are a barrier to BIM adoption in Slovenia. Slovenia is indeed late with legislation regard­ing the mandatory usage of BIM. However, it en­courages the use of BIM in other ways. In its guidelines and action plan for the introduction of BIM, it mainly highlights the increase in productivity and e.ciency. The question is how this a.ects the adoption of BIM (MGRT, 2019). Therefore, we set the following research ques­tions: RQ1: Does the lack of legislation in Slovenia repre­sent the barrier for BIM adoption? RQ2: Is the high cost of BIM implementation a bar­rier in Slovenia? RQ3: Which are the most important factors for BIM adoption in Slovenia? 3METHODS In the first step of the study, we sought a rele­vant collection of studied enablers and barriers of BIM implementation and reviewed the findings from these studies. Subsequently, we made an online questionnaire, which was divided into two sections: a professional section and a general section. The pro­fessional segment of the questionnaire was built upon the framework of barriers mentioned earlier, which categorizes risk factors into five groups (Oraee et al., 2019). We incorporated three of these cate­gories (procedural, contextual, and team barriers) into the questionnaire, focusing on the ones most frequently discussed in existing literature. Following our research objectives, we supple­mented the three described categories of BIM bar­riers with two extra sets of questions that addressed enablers of BIM implementation and legislation regarding BIM. We formulated the ques­tions using the research articles, the action plan (MGRT, 2019), and the BIM implementation manual (EUBIM Taskgroup, 2016). For professional questions, we used a five-point Likert scale to assess respondents’ attitudes, with the following values: 1 – Strongly disagree, 2 – Dis­agree, 3 – Neutral, 4 – Agree, and 5 - Strongly agree. If the factor is rated with a value greater than 3, it has an impact on BIM adoption. We also included a general section with socio-demographic questions to gain deeper insights. The data were collected from a sample of professionals in the architectural and engineering profession. To ensure a represen­tative sample, we gathered data from publicly avail­able sources, such as directories of architectural and engineering firms in Slovenia. Before launching the survey, we conducted a pilot study to improve ques­tion clarity. We also made some general questions multiple-choice. Table 1 provides an overview of all the critical success factors for BIM implementation used in our survey, totaling 32 factors. They follow a naming pattern: CSF-Pn The meaning of the pattern is as follows: •CSF - abbreviation for critical success factor (CSF - critical success factor) •Pn - sequential designation of the CSFs of the re­spective group – P: Process barriers, K: Contextual barriers, T: Team barriers, S: Enablers of BIM im­plementation, Z: Claims related to BIM-legislation. A higher mean value of a factor means that this factor has a greater influence on the adoption of BIM. Besides, we defined the rule that the group of most important factors consists of factors that are rated with the value 3 or more by the majority of respondents. For a factor to be among the most im­portant, its mean value minus standard deviation must be greater than 3. To identify key groups of factors and relation­ships between the observed 32 variables, we also performed an exploratory factor analysis (Varimax rotation with Kaiser normalization, 7 factors, 50 it­erations). With this analysis, we get additional in­sight into what the key factors influencing the introduction of BIM in Slovenia are. We gathered data through the online survey tool 1KA and analyzed it using the Microsoft Excel spreadsheet program. We first performed some basic statistical calculations on the collected data (average, standard deviation). For later comparison with other studies, we also calculated the BIM com­parative index and ranked these values from the largest to the smallest. According to the definition, the BIM Comparative Index BIMpi is calculated using the equation (1) (Amuda-Yusuf, 2018): (1) In the equation (1): W – represents the weight assigned to each variable by the individual respondent, with values ranging from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree). A – The highest possible score, which is 5 in our case. N – Total number of respondents. The internal consistency of the questionnaire was assessed using the Cronbach alpha coe.cient, resulting in a value of 0.69. This value indicates the acceptable questionnaire reliability. The coe.cient calculation covered all sets of questions evaluated on a five-point Likert scale, with only socio-demo­graphic questions excluded. 4RESULTS The results were obtained through voluntary participation in the survey, stating that the survey was anonymous and that the collected data would be treated confidentially and analyzed in general rather than the natural responses of the individual. A total of 108 respondents completed the sur­vey, with 82.4% being male and 17.6% female partic­ipants. The largest age group consisted of individuals aged 40 to 49 (42%), followed by the 30 to 39 age group at 24%. Other groups are smaller (Figure 1). The majority (56%) of survey participants had a 2nd Bologna level or SOK8 education, followed by a 1st Bologna level (26%) or SOK7 education (Figure 2). Almost 70% of respondents had at least 2 years of experience with BIM (Figure 3). The most respon­dents (56%) came from design companies (Figure 4). Regarding their professions, 31% of respondents worked in the field of construction, while 22% were in electrical installations, 21% in architecture, 15% in mechanical installations, and 10% in other pro­fessions (Figure 5). Notably, none of the respon­dents indicated a profession related to geodesy. Table 2 presents the results of all 32 measured factors. In addition to the label and description of the factor, data on the average value, standard de­viation, average value – standard deviation, BIM index, and rank of the factor are given. The latter is determined according to the BIM index. The results Table 3 shows the results of the exploratory fac­tor analysis. Seven groups of factors were identified. The names of the groups were determined accord­ing to the content of the factors connected to the groups. They are ordered from the most to the least important. 5DISCUSSION Our first research question was whether the lack of legislation in Slovenia represents the barrier for BIM adoption or not. The question was based on the findings of research conducted by Charef et al., where Slovenia was recognized as a late BIM adopter, and the survey of Kiraly et al., which claims that 59% of users feel the lack of national guidelines in Slovenia (Charef et al., 2019; Kiraly & Stare, 2019). In our research, two factors are directly related to this question. The first one is “The newly adopted BIM legislation is excessive and di.cult to imple­ment in practice.” (CSF-Z3) is ranked 20th (BIMpi = 0.63) and the second one, “BIM laws and guidelines are inadequate or not adopted.”, is ranked 13th (CSF-Z4, BIMpi = 0.69). None of these factors meet the cri­teria to be classified as important factors. Therefore, we conclude that the lack of legislation in Slovenia does not represent the barrier for BIM adoption. In Slovenia, the use of BIM will become manda­tory from 2024. In the United Kingdom, which is an early BIM adopter, it became mandatory in 2016. However, back in 2012, more than 70% of respon­dents believed that BIM would become mandatory and over 50% already used it in the UK. In 2018 in Slovenia, there were 45% of such respondents and more than 70% of BIM users (Kiraly & Stare, 2019). We cannot claim that the awareness of future mandatory usage of BIM will accelerate its adop­tion, but this is very likely the case. If the use of BIM is not yet mandatory, it does not mean that the country is a late adopter of BIM. In addition, users apparently do not perceive the lack of legislation as a key barrier, as many have successfully imple­mented BIM without the legislation making it mandatory. Similarly, some studies conducted in de­veloping countries prove that legislation and gov­ernment schemes are among the less important factors for BIM adoption. In Nigeria, a similar factor was ranked 16th among 28 factors with a slightly higher index (BIMpi = 0.82) (Darwish et al., 2020; Ozorhon & Karahan, 2017). The second research question is about the costs of BIM implementation. According to the conclu­sions of other research, this can be a barrier for small and middle-sized companies (Amuda-Yusuf, 2018). The fact is that in Slovenia there are mainly smaller companies. The assertion in our question­naire that measures the impact of high costs on BIM implementation in Slovenia is CSF-P6: “The cost of implementing BIM is very high and therefore only available to the largest organizations.”. It is ranked 17th with the BIMpi value 0.64. According to our cri­teria, it is also not classified among important fac­tors. We conclude that the high cost of BIM implementation is not an important factor (barrier) for BIM adoption in Slovenia. In a similar study in Nigeria, the factor with the same meaning was ranked 2nd with the BIMpi value 0.91. One of the reasons for the big di.erence may be that Slovenia belongs to more developed countries and has greater purchasing power than Nigeria. With the third research question, we want to check which are the most important factors for BIM adoption in Slovenia. In its key documents, Slovenia highlights the advantages of the implementation, namely e.ciency and productivity (MGRT, 2019). In the survey questionnaire, we had several items with which we checked factors related to productivity and e.ciency (CSF-S3, CSF-S4, CSF-S5, CSF-S6, and CSF-S7). From the results in Table 2, we can con­clude that as many as four out of five factors are at the top of the list, with ranks from 1 to 4. Only one is ranked lower, namely in 9th place. Factors with ranks from 1 to 4 meet the importance criterion and belong to the group of important factors. We con­clude that the most important enablers for BIM adoption in Slovenia are those that address the im­provement of productivity and e.ciency. In its guidelines and action plan, Slovenia highlights the right things and thus influences the adoption of BIM in the right way. However, the situation would be better if Slovenia had been faster in adopting legis­lation and would not be exposed in the EU as a late adopter of BIM. According to the respondents, the most impor­tant enabler for BIM adoption in Slovenia (rank 1) is the fact that the implementation of BIM improves the coordination of project documentation and im­plementation (BIMpi = 0.81). In a 2018 survey in Slovenia, a significant 91% of respondents agreed with the statement that BIM enhances the coordi­nation of project documentation (Kiraly & Stare, 2019). A bit di.erent, in Nigeria, the most important factor was obtaining a standard platform for inte­gration and communication (BIMpi = 0.92). However, a similar factor, which addresses the coordination of project documentation and implementation, is also ranked as high as 4th (BIMpi = 0.88). Let’s take a look at the remaining 3 factors from the group of important factors. “The use of BIM on public projects encourages the adoption of BIM” is ranked 6th. This is additional evidence that faster adoption of legis­lation would be beneficial for Slovenia. The other two factors are barriers to BIM adoption. The assertion “members of BIM teams come from di.erent organiza­tions, with di.erent organizational structures and hier­archies” is ranked 5th, and “communication still takes place outside the BIM environment (telephone conver­sations, e-mail ...)” is ranked 7th. It is also important to know the factors that do not have a particular impact on the adoption of BIM. In the case of Slovenia, it does not represent a barrier to BIM adoption if team members are of dif­ferent nationalities or cultures or if the team is dis­persed across di.erent o.ces and locations. With the help of exploratory factor analysis, we also checked the connections or correlations be­tween the factors. Table 3 lists seven groups of factors ordered from more to less important. In the first group are all factors with a negative impact on BIM adoption (barriers). Based on the meaning and con­tent of these factors, we named the group “Misun­derstanding of the BIM concept”. The large di.erences in the perception of the BIM concept have already been confirmed by research (Kiraly & Stare, 2019). Many people think that the essence of BIM is the software. In the second group are mainly positive factors (enablers). According to their mean­ing, we named this factor group “E.ciency”. The analysis of individual factors has already shown how important e.ciency is as a factor. The next group is named “Trust” and consists of just a few factors con­nected to legislation and cultural di.erences. The last big factor group is named “Empowerment”. It com­bines factors related to cooperation, management, knowledge, and communication. The defined factors encompass all those concepts that are necessary for the BIM process to be properly established. The re­maining less important factor groups that influence BIM adoption in Slovenia are “Demand”, “Qualifica­tions”, and “Technology and Standards”. A frequency analysis of critical success factors in the literature spanning from 2005 to 2015 high­lights the absence of a consistent set of critical suc­cess factors that could serve as a comprehensive guide for scholars and professionals in BIM imple­mentation (Antwi-Afari et al., 2018). In previous studies, the most frequently recognized critical suc­cess factor for BIM adoption was the active involve­ment of stakeholders in design, construction, engineering, and facility management. This was fol­lowed by “Early and precise 3D planning visualiza­tion”. The third most common factor was “Improved information sharing and knowledge management”. Other most frequently exposed factors talk about the coordination between all project participants, the training and development of sta., and the level of awareness of BIM importance (Darwish et al., 2020; Ozorhon & Karahan, 2017; Sinoh et al., 2020). These factors relate to our “Empowerment” factor group, which means that Slovenia is not di.erent in this regard. Based on this analysis, we conclude that the two most important enablers of BIM adoption in Slovenia are the awareness that BIM increases ef­ficiency and that this can be achieved by empower­ing people to work in a BIM environment. At the same time, we must overcome the biggest obstacle, which is the misunderstanding of the BIM concept. Earlier adoption of relevant legislation would be helpful but is not essential for BIM adoption. 6CONCLUSION Slovenia is considered a late adopter in the im­plementation of BIM because BIM is still not mandatory for public projects. In any case, Slovenia carries out many activities that accelerate BIM adoption. Past research also confirms that BIM is already being introduced in Slovenia. In the study, we asked ourselves what the current situation is in this area and what the key success factors for BIM adoption are. We conclude that legislative support for BIM adoption in Slovenia is not crucial. If the use of BIM is not yet mandatory, it does not mean that the country is a late adopter of BIM. Earlier adoption of relevant legislation would be helpful but is not es­sential for BIM adoption. The most important factors for BIM adoption in Slovenia are those that address the improvement of productivity and e.ciency. Therefore, we can argue that Slovenia highlights the right things in its guidelines and action plan, and thus influences the adoption of BIM in the right way. The single most important factor for BIM adoption in Slovenia is the fact that the implementation of BIM improves the coordination of project documentation and imple­mentation. REFERENCES: Abbasnejad, B., Nepal, M. P., Ahankoob, A., Nasirian, A., & Drogemuller, R. (2020). Building Information Mod­elling (BIM) adoption and implementation enablers in AEC firms: a systematic literature review. Architec­tural Engineering and Design Management, 1–23. Ahmed, A. (2018). Evaluating learning management mech­anisms and requirements for achieving BIM competen­cies: an in-depth study of ACE practitioners. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324705747 Amuda-Yusuf, G. (2018). Critical Success Factors for Build­ing Information Modelling Implementation. Construc­tion Economics and Building, 18(3), 55–73. Antwi-Afari, M. F., Li, H., Pärn, E. A., & Edwards, D. J. (2018). Critical success factors for implementing building information modeling (BIM): A longitudinal review. Automation in Construction, 91, 100–110. Ariyachandra, M. R. M. F., Jayasena, H. S., & Perera, B. A. K. S. (2022). Competencies Expected from an Infor­mation Manager Working in BIM Based Projects. In­ternational Journal of Construction Education and Research, 18(1), 49–66. Bakogiannis, E., Papadaki, K., Kyriakidis, C., & Potsiou, C. (2020). How to adopt BIM in the building construc­tion sector across greece? Applied Sciences (Switzer­land), 10(4). Chan, A. P. C., Ma, X., Yi, W., Zhou, X., & Xiong, F. (2018). Critical review of studies on building information modeling (BIM) in project management. Frontiers of Engineering Management, 5(3), 394–406. Charef, R., Emmitt, S., Alaka, H., & Fouchal, F. (2019). Building Information Modelling adoption in the Euro­pean Union: An overview. Journal of Building Engi­neering, 25. The study also confirmed that the high cost of BIM implementation is not an important barrier to BIM adoption in Slovenia. By using the exploratory factor analysis, we uncovered that the two most im­portant enablers of BIM adoption in Slovenia are the awareness that BIM increases e.ciency and that this can be achieved by empowering people to work in a BIM environment. At the same time, we must overcome the biggest obstacle, which is the misun­derstanding of the BIM concept. Darwish, A. M., Tantawy, M. M., & Elbeltagi, E. (2020). Critical Success Factors for BIM Implementation in Construction Projects. Saudi Journal of Civil Engineer­ing, 4(9), 180–191. EUBIM Taskgroup. (2016). Prirocnik za uvedbo informa­cijskega modeliranja gradenj v evropskem javnem sektorju, Strateški ukrepi za ucinkovitost gradbenega sektorja: spodbujanje vrednosti, inovacij in rasti. http://www.eubim.eu/wp-content/uploads/ ­2018/07/ GROW-2017-01356-00-00-SL-TRA-00.pdf Gha.arianhoseini, A., Tookey, J., Gha.arianhoseini, A., Naismith, N., Azhar, S., Efimova, O., & Raahemifar, K. (2017). Building Information Modelling (BIM) uptake: Clear benefits, understanding its implementation, risks and challenges. Renewable and Sustainable En­ergy Reviews, 75, 1046–1053. Hamil, S. (2022, October 25). BIM dimensions – 3D, 4D, 5D, 6D BIM explained. https://www.thenbs.com/knowl­edge/bim-dimensions-3d-4d-5d-6d-bim-explained Hardin, B., & McCool, D. (2015). BIM and Construction Management: Proven Tools, Methods, and Work­flows, 2nd Edition. Hochscheid, E., & Halin, G. (2019). Micro BIM Adoption in Design Firms: Guidelines for Doing a BIM Implementation Plan. 864–871. https://doi.org/10.3311/ccc2019-119 Kiraly, S., & Stare, A. (2019). Analysis of Application of Building Information Modeling (BIM) in Slovenia. Pro­jektna Mreža Slovenije, V(1). Koutamanis, A. (2020). Dimensionality in BIM: Why BIM cannot have more than four dimensions? Automation in Construction, 114. Liao, L., & Ai Lin Teo, E. (2018). Organizational Change Perspective on People Management in BIM Imple­mentation in Building Projects. Journal of Manage­ment in Engineering, 34(3). Lindblad, H., & Karrbom Gustavsson, T. (2021). Public clients ability to drive industry change: the case of im­plementing BIM. Construction Management and Eco­nomics, 39(1), 21–35. Ma, X., Xiong, F., Olawumi, T. O., Dong, N., & Chan, A. P. C. (2018). Conceptual Framework and Roadmap Approach for Integrating BIM into Lifecycle Project Management. Journal of Management in Engineering, 34(6). Macloughlin, S., & Hayes, E. (2019). Overcoming Resistance To BIM: Aligning A Change Management Method with A BIM Implementation Strategy Method with A BIM Implemen­tation Strategy. https://arrow.tudublin.ie/schmuldistcap/4 Mahamadu, A. M., Manu, P., Mahdjoubi, L., Booth, C., Aig­bavboa, C., & Abanda, F. H. (2020). The importance of BIM capability assessment: An evaluation of post-se­lection performance of organisations on construction projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27(1), 24–48. MGRT. (2019). Akcijski nacrt uvedbe digitalizacije na po­drocju grajenega okolja v Republiki Sloveniji, REPUB­LIKA SLOVENIJA MINISTRSTVO ZA GOSPODARSKI RAZVOJ IN TEHNOLOGIJO. http://arhiv.izs.si/filead­min/dokumenti/aktualno/aktualno-leto-2019/Akci­jski_nacrt-MGRT-digitalizacija-22-11-19.pdf Mirhosseini, S. A., Mavi, R. K., Mavi, N. K., Abbasnejad, B., & Rayani, F. (2020). Interrelations among leadership competencies of BIM leaders: A fuzzy DEMATEL-ANP approach. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(18), 1–30. Muńoz-La Rivera, F., Vielma, J. C., Herrera, R. F., & Car­vallo, J. (2019). Methodology for Building Information Modeling (BIM) Implementation in Structural Engi­neering Companies (SECs). Advances in Civil Engineer­ing, 2019, 1–15. Oraee, M., Hosseini, M. R., Edwards, D. J., Li, H., Pa­padonikolaki, E., & Cao, D. (2019). Collaboration bar­riers in BIM-based construction networks: A conceptual model. International Journal of Project Management, 37(6), 839–854. Ozorhon, B., & Karahan, U. (2017). Critical Success Factors of Building Information Modeling Implementation. Journal of Management in Engineering, 33(3). Sacks, R., Eastman, C., Lee, G., & Teicholz, P. (2018). BIM Handbook. Wiley. Sinoh, S. S., Othman, F., & Ibrahim, Z. (2020). Critical suc­cess factors for BIM implementation: a Malaysian case study. Engineering, Construction and Architec­tural Management, 27(9), 2737–2765. Turk, Ž. (2016). Ten questions concerning building infor­mation modelling. Building and Environment, 107, 274–284. Turk, Ž., & Istenic Starcic, A. (2020). Toward deep impacts of BIM on education. Frontiers of Engineering Man­agement, 7(1), 81–88. Ugwu, O., & Kumaraswamy, M. M. (2007). Critical success factors for construction ICT projects - Some empirical evidence and lessons for emerging economies. Jour­nal of Information Technology in Construction, 12, 231–249. Wang, Y., Zhu, J., & Wei, B. (2022). Domestic and Inter­national Mainstream BIM Software Application and Comparison Study. Journal of Physics: Conference Se­ries, 2185(1), 1–8. Zomer, T., Neely, A., Sacks, R., & Parlikad, A. (2020). Ex­ploring the influence of socio-historical constructs on BIM implementation: an activity theory perspective. Construction Management and Economics, 1–20. show that among the 32 measured factors, 7 factors are classified as important factors by our definition (ranks 1 to 7 where Mean – StdDev > 3). For easier comparison of results, in Figure 6, we depicted the measured BIM indexes of all factors. Abstract Vol. 13, No. 1, 5-18 doi:10.17708/DRMJ.2024.v13n01a01 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 6 Bojan Gorenc, Andrej Dobrovoljc: Key Success Factors of Implementation of Building Information Modeling in Slovenian Organizations Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 7 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 8 Bojan Gorenc, Andrej Dobrovoljc: Key Success Factors of Implementation of Building Information Modeling in Slovenian Organizations Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 9 Table 1: Overview of critical success factors analyzed in our study Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 10 Bojan Gorenc, Andrej Dobrovoljc: Key Success Factors of Implementation of Building Information Modeling in Slovenian Organizations Figure 1: The share of respondents by age group Figure 2: The share of respondents by level of education Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 11 Figure 3: The share of respondents by duration of BIM usage Figure 4: The share of respondents by type of company Figure 5: The share of respondents by profession Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 12 Bojan Gorenc, Andrej Dobrovoljc: Key Success Factors of Implementation of Building Information Modeling in Slovenian Organizations Table 2: Results and basic statistics of all observed factors Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 13 Figure 6: Results of all critical success factors (BIM index) Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 14 Bojan Gorenc, Andrej Dobrovoljc: Key Success Factors of Implementation of Building Information Modeling in Slovenian Organizations Table 3: Results of an exploratory factor analysis Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 15 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 Bojan Gorenc, Andrej Dobrovoljc: Key Success Factors of Implementation of Building Information Modeling in Slovenian Organizations 16 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 17 EXTENDED SUMMARY/IZVLECEK Namen te raziskave je identificirati glavne spodbujevalce in ovire za informacijsko modeliranje objektov (Building information modeling; BIM) v Sloveniji. Študija je vkljucevala kvantitativno anketo s spletnim vprašalnikom, ki je zajemala širok vzorec slovenskih gradbenih podjetij. Raziskava je razkrila, da je najpomembnejši spodbujevalec implementacije BIM v Sloveniji zavedanje, da BIM izboljšuje ko­ordinacijo projektne dokumentacije in gradbene procese. Ugotovljeno je bilo tudi, da zakonodajna podpora za sprejetje BIM v Sloveniji ni kljucna. Zgodnje sprejetje ustrezne zakonodaje bi bilo koristno, vendar ni nujno za sprejetje BIM. Najpomembnejši dejavniki za sprejetje BIM v Sloveniji so tisti, ki naslavljajo izboljšanje produktivnosti in ucinkovitosti. Študija je potrdila tudi, da visoki stroški imple­mentacije BIM niso pomembna ovira za sprejetje BIM v Sloveniji. Z uporabo eksploratorne analize smo odkrili, da sta dva najpomembnejša spodbujevalca za sprejetje BIM v Sloveniji zavedanje, da BIM povecuje ucinkovitost, in to, da se to lahko doseže z opolnomocenjem ljudi za delo v okolju BIM. Hkrati moramo premagati najvecjo oviro, ki je nerazumevanje koncepta BIM. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 18 Bojan Gorenc, Andrej Dobrovoljc: Key Success Factors of Implementation of Building Information Modeling in Slovenian Organizations IMPACT OF SUBORDINATE ATTACHMENT STYLE ON LEADER–MEMBER EXCHANGE: THE MEDIATING EFFECT OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSIVITY Rotumba Arachchige Ishanka Chathurani Karunarathne Department of Human Resource Management, Faculty of Commerce and Management Studies, University of Kelaniya, Dalugama, 16000, Sri Lanka ishankac@kln.ac.lk S.S.Weligamage Department of Finance, Faculty of Commerce and Management Studies, University of Kelaniya, Delugama, 11600, Sri Lanka susima@kln.ac.lk Although individuals possess di.erent behaviors, they have coherent and stable patterns of emotion and behavior in close relationships, which can significantly impact their relationships. We extend the theoretical understanding of leader–member exchange (LMX) relationships by o.ering new insights into why leaders develop di.erent types of re­lationships with their subordinates. Specifically, we propose how subordinates’ attachment styles influence LMX rela­tionships through emotional expressivity. This study is based upon positivism research philosophy, and we followed the deductive research approach. Moreover, we used the survey method as the research strategy. Results from sur­veying 258 employees revealed that secure and preoccupied attachments are positively related and dismissive attach­ments are negatively related to emotional expressivity. Furthermore, the results of our study indicate a strong positive association between emotional expressivity and the LMX relationship. In addition, except for the fearful attachment, the mediation analysis results showed that emotional expressivity mediates the association between attachment style and LMX. Furthermore, our results show that individuals with secure and preoccupation attachment styles develop strong positive LMX relationships (in-group relationships), and dismissive individuals are poor in relationship building. Contributions to the literature on LMX and attachment theory are discussed. Keywords: Dismissive, Emotional expressivity, Fearful, Leader–member exchange, Preoccupation, Secure 1INTRODUCTION Dyadic relationships between leaders and sub­ordinates have been described as the foundation of individual, group, and organizational success (Bauer & Green, 1996; Gerstner & Day, 1997; Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; Liden et al., 1997; Tremblay et al., 2022; Richards, & Schat, 2011; Yukl et al., 2009). Research on the leader–member exchange (LMX) relationship has burgeoned since the inception of the LMX the­ory by Graen and Cashman (1975). Given the impor­tance of LMX for organizational success, research has focused primarily on identifying the conse­quences of LMX; Martin et al. (2016) provided a re­view). For example, the extant research has showed that high-quality leader–member exchange rela­tionships are significantly related to job satisfaction (e.g., Epitropaki & Martin, 2005; Graen et al., 1982; Major et al., 1995; Volmer et al., 2011; Zhang et al., 2012), productivity (e.g., Gerstner & Day, 1997; Graen et al., 1982), satisfaction with supervisors (e.g., Duchon et al., 1986), organizational commit­ment and organizational citizenship behavior (e.g., Brown et al., 2019; Richards, & Schat, 2011; Trem­blay et al., 2022; Zhang et al., 2012), and employee turnover (e.g., Graen et al., 1982; Vecchio, 1985). LMX theory explains that leaders treat their subordinates di.erently (Buengeler et al., 2021; Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995), and di.erent patterns of relationships develop between leaders and their subordinates (Liden et al., 1997; Hinojosa et al.,2014; Cerne et al., 2018). Moreover, the theory explains that the quality of relationships is di.erent from one subordinate to another (Dienesch & Liden, 1986; Yukl et al., 2009). Leaders develop high-qual­ity (close) exchange relationships with some subor­dinates, but develop lower-quality (distant) exchange relationships with other subordinates (Graen & Cashman, 1975; Liden & Maslyn, 1998), and these relationships are characterized by factors such as trust, loyalty, liking, and respect (Buengeler et al., 2021). Moreover, Liden and Graen (1980) showed that leaders form the same type of relation­ships with their subordinates only about 1-% of the time, and 90% of LMX relationships are di.erent. Al­though the theory suggests that both leader and subordinate characteristics are intimately linked to interpersonal and group behavior (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; Truckenbrodt, 2000), most prior re­search (e.g., Bauer & Green, 1996; Dienesch & Leden, 1986; Tran et al., 2020; Wijaya, 2019; Zhang et al., 2012) widely examined the e.ect of leader’s characteristics, such as leadership style, gender, and personality on interpersonal relationships, and sig­nificantly ignored the subordinate’s perspective in the process (Cerne et al., 2018). In contrast, there is much evidence that attach­ment style is one of the dispositional features of re­lational orientation and interpersonal behavior (Kirrane et al., 2019). Attachment styles refer to “rel­ative coherent and stable patterns of emotion and behavior that are exhibited in close relationships” (Shaver et al., 1996, p. 25). Attachment styles are re­lationship-based attributes that influence an indi­vidual’s willingness to build emotional bonds and disposition toward others (Richards & Hackett, 2012; Kirrane et al., 2019). Scholars (e.g., Ainsworth et al., 1978; Bowlby, 1982) have illustrated that at­tachment styles range from secure to insecure; thus, individuals are di.erent in coping with stress, devel­oping interpersonal relationships, and prosocial val­ues (Shaver et at.,2008). For example, individuals with a secure attachment style are more likely to be­lieve in positive intentions of close others, whereas individuals with insecure attachment styles gener­ally have a negative view of others (Russell et al., 2013). Thus, leaders may develop di.erent types of LMX due to the di.erent forms of attachment styles of their subordinates. Family researchers (e.g., Guerrero et al., 2009; Karney & Bradbury, 1995) have emphasized that people with di.erent attachment styles should vary in expressing emotions and building relationships. Defined as “the extent to which a person outwardly displays emotions regardless of valence or channel” (Burgin et al., 2012, p. 1), emotional expressivity has been identified as an integral part of human re­lationships (Dobbs et al., 2007). Prior research also has shown that securely attached individuals are more expressive than insecurely attached people (e.g., Feeney, 1995; Guerrero et al., 2009). How­ever, it is not clear how personal disposition influ­ences interpersonal interaction; most extant research is leader-centric (Cerne et al., 2018); thus, there is unsolved ambiguity about how subordinate attachment styles influence the quality of LMX re­lationships. Moreover, in the literature, less atten­tion has been given to the role of emotional expressivity in the relationship between attach­ment style and LMX. This led us to examine the ef­fect of subordinate attachment style on LMX through emotional expressivity. This study contributes to the literature in three ways. First, we contribute to attachment theory by examining the e.ect of subordinate attachment style on the LMX relationship. Attachment theory has been shown to be highly relevant in explaining parent–child attachment. Although prior research has shown the analogy between leaders, in partic­ular, transactional leadership and parents (Popper & Mayseless, 2003), leader–subordinate attach­ment might vary from parent–child attachment in many ways, such as proximity and the relationship development process. Hence, the study shifts the predominant perspective of attachment theory, i.e., parent–child relationships, to leader–subordinate relationships to navigate how do subordinate at­tachment style influences the quality of LMX. Furthermore, most extant research is based on two attachment styles; however, in this study we used a four-dimensional approach to better capture the subordinate attachment style [four-attachment-style model developed by Bartholomew (1990), mainly developed to explain adults’ attachment]. Thus, based on attachment theory, this study will help understand why leaders develop di.erent types of relationships with their subordinates. Second, we contribute to attachment and LMX theories by explaining the role of emotional expres­sivity in building quality LMX relationships. Prior re­searchers (e.g., Burgin et al., 2012; Guerrero et al., 2009) proposed that individuals are di.erent in ex­pressing their emotions, and the level of social con­nectedness depends on the individual’s level of emotional expressivity. Given that emotional ex­pressivity as a key feature of a satisfying relationship (Gaelick et al., 1985), we argue that emotional ex­pressivity will mediate the relationship between at­tachment style and the LMX relationship. Finally, this study makes a novel contribution to the literature by integrating two di.erent but re­lated theories, i.e., attachment theory and LMX the­ory, to explain the leader–subordinate relationships. Thus, focusing on subordinate attachment style, this study examines the individual di.erences in emo­tional expressivity and LMX relationships. 2LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1Attachment Theory Attachment theory (Ainsworth et al., 1978; Bowlby, 1969, 1973, 1982) initially was developed to explain the patterns of interpersonal relation­ships, particularly mother–child attachment (Ravitz et al., 2010). However, a large body of subsequent research has generated and provided a framework to understand adults’ attachment. The experience with the attachment figure (e.g., parents, caregivers, and partners) shapes interpersonal relationships and their working models (Oldmeadow et al., 2013). The theory explains di.erent attachment styles (sometimes called attachment orientation), which help to understand one’s relational expectations, and how an individual’s experience responds to and regulates negative a.ect (Fraley & Shaver, 2000; Guerrero et al., 2009). Initially, scholars proposed that attachment styles can be measured through two orthogonal dimensions, i.e., attachment-related anxiety, and avoidance (Ainsworth et al., 1978). However, Bartholomew (1990) developed a four-category model of attachment styles to explain adults’ attachment in particular. This new opera­tionalization of attachment styles has broadened the previous classification of an individual’s attach­ment; in particular, it dichotomized an individual’s abstracted image of the self and others as positive and negative (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). This categorization helps to better understand the indi­vidual di.erences in emotion regulation because it combines the positive vs. negative image of self and others. Moreover, this model was validated across di.erent samples, and the results were comparable with the original understanding (e.g., Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; Gri.n & Bartholomew, 1994). The four attachment styles are secure, preoc­cupied, dismissive, and fearful. Individuals with a se­cure (worthiness or lovability) attachment style are comfortable with self and intimacy. Preoccupied (unlovability or unworthiness) individuals have a negative sense of self and a positive sense of oth­ers. Dismissive people have a positive sense of self but a negative sense of others. Thus, these individ­uals are highly independent and less likely to believe and trust others. Finally, fearful individuals have a negative sense of self as well as others. These indi­viduals avoid close relationships because of fear of rejection (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). 2.2Leader–Member Exchange Theory Although there is some criticism of the concep­tualization and measurement of the construct of LMX (Gottfredson et al., 2020), LMX theory helps to explain the dyadic interplay between the leader and the subordinate, which addresses the main limita­tions of other leadership theories, i.e., most other leadership theories focus only on the leader char­acteristics (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). LMX theory is rooted in social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), which is guided by the norm of reciprocity. The theory mainly has emphasized the importance of focusing on the leader and subordinate characteristics in re­lationship building (Cogliser et al., 2009; Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). As the theory states, the leader’s relationship with the individual subordinate is di.er­ent (Yukl et al., 2009). The theory discusses two types of relationships, in-group relationships, and out-group relation­ships. In-group relationships are high-quality rela­tionships in which a high level of mutual trust, loyalty, respect, and link are essential characteristics of LMX relationships (Buengeler et al., 2021; Cogliser et al., 2009). In contrast, out-group relation­ships are low-quality relationships in which the leader and followers of these relationships are shown low trust, respect, and loyalty (Cogliser et al., 2009). Thus, understanding the leader’s subordinate characteristics is essential in developing leader–member relationships. Drawing from attachment and LMX theories, we developed a conceptual model. We propose that the subordinate attach­ment style influences LMX relationships through emotional expressivity. The proposed model is de­picted in Figure 1. 2.3Attachment Style and Emotional Expressivity Based upon attachment theory, we propose that subordinate attachment style significantly influences emotional expressivity. The theory explains that indi­viduals di.er in expressing emotions and in their level of dependency on others (Guerrero et al., 2009). At­tachment theory describes four main attachment styles (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991) which help to understand how people express their emotions. Secure individuals have self-confidence, trust others, and are better able to regulate negative af­fect (Hazan & Shaver, 1987). Moreover, securely at­tached individuals prefer to engage in constructive responses (Guerrero et al., 2009, p. 490). When se­cure individuals have distress or an issue, they feel comfortable communicating and seeking support from others in a close relationship. Individuals share their feelings or concerns only with the people they believe in and trust. Accordingly, when subordinates feel they can trust a leader, they share their feelings without reservation. Furthermore, research has shown that secure individuals generally are more expressive than individuals with other attachment styles, such as dismissive (e.g., Guerrero, 1996; Guerrero et al., 2009). They are more likely to dis­close personal information to others because they believe that self-disclosure encourages emotional closeness. Attachment theory explains that preoccupied individuals have a positive evaluation of others and a negative image of self; thus, they overly rely on others (Bartholomew, 1990; Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; Korver-Nieberg et al., 2015). These individuals are more likely to trust others, and the individual’s self-worth depends on the extent to which others accept them (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). However, these individuals have a fear of losing the relationship. Thus, constant care­giving is required to keep the relationship secure (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). Because preoc­cupied attachment relationships highly value the company of others, they are more socially and emo­tionally expressive than other attachment styles, i.e., dismissive and fearful (Guerrero et al., 2009). Thus, subordinates with preoccupied attachment styles are more likely to express their emotions with their leaders. Dismissive individuals have a favorable view of self and a negative view of others; thus, they rarely trust and get closer to others (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). These individuals perceive their partners (or close others in a relationship) to be un­available and untrustworthy; hence, they do not seek emotional or physical support from others (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). Individuals with a dismissive attachment style value physical and emo­tional freedom. To avoid rejection, these individuals avoid close involvement with others (Bartholomew, 1990; Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2012). Thus, these individuals are hesitant to disclose personal information as they believe self-disclosure can harm their privacy (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2012). Accordingly, we believe that dismis­sive individuals are less emotionally expressive than those with other attachment styles. Subordinates with a dismissive leadership style may have limited self-disclosure with their leaders. Fearful individuals have a negative view of self and a lack of trust in others (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). Thus, they do not keep close rela­tionships because they have a fear of rejection. These individuals avoid discussing issues and ex­pressing their feelings with close others (Guerrero et al., 2009). Moreover, fearful individuals are less expressive and are uncomfortable with closeness (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). Thus, we assume that subordinates with fearful attachment styles do not express their emotions to their leaders. Given the di.erences in attachment styles in emotional ex­pressivity, we postulate that H1: Attachment style has a significant impact on emotional expressivity, such that (a) secure and (b) preoccupied attachments have a significant positive impact whereas (c) dismissive and (d) fearful attach­ments have a significant negative impact on emo­tional expressivity. 2.3.1Emotional Expressivity and LMX Relationship Emotional expressivity is a primary function of social relationships (Burgin et al., 2012). Family re­searchers have shown that emotional expressivity help partners to remain close (e.g., Burgin et al., 2012; Guerrero et al., 2009). Individuals with high emotional expressivity are better able to develop social interactions (Kring et al., 1994). Moreover, prior research on LMX found that communication between subordinates and a leader has a beneficial e.ect on building high-quality LMX and aggravates the negative e.ect of low-quality LMX (Antonakis & Atwater, 2002; Gajendran & Joshi, 2012). Thus, we believe that when subordinates express their emo­tions, they are more likely to maintain a satisfying relationship with their leaders. This leads to the fol­lowing hypothesis: H2: Emotional expressivity is significantly related to the LMX relationship. 2.3.2Attachment Style and the LMX Relationship Attachment theory demonstrates that individu­als develop internal working models of self and oth­ers based on their interaction with the members of a close relationship (Bowlby, 1982). As the theory ex­plains, the attachment system functions when the at­tachment figure is available, supportive, and responsive (Bowlby, 1973). One of the main charac­teristics of secure attachment is maintaining a close emotional connectedness. Secure individuals trust others and expect emotional support from their part­ners or close others. As a result, they have the capac­ity to maintain close relationships (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). Thus, they are more likely to have a happy and satisfying relationship. Similarly, preoccupied individuals tend to be self-disclosed, to exhibit a.liative behaviors (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; Mikulincer & Nachshon, 1991), and to be highly engaged in close relationships. Researchers (e. g., Kohn et al., 2012; Guerrero et al., 2009) found that securely attached individuals experienced higher satisfaction with their intimates. Thus, we believe that subordinates with secure and preoccupied attachment styles are better able to develop strong positive relationships with their leaders (in-group LMX relationships). In contrast, individuals with dismissive and fear­ful attachment styles are more likely to maintain emotional distance and keep interactions minimal with members in a close relationship. These individ­uals have negative expectations of others (Bartholomew, 1993; Guerrero et al., 2009) and tend to avoid a.ection in order to minimize rejection. In particular, dismissive individuals underplay the im­portance of close relationships because they do not trust others. Thus, they are more independent (Bartholomew, 1993). Furthermore, fearful individ­uals avoid close relationships because they have a fear of rejection and have personal insecurity (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). Hence, they are reluctant to disclose their personal information and to get closer to others (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2012). Kohn et al. (2012) provided evidence that highly anx­ious individuals have lower satisfaction when they feel that their partner is less supportive. Moreover, prior research on LMX and attach­ment (e.g., Richards & Hackett, 2012; Maslyn et al., 2017) has shown that relationship quality, in partic­ular that of the LMX relationship, depends on the individual’s attachment style. For example, Kirrane et al. (2019) found that anxiety and avoidance at­tachment styles are negatively related to LMX. Hence, we believe that subordinates who possess dismissive and fearful attachments tend to develop a negative relationship with their leaders, which thus can be characterized as out-group LMX rela­tionships. Therefore, it is hypothesized that H3: Subordinate attachment style has a significant impact on the LMX relationship, such that (a) secure and (b) preoccupation styles are positively related to LMX (in-group relationship), whereas (c) dismis­sive and (d) fearful styles are negatively related to LMX (out-group relationship). 2.3.3Emotional Expressivity as a Mediator Based upon attachment and LMX theories, we argue that emotional expressivity mediates the re­lationship between attachment and LMX relation­ship. As attachment theory explains, attachment style determines the extent to which people like to express their emotions (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2012). For example, securely attached individuals carefully encode and decode their messages, which helps them to build harmony and cooperation in their re­lationships. As the theory explains, secure individu­als are highly emotionally expressive; thus, they can easily build good relationships. Moreover, secure in­dividuals can control their negative emotions and express them constructively, promoting relationship satisfaction and harmony (Guerrero et al., 2009). Furthermore, preoccupied individuals are un­certain about their self-view but overly trust others. Thus, they are more expressive and are highly de­pendent on close others. In contrast, dismissive and fearful individuals tend to focus on their emotions, and are less likely to trust other people in a relation­ship. Thus, they find it challenging to maintain mu­tual satisfaction and happiness in the relationship (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2012). As another example, Freeny et al. (1994) found that female partners are satisfied with their relationship when the male part­ner has a secure attachment style. In contrast, fearful individuals are less expres­sive, and thus find it di.cult to build happy relation­ships. Based on these theoretical insights, we argue that emotional expressivity is essential for building high-quality relationships. Specifically, leaders would be able to develop a high-quality relationship with their subordinates only if subordinates possess secure and preoccupied attachment styles, because they are more likely to express their emotions and tend to have strong personal interactions. In support of this view, prior research has re­ported the mediation e.ect of communication be­tween attachment and relationship satisfaction. For example, scholars (e. g., Guerrero et al., 2009; Freeny et al., 1994) reported a mediation e.ect of commu­nication between attachment style and relational satisfaction. Given this theoretical logics and empir­ical evidence, we believe that emotional expressivity is an important variable that links attachment and the quality of relationships. Thus, we propose H4(a–d): Emotional expressivity mediates the asso­ciation between attachment styles—(a) secure, (b) preoccupation, (c) dismissive, and (d) fearful—and the LMX relationship. 3METHODOLOGY In this study, we followed the positivist research philosophy, and the research approach was deductive. We used a quantitative research model. Moreover, we followed the survey method as our research strategy. To test the hypotheses, we collected data using an on­line survey. The survey participants of the study were found through the database of a part-time (weekend) Master of Business Administration program at a state university in Sri Lanka (students who registered for the program during 2016–2020). Along with the survey, we sent out a cover letter to explain the study’s pur­pose. Participation in the survey was entirely volun­tary, and respondents were guaranteed confidentiality of data and information. To ensure their active em­ployment (whether they currently were employed) and that all the survey participants were working under a leader, we included two screening questions at the beginning of the survey: (1) Are you currently employed? (Answer options were yes and no.) (2) Are you working under a leader? (Answer op­tions were yes and no). Thus, this survey was continued only if respon­dents met both requirements. Initially, we sent out 613 survey invitations. However, 14 emails were re­turned, and we checked for updated emails. We were able to find only six successful updated emails through alumni. We sent a reminder email 1 week after the first invitation. Three days after the first re­minder, we sent another reminder. We received 264 surveys back. However, we rejected six due to in­completeness. Thus, the final sample size was 258, which equates to a response rate of 42.1%. In terms of demography, the sample was com­posed of 53.5% females. Sample members had at least a bachelor’s degree or higher qualifications. The aver­age age in years was 33.54 [standard deviation (SD) = 7.00 years]. The average length of stay with the current supervisor was 2.69, and on average, participants had 20.03 hours of direct contact with the immediate su­pervisor per week. Of the total survey participants, 59.7% worked in private-sector organizations. 3.1Measures Attachment Style: We measured attachment style using the scale developed by Feeney et al. (1994). Instead of using two attachment styles, i.e., avoidance and anxiety, in line with Guerrero et al. (2009), we used four attachment styles to assess the subordinate attachment style. In addition, we as­sessed subordinate attachment style in general without considering the context. Secure: Secure was measured using five items. Example items are “I sometimes worry that I do not really fit in with other people,” and “I am confident that others will accept me.” For each item, partici­pants responded on a scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Cronbach’s alpha for the scale was 0.92. Preoccupation: Preoccupation was measured using six items (ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree) to understand how people de­pend on and worry about their relationships. Exam­ple items are “Intimate relationships are the most central part of my life” and “I feel a very strong need to have close relationships.” Cronbach’s alpha for the scale was 0.91. Fearful: Fearful was measured using five items (ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree), and example items include “I would like to trust others, but I have a hard time doing so” and “I worry about getting hurt if I allow myself to get too close to others.” The scale’s Cronbach’s alpha was 0.97. Dismissiveness: Dismissive was measured using five items. Example items are “Achieving personal goals is more important to me than building rela­tionships” and “If something needs to be done, I prefer to rely on myself rather than others.” The scale’s Cronbach’s alpha was 0.96. Leader–member exchange: The dependent vari­able, leader–member exchange, was measured using the seven-item scale developed by Scandura and Graen (1984). However, following a similar method as Bauer and Green (1996), we slightly revised the items. We split one item (do you usually feel that you know where you stand ... do you usually know how satisfied your immediate supervisor is with what you do?) into two separate items, i.e., “I usually know where I stand with my manager” and “I usually know how satisfied my manager is with me” to increase the participants’ understanding. We tested the validity of this modifi­cation through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and the factor loadings were 0.83 and 0.76, respectively, which are well above the common threshold (=0.40) of Brown and Moore (2012). The participants rated their responses on a scale of strongly disagree (1) to agree (7) strongly. Example items are “My immediate supervisor understands my problems and needs” and “My immediate supervisor recognizes my potential.” Cronbach’s alpha for the scale was 0.96. Emotional expressivity: Emotional expressivity was measured using the social skills inventory (SSI) Riggio, 1986, used only the emotional expressivity out of three dimensions of the social skill inventory. Considering the original scale’s length, we used a short scale from Oldmeadow et al. (2013). Accord­ingly, we measured emotional expressivity using the four items to capture respondents’ ability to com­municate (verbally and non-verbally). The partici­pants’ responses rated from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). Example items are “I usually feel uncomfortable touching other people” and “some­times I have trouble making my friends and family realize how angry or upset I am with them.” Cron­bach’s alpha for the scale was 0.95. Control variables: In line with prior research, we controlled for several variables that have been shown to influence the quality of leader–member exchange. In addition, we controlled for some de­mographic variables of the participants that can in­fluence the quality of leader–member exchange (Liden et al., 1993; Turban & Jones, 1988). Accord­ingly, we controlled for participant’s gender (coded 0 = male, 1 = female), the number of years with the current supervisor (measured in years), and dyadic contact hours (how many direct contact hours with the immediate supervisor per week) (e.g., Bauer & Green, 1996; Judge & Ferris, 1993). However, we did not control for the participant’s age and education, because all the participants were students of an MBA program (they all had similar education quali­fications and mostly were of similar ages). 3.2Data Analysis 3.2.1Preliminary Analysis Before testing the hypotheses, we conducted confirmatory factor analysis to test the scales’ valid­ity. All the variables were reflective and were con­ceptualized as first-order structures. Due to high content overlap, we had to add one error-term cor­relation in secure, preoccupation, dismissive, and emotional expressivity. All items loaded on their re­spective factor significantly, with loadings higher than 0.40. According to the common threshold pro­posed by Brown and Moore (2012), Finney and DiS­tefano (2013), and Hu and Bentler (1999), a model has a reasonably good fit if (1) RMSEA values are =0.06 and (2) CFI and TLI values are =0.95, and SRMR values are =0.08. The results from CFA (six-factor model) indicated that the measurement model fit the data well (.2 = 909.81; DF = 54; p < 0.001; CMIN/DF = 1.68; CFI = 0.96; TLI = 0.96; RMSEA = 0.05; SRMR = 0.05). Furthermore, the av­erage variance extracted (AVE) by each factor was greater than 0.5 for all constructs, which suggests discriminant validity (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). We performed Harman’s single-factor test to examine if common method variance (CMV) was distorting our data (Podsako. et al., 2003). The results indicated that the first factor accounted only for 28.49% of the variance, which is well below the threshold of 50%. Furthermore, we standardized all predicting vari­ables before analyses to lessen the risk of multi­collinearity. Mean, standard deviation, and inter-item correlations are presented in Table 1. 3.2.2Hypotheses Testing We analyzed hypotheses using hierarchical lin­ear regression and used Hayes’ PROCESS (V.3.5.3) with a 5,000-sample, bias-corrected bootstrap pro­cedure (Hayes, 2018). We ran four separate models: Model 1 had the secure attachment style, Model 2 had the preoccupation attachment style, Model 3 had the dismissive attachment style, and Model 4 had the fearful attachment style. H1 hypothesizes that attachment style significantly impacts emo­tional expressivity. The results of H1a showed that there was a significant positive e.ect of the secure attachment style on emotional expressivity (ß = 0.30, p < 0.01, 95% CI [0.13, 0.46]). Thus, H1a is sup­ported. H1b is accepted (ß = 0.37, p < 0.01, 95% CI [0.15, 0.59]) by showing the positive association be­tween preoccupation and emotional expressivity. The results of H1c showed that there was a signifi­cant negative e.ect of dismissive on emotional ex­pressivity (ß = -0.24, p < 0.01, 95% CI [-0.40, -0.08]). Thus, H1c is accepted. However, the results showed that there is a negative impact of fearful on emotional expressivity (ß = -0.05, p = 0.40, 95% CI [-.19, 0.08]), but it is not significant. Thus, H1d is re­jected. The results are reported in Table 2. H2 hypothesizes that emotional expressivity positively influences LMX. We tested these hy­potheses with all four models, and the results were comparable. This hypothesis was supported for Model 1 (secure) (ß = 0.11, SE = 0.05, p = 0.03, 95% CI [0.01, 0.21]), Model 2 (preoccupation) (ß = 0.11, SE = 0.05, p = 0.02, 95% CI [0.01, 0.21]), Model 3 (dismissive) (ß = 0.13, SE = 0.05, p = 0.01, 95% CI [0.03, 0.23]), and Model 4 (fearful) (ß = 0.15, SE = 0.05, p < 0.01, 95% CI [0.05, 0.25]). We hypothesized H3 to understand the direct effect of attachment style on LMX. Accordingly, the re­sults show that secure (ß = 0.26, SE = 0.07, p < .01, 95% CI [0.12, 0.39]) and preoccupation (ß = 0.33, SE = 0.09, p < .01, 95% CI [0.15, 0.51]) have signif­icant a positive effect on LMX. Thus, H3a and H3b are supported. Moreover, results showed a signif­icant negative effect between dismissive attach­ment style and LMX (ß = -0.16, SE = 0.07, p = 0.02, 95% CI [-0.29, -0.02]). Thus H3c is supported. However, H3d is rejected (ß = 0.03, SE = 0.06, p = 0.63, 95% CI [-0.08, 0.14]). The results are re­ported in Table 3. Finally, we examined H4a–H4d), which hypoth­esize that emotional expressivity functions as a me­diator in the relationship between attachment style and LMX. The results of our analysis support H4a [secure (ß = 0.03, SE = 0.02, 95% CI [0.01, 0.08])], H4b [preoccupation (ß = 0.04, SE = 0.03, 95% CI [0.01, 0.11]), and H4c dismissive (ß = -0.03, SE = 0.02, 95% CI [-0.08, -0.01]). However, H4d is re­jected (ß = -0.01, SE = 0.01, 95% CI [-0.03, 0.01]); thus, there was no mediation e.ect of emotional ex­pressivity in the relationship between fearful and LMX. The results are presented in Table 4. 4DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The primary objective of this study was to ex­tend the previous understanding of individual at­tachment and relationship satisfaction (non-work) into the work domain, i.e., subordinate–leader dyadic relationships. Based on attachment theory (Bowlby, 1969; Shaver & Mikulincer, 2002; Shaver et al., 2000), LMX theory (Graen & Cashman, 1975) and prior research on adults’ attachment (e.g., Guerrero et al., 2009; Russell et al., 2013), we ex­plored the e.ect of subordinate attachment style on LMX through emotional expressivity. Our findings that subordinate attachment styles are associated with LMX through emotional expres­sivity (e.g., secure and preoccupation attachment styles are related positively and dismissive attach­ment style is related negatively) are in line with those of previous studies that found that secure at­tachment styles influence an individual’s ability and willingness to build LMX relationships (e.g., Kirrane, et al., 2019; Maslyn et al., 2017; Richards & Hackett, 2012; Popper et al., 2000). Moreover, our empirical findings are consistent with attachment theory (Bartholomew, 1990; Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; Bowlby, 1973) which emphasizes that individ­uals’ abstracted images of self and others range from positive to negative (image of self: high self-worth vs. low self-worth; image of others: trustwor­thy and reliable vs. unreliable and rejecting). Specifically, individuals with secure and preoccupied attachment styles are trustworthy and reliable; thus, they can build healthy relationships with others. However, dismissive and fearful individuals are highly avoidant, thus manifesting discomfort in re­lationship building, because they have a negative disposition toward others (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; Holmes & Johnson, 2009). How­ever, our results do not support the hypothesis that a subordinate’s fearful attachment is negatively as­sociated with emotional expressivity and LMX rela­tionship. A possible reason for this finding is that these subordinates have a negative view of them­selves and a lack of trust in others. Thus, subordi­nates with fearful attachment styles are unwilling to build emotional connectedness with their leaders. Additionally, our findings lend support to LMX theory, showing that subordinates’ attachment styles and emotional expressivity are associated with the LMX relationship. These findings are con­sistent with those of prior research suggesting that emotional communication increased LMX (Anton­akis & Atwater, 2002; Gajendran & Joshi, 2012) and that subordinate attachment style influences the quality of LMX relationships (Kirrane et al., 2019). Because LMX theory is rooted in social exchange theory, which emphasizes reciprocity as the foun­dation of interpersonal relationships (Graen & Scan­dura, 1987; Gouldner, 1960), the perceived quality of the LMX relationship depends on the transac­tional exchange between the subordinate and the leader (Estel et al., 2019; Kirrane et al., 2019; Richards & Hackett, 2012). Thus, subordinates’ pos­itive perceptions of leaders, high trust, open com­munication, respect, and loyalty may persuade leaders to decide that these subordinates belong in their in-group. In contrast, when leaders sense that their subordinates are uncommunicative and show less respect and trust, they decide that such subor­dinates do not belong in their group (out-group re­lationship) (Anand et al., 2016; Estel et al., 2019; Erdogan & Bauer, 2016). Thus, our results confirmed the previous understanding of attachment styles, emotional expressivity, and LMX relationships. 4.1Theoretical Implications This study has several theoretical implications. First, this study contributes to attachment theory by empirically examining the e.ect of adults’ at­tachment styles on emotional expressivity and LMX. Most of the extant research on attachment theory focused on the family domain, and less at­tention was given to the work domain, which is the main limitation of research on adults’ attachment. This study addressed this limitation by deviating from the family domain to the work domain to un­derstand how subordinate attachment style influ­ences LMX. In line with attachment theory, our study highlights the importance of understanding subordinate attachment styles to build successful leader–member relationships. Thus, our findings help enrich the conceptualization of adult attach­ment (Bartholomew, 1990; Hazan & Shaver, 1987), particularly in the work domain. Second, our study examined four prototypes of attachment styles instead of two. Although Bartholomew & Horowitz (1991) conceptualized a four-category model, except for a few studies, most research has focused on two attachment styles, i.e., anxiety and avoidant. However, the two-attachment style model is much more appropriate for under­standing child attachment, and captures only self-image (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). The four-category model addressed this limitation by in­corporating the self-image as well as the image of others. Thus, this study elucidates adult attachment in the work domain. Third, this study contributes to attachment the­ory by examining the intervening role of emotional expressivity. Although scholars consistently have ex­amined the direct e.ect of attachment style on social exchange relationships (Kirrane et al., 2019), the ef­fect of attachment styles on LMX through emotional expressivity has yet to be fully understood. Hence, we postulated that attachment style influences LMX through emotional expressivity. Attachment theory discusses that individuals di.er in expressing their emotions and feelings (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; Guerrero, 2009). For example, a dismissive pro­totype is characterized by emotional restriction and a lack of credibility in discussing issues. Thus, individ­uals are di.erent in expressing their emotions. Our findings indicate that emotional expressivity medi­ates the association between attachment style and LMX. Therefore, our findings complement attach­ment theory (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). Finally, we contribute to the existing literature by examining two di.erent but related theories, i.e., at­tachment theory and LMX theory. Although this study was based mainly on attachment theory, we used LMX theory to conceptualize LMX. LMX theory highlighted the importance of leadership qualities and characteristics in building relationships. However, our study adds to the literature on the importance of subordinate characteristics, particularly subordinate attachment style, in building quality leader–member relationships. Although we did not examine the e.ect of leaders’ attachment styles on LMX relationships, this study informs us that individual attachment styles play a significant role in relationship building. 4.2Managerial Implications This study provides important implications for managers. First, the results of this study emphasize the importance of understanding subordinate attachment styles in developing LMX relationships. Thus, we rec­ommend that managers make a serious e.ort to un­derstand their subordinates’ attachment styles, i.e., relationship dynamics, and deal with their subordi­nates accordingly. Moreover, we recommend that managers assess the individual’s attachment style when they hire people. An initial understanding of sub­ordinate emotion regulation’s complexity and dynam­ics will help managers minimize interpersonal conflicts and develop e.ective coping strategies (Kirrane et al., 2019). Thus, it also is necessary to develop leaders’ ca­pabilities, in particular, interpersonal skills, coaching, and emotional management skills, which help them understand subordinate attachment styles and cope with them e.ectively. To address this need, we recom­mend that organizations conduct workshops led by qualified professionals to make leaders aware of di.er­ent attachment styles, which impact leader–member relationship success and dealing with them. Second, our results show that individuals with dismissive and fearful attachment styles have poor emotional expressivity, eventually leading to poor LMX. Fearful prototypes are characterized as poor in relying on self and others. Thus, these individuals need support and guidance to develop their self-ef­ficacy and build trust with others. Furthermore, dis­missive individuals trust others less in a relationship. Thus, managers should provide coaching and coun­seling to improve their negative perceptions of oth­ers and to control their habitual reactions. These individuals then will be able to develop their attach­ment style from insecure to secure, which will help them develop in-group LMX relationships. We be­lieve that this eventually will generate favorable out­comes, such as e.ective conflict management, reduced grievances, and improved employee satis­faction and overall performance. 4.3Limitations and Avenues for Future Research Although the study makes a significant contri­bution to attachment theory and LMX theory, the findings of the study need to be interpreted in light of its limitations. First, we collected data only from subordinates, which may do not reflect the leaders’ perceptions. In particular, LMX is a self-reported measure, and we assessed this measure from sub­ordinates only. To better capture the interpersonal nature of the LMX relationship, future research needs to collect dyadic data from both the subordi­nates and leaders. Moreover, we collected data at only one point in time, which does not help to ex­plain the longitudinal e.ect. Thus, the findings of this study might be influenced by common method bias. Future studies are advised to collect data from multiple sources and at multiple time points to im­prove the study’s design. Second, this study focused only on the subordi­nates’ attachment styles, and did not test the e.ect of a leader’s attachment style on the LMX relationship. However, previous scholars (e.g., Wijaya, 2019; Zhang et al., 2012) have shown that leader characters also are significant predictors of the LMX relationship. Due to the dyadic nature of LMX relationships and attachment styles (Kirrane, et al., 2019), the relationship quality is influenced by both leader and subordinate character­istics (Dulebohn et al., 2012; Cerne et al., 2018). Assess­ing the process from only the subordinates’ perspective and excluding the leader’s attachment styles does not reflect both leader and member involvements in the exchange relationship. Thus, examining both leader and subordinate attachment styles will help to better understand the LMX relationship. Accordingly, future researchers are encouraged to examine the (in)congru­ence between the leader and the subordinate attach­ment styles that may influence the LMX relationship. We recommend that future research collect data on both subordinate and leader attachment and test how the (in)congruence of leader–subordinate attachment influences the LMX relationship. Third, although we controlled for the e.ect of subordinate gender, we did not integrate the leader’s gender into the model. The findings may vary depend­ing on leader–subordinate gender, i.e., same gender or opposite gender. Although there is no consistency in the literature about leader–member gender match and LMX relationship, prior research (Adebayo & Udegbe, 2004; Milner et al., 2007) evidenced that the LMX relationship is firm when both leader and subor­dinate belong to the same gender. Thus, we recom­mend that future researchers examine leader and subordinate gender as a moderator. Finally, we did not test the boundary conditions of the proposed rela­tionship. The findings of this study may vary with sit­uational factors such as stress. Thus, we recommend that future researchers test our research model with boundary conditions which will help to better under­stand the association between attachment and LMX. 5CONCLUSION By extending the understanding of LMX, our study adds to the antecedents of LMX. This study mainly contributes to attachment theory, in partic­ular, adult attachment. We changed the previous focus of attachment theory from the family domain to the work domain to better capture adult attach­ment in a di.erent context. The results demonstrate that a subordinate’s attachment style significantly a.ects emotional expressivity and LMX relation­ships. Thus, the findings of this study primarily help to understand why leader–subordinate relation­ships are di.erent across subordinates. REFERENCES Adebayo, D.O., & Udegbe, I.B. (2004). Gender in the boss-subordinate relationship: A Nigerian study. Journal of Organizational behavior, 25(4), 515-525. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.255 Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: Assessed in the strange situation and at home. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Anand, S., Vidyarthi, P. R., & Park, H. S. (2016). LMX di.er­entiation: Understanding relational leadership at indi­vidual and group levels. In T. N. Bauer & B. Erdogan (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of leader-member ex­change (pp. 263–291). Oxford University Press Antonakis, J., & Atwater, L. (2002). Leader distance: A review and a proposed theory. Leadership Quarterly, 13, 673–704. https://doi:10.1016/ S1048-9843(02)00155-8. Bartholomew, K. (1990). Avoidance of intimacy: An at­tachment perspective. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7(2), 147–178. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407590072001 Bartholomew, K. (1993). From childhood to adult rela­tionships: Attachment theory and research. In S. Duck (Ed.), Learning about relationships (pp. 30–62). Sage Publications, Inc. Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(2), 226–244. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.61.2.226 Bauer, T. N., & Green, S. G. (1996). Development of leader–member exchange: A longitudinal test. Academy of Management Journal, 39(6), 1538-1567. https://doi.org/10.2307/257068 Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1964.tb00583.x Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss. Vol.1. Attach­ment. Basic Book. https://mindsplain.com/wpcon­tent/uploads/2020/08/ATTACHMENT_AND_LOSS_VOLUME_I_ATTACHMENT. Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss. Vol.2. Separation: Anxiety and anger. Basic Book. https://abebe.zo­hosites.com/files/John-Bowlby-Separation-Anxiety-And-Anger-Attachment-and-Loss-Vol-2-1976.pdf Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and loss: Retrospect and prospect. American journal of Orthopsychiatry, 52(4), 664-678. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.1982.tb01456.x Brown, O., Paz-Aparicio, C., & Revilla, A. J. (2019). Leader’s communication style, LMX and organizational commit­ment: A study of employee perceptions in Peru. Lead­ership & Organization Development Journal, 40(2), 230-258. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-03-2018-0129 Brown, T. A., & Moore, M. T. (2012). Confirmatory factor anal­ysis. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Handbook of structural equation modeling (pp. 361-379). New York: Guilford Press. Burgin, C. J., Brown, L. H., Royal, A., Silvia, P. J., Barrantes-Vidal, N., & Kwapil, T. R. (2012). Being with others and feeling happy: Emotional expressivity in everyday life. Personality and Individual Di.erences, 63, 185–190. https://doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2012.03.006 Buengeler, C., Piccolo, R. F., & Locklear, L. R. (2021). LMX Di.erentiation and Group Outcomes: A Framework and Review Drawing on Group Diversity Insights. Jour­nal of Management, 47(1), 260–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206320930813 Cerne, M., Batistic, S., & Kenda, R. (2018). HR systems, attachment styles with leaders, and the creativity–in­novation nexus. Human Resource Management Re­view, 28(3), 271-288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2018.02.004 Cogliser, C.C., Schriesheim, C.A., Scandura, T.A. and Gardner, W.L. (2009) Balance in Leader and Follower Perceptions of Leader-Member Exchange: Relationships with Perfor­mance and Work Attitudes. Leadership Quarterly, 20(3), 452-465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.03.010 Dienesch, R. M., & Liden, R. C. (1986). Leader–member exchange model of leadership: A critique and further development. The Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 618–634. https://doi.org/10.2307/258314 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/10.1177/014920631141528 Dobbs, J. L., Sloan, D. M., & Karpinski, A. (2007). A psy­chometric investigation of two self-report measures of emotional expressivity. Personality and Individual Di.erences, 43(4), 693–702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.01.010 Duchon, D., Green, S. G., & Taber, T. D. (1986). Vertical dyad linkage: A longitudinal assessment of antecedents, measures, and consequences. Journal of Applied Psy­chology, 71(1), 56–60. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.71.1.56 Estel, V., Schulte, E., Spurk, D., & Kau.eld, S. (2019) LMX di.erentiation is good for some and bad for others: A multilevel analysis of e.ects of LMX di.erentiation in innovation teams, Cogent Psychology, 6(1), https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2019.1614306 Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. (2005). From Ideal to Real: A Longitudinal Study of the Role of Implicit Leadership Theories on Leader-Member Exchanges and Employee Outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(4), 659–676. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.659 Erdogan, B., & Bauer, T. N. (2016). LMX Theory: A glimpse into the future. In T. N. Bauer & B. Erdogan (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of leader-member exchange (pp. 413–421)). Oxford University Press. Feeney, J. A. (1995). Adult attachment and emotional control. Personal Relationships, 2(2), 143–159. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.1995.tb00082.x Feeney, J., Noller, P., & Hanrahan, M. (1994). Assessing adult attachment. In M. B. Sperling, & W. H. Berman (Eds.), Attachment in adults (pp. 128-151). New York: The Guilford Press. Finney, S. J., & DiStefano, C. (2013). Nonnormal and Cat­egorical Data in Structural Equation Modeling. In G.R. Hancock & R.O. Mueller (Eds.). Fornell, C. & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50. https:/ /doi.org/10.2307/3151312. Fraley, R. C., & Shaver, P. R. (2000). Adult romantic attach­ment: Theoretical developments, emerging contro­versies, and unanswered questions. Review of General Psychology, 4, 132-154. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.4.2.132 Gaelick, L., Bpdenhausen, G.V., & Wyer, Jr, R. S. (1985). Emotional Communication in Close Relationships, Jour­nal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(5), 1246-1265. https://doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.49.5.1246 Gajendran, R. S., & Joshi, A. (2012). Innovation in globally distributed teams: The role of LMX, communication frequency, and member influence on team deci­sions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(6), 1252–1261. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028958 Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1997). Meta-Analytic review of leader–member exchange theory: Correlates and construct issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(6), 827–844. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.6.827 Gottfredson, R. K., Wright, S. L., & Heaphy, E. D. (2020). A critique of the Leader-Member Exchange construct: Back to square one. The Leadership Quarterly, 31(6), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.101385 Graen, G. B., & Cashman, J. F. (1975). A role-making model of leadership in formal organisations: a developmental approach. In J.G. Hunt and L.L Larson (eds.), Leadership frontiers (pp. 143-165). Kent, Ohio: Kent State Univ. Press. 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. Graen, G. B., Liden, R. C., & Hoel, W. (1982). Role of lead­ership in the employee withdrawal process. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(6), 868–872. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.67.6.868 Graen, G. B., Novak, M. A., & Sommerkamp, P. (1982). The e.ects of leader–member exchange and job de­sign on productivity and satisfaction: Testing a dual attachment model. Organizational Behavior & Human Performance, 30(1), 109–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(82)90236-7 Gri.n, D. & Bartholomew, K. (1994) Models of the Self and Other: Fundamental Dimensions Underlying Measures of Adult Attachment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(3), 430-445. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.3.430 Guerrero, L. K. (1996) Attachment-style differences in intimacy and involvement: A test of the four-cate­gory model. Communication Monographs, 63(4), 269-292, https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759609376395 Guerrero, L. K., Farinelli, L., & McEwan, B. (2009). Attach­ment and Relational Satisfaction: The Mediating Ef­fect of Emotional Communication, Communication Monographs, 76(4), 487-514. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750903300254 Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to Mediation, Modera­tion, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression, Based Approach (2nd Ed.). A Guilford press. https://www.afhayes.com/introduction-to-mediation-moderation-and-conditional-process-analysis.html Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptu­alized as an attachment process. Journal of Personal­ity and Social Psychology, 52(3), 511–524. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.511 Hinojosa, A. S., McCauley, K. D., Randolph-Seng, B., & Gardner, W. L. (2014). Leader and Follower Attach­ment Styles: Implications for Authentic Leader-Fol­lower Relation-Ships. The Leadership Quarterly, 25, 595-610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Holmes, B. M. & Johnson, K. R. (2009) Adult Attachment and Romantic Partner Preference: A Review. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 26, 833-852. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265407509345653 Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cuto. Criteria for Fit In­dexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria versus New Alternatives. Structural equation modeling, 6(1):1-55. https://doi.org /10.1080/10705519909540118 Judge, T. A., & Ferris, G. R. (1993). Social context of per­formance evaluation decisions. Academy of Manage­ment Journal, 36(1), 80–105. https://doi.org/10.2307/256513 Karney, B. R., & Bradbury, T. N. (1995). The longitudinal course of marital quality and stability: A review of the­ory, method, and research. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 3-34. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.118.1.3 Kirrane, M., Kilroy, S., Kidney, R., Flood, P., & Bauwens, R. (2019). The relationship between attachment style and creativity: the mediating roles of LMX and TMX. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28(6), 784-799. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2019.1646247 Kohn, J. L., Rholes, S. W., Simpson, J. A., Martin, A. M., Tran, S., & Wilson, C. L. (2012). Changes in marital sat­isfaction across the transition to parenthood: the role of adult attachment orientations. Personality Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(11), 1506-22. https://doi: 10.1177/0146167212454548. Korver-Nieberg N, Berry K, Meijer CJ, de Haan L. (2014). Adult attachment and psychotic phenomenology in clinical and non-clinical samples: a systematic review. Psychiatry Research, 87(2), 127-54. https://doi.org/10.1111/papt.12010. Kring, A. M., Smith, D. A., & Neale, J. M. (1994). Individual di.erences in dispositional expressiveness: Develop­ment and validation of the Emotional Expressivity Scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(5), 934–949. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.66.5.934 Liden, R. C., & Graen, G. (1980). Generalizability of the vertical dyad linkage model of leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 23(3), 451–465. https://doi.org/10.2307/255511 Liden, R. C., Sparrowe, R. T., & Wayne, S. J. (1997). Leader-member exchange theory: The past and po­tential for the future. In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management, 15, 47–119. Liden, R. C., & Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader–member exchange: An empirical assess­ment through scale development. Journal of Manage­ment, 24(1), 43–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(99)80053-1 Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Stilwell, D. (1993). A longitu­dinal study on the early development of leader mem­ber exchanges. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 662-674. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.4.662 Major, D. A., Kozlowski, S. W. J., Chao, G. T., & Gardner, P. D. (1995). A longitudinal investigation of newcomer expectations, early socialization outcomes, and the moderating e.ects of role development factors. Jour­nal of Applied Psychology, 80, 418–431. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.80.3.418 Martin, S., Charvát, M., Strelec, J., Seitlová, K., & Kafet­sios, K. (2022). Experiences in Work Relationships: A Measure of Attachment Strategies at work. Psycho­logical Reports, 0(0), https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941221075249 Martin, R., Thomas, G., Guillaume, Y., Lee, A. & Epitropaki, O. (2016). Leader-member Exchange (LMX) and Performance: A Meta-Analytic Review. Per­sonnel Psychology, 69, 67-121. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12100 Maslyn, J. M., Schyns, B., & Farmer, S. M. (2017). Attach­ment style and leader-member exchange: The role of e.ort to build high quality relationships. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 38(3), 450–462. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-01-2016-0023 Mikulincer, M., & Nachshon, O. (1991). Attachment styles and patterns of self-disclosure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(2), 321–331. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.61.2.321 Mikulincer, M., Shaver, P. R. (2012). An attachment per­spective on psychopathology. World Psychiatry, 11(1),11-5. https://doi: 10.1016/j.wpsyc.2012.01.003. Mikulincer, M., Shaver, P. R., Sapir-Lavid, Y., & Avihou-Kanza, N. (2009). What’s inside the minds of securely and insecurely attached people? The secure-base script and its associations with attachment-style dimen­sions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(4), 615–633. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015649 Oldmeadow, J. A., Quinn, S., & Kower, R. (2013). Attach­ment style, social skills, and Facebook use amongst adults. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1142-1149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.006 Popper, M., & Mayseless, O. (2003). Back to basics: Ap­plying a parenting perspective to transformational leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(1), 41-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(02)00183-2 Popper, M., Mayseless, O., & Castelnovo, O. (2000). Trans­formational leadership and attachment. The Leader­ship Quarterly, 11(2), 267-289. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(00)00038-2 Podsako., P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee J., & Podsako., N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral re­search: A critical review of the literature and recom­mended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879-903. https://doi/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 Ravitz, P., Maunder, R., Hunter, J., Sthankiya, B., & Lancee, W. (2010). Adult attachment measures: A 25-year review, Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 69, 419–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2009.08.006 Riggio, R. E. (1986). Assessment of Basic Social Skills. Jour­nal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 649-660. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.3.649 Richards, D. A., & Hackett, R. D. (2012). Attachment and emotion regulation: Compensatory interactions and leader–member exchange. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(4), 686–701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.03.005 Richards, D. A., & Schat, A. C. (2011). Attachment at (not to) work: applying attachment theory to explain indi­vidual behavior in organizations. Journal of applied psychology, 96(1), 169-182. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020372 Russell, V. M., Baker, L, R., & McNulty, J. K. (2013). Attach­ment Insecurity and Infidelity in Marriage: Do Studies of Dating Relationships Really Inform Us About Mar­riage? Journal of Family Psychology, 27(2), 242–251. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032118 Scandura, T. A., & Graen, G. B. (1984). Moderating e.ects of initial leader–member exchange status on the ef­fects of a leadership intervention. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(3), 428–436. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.69.3.428 Shaver, P. R., Belsky, J., & Brennan, K. A. (2000). The adult attachment interview and self-reports of romantic at­tachment: Associations across domains and methods. Personal Relationships, 7(1), 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2000.tb00002.x Shaver, P. R., Collins, N., & Clark, C. L. (1996). Attachment styles and internal working models of self and rela­tionship partners. In G. J. O. Fletcher & J. Fitness (Eds.), Knowledge structures in close relationships: A social psychological approach (pp. 25–61). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Shaver, P. R., & Mikulincer, M. (2002). Attachment-related psychodynamics. Attachment & Human Development, 4(2), 133–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616730210154171 Shaver, P. R., Mikulincer, M., & Chun, D. S. (2008). Adult attachment theory, emotion regulation, and prosocial behavior. Regulating emotions: Culture, social neces­sity, and biological inheritance, 121-145. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444301786.ch5 Tran, D. T., Lee, L. Y., Nguyen, P. T., & Srisittiratkul, W. (2020). How Leader Characteristics and Leader Mem­ber Exchange Lead to Social Capital and Job Perfor­mance. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 7(1), 269–278. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no1.269 Tremblay, M., Parent-Rocheleau, X., & Sajadi, P. (2022). Are leaders and followers receiving what they give? A long-term examination of the reciprocal relation­ship between relative LMX and relative OCB-helping. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 29(3), 359-371. https://doi.org/10.1177/15480518211041629 Truckenbrodt, Y. B. (2000). The relation between leader-member exchange and commitment and orga­nizational behavior. Acquisition Review Quarterly, 7, 233-244. https://www.dau.edu/library/arj/ARJ/arq2000/truck.pdf Turban, D. B., & Jones, A. P. (1988). Supervisor-subordi­nate similarity: Types, e.ects, and mechanisms. Jour­nal of Applied Psychology, 73(2), 228–234. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.73.2.228 Vecchio, R. (1985). Predicting Employee Turnover from Leader-Member Exchange: A Failure to Replicate. The Academy of Management Journal, 28(2), 478-485. https://doi:10.2307/256213 Volmer, J., Niessen, C., Spurk, D., Linz, A., & Abele, A. E. (2011). Reciprocal Relationships between Leader–Member Exchange (LMX) and Job Satisfaction: A Cross-Lagged Analysis. Applied Psychology: An Inter­national Review, 60(4), 522–545. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2011.00446.x Wijaya, N. H. S. (2019). Proactive Personality, LMX, and Voice Behavior: Employee– Supervisor Sex (Dis)simi­larity as a Moderator. Management Communication Quarterly, 33(1), 86–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318918804890 Yukl, G., O’Donnell, M., & Taber, T. (2009). Influence of leader behaviors on the leader-member exchange rela­tionship. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24(4), 289-299. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940910952697 Zhang, Z., Wang, M. O., & Shi, J. (2012). Leader-follower congruence in proactive personality and work out­comes: The mediating role of leader-member ex­change. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 111-130. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.0865 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 19 Abstract Vol. 12, No. 2, 19-35 doi:10.17708/DRMJ.2023.v12n02a02 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 20 Rotumba Arachchige Ishanka Chathurani Karunarathne, S.S.Weligamage: Impact of Subordinate Attachment Style on Leader–Member Exchange: The Mediating E.ect of Emotional Expressivity Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 21 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 22 Rotumba Arachchige Ishanka Chathurani Karunarathne, S.S.Weligamage: Impact of Subordinate Attachment Style on Leader–Member Exchange: The Mediating E.ect of Emotional Expressivity Figure 1: Conceptual framework Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 23 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 24 Rotumba Arachchige Ishanka Chathurani Karunarathne, S.S.Weligamage: Impact of Subordinate Attachment Style on Leader–Member Exchange: The Mediating E.ect of Emotional Expressivity Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 25 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 26 Rotumba Arachchige Ishanka Chathurani Karunarathne, S.S.Weligamage: Impact of Subordinate Attachment Style on Leader–Member Exchange: The Mediating E.ect of Emotional Expressivity Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 27 Table 1: Mean, standard deviation, and inter-item correlation (n = 258) Table 2: Results of regression analysis (Hypotheses 1a–1d) Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 28 Rotumba Arachchige Ishanka Chathurani Karunarathne, S.S.Weligamage: Impact of Subordinate Attachment Style on Leader–Member Exchange: The Mediating E.ect of Emotional Expressivity Table 3: Results of regression analysis (leader–member exchange, Hypotheses 2 and 3a–3d) Table 4: Results of regression analysis (indirect e.ect, Hypotheses 4a–4d) Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 29 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 Rotumba Arachchige Ishanka Chathurani Karunarathne, S.S.Weligamage: Impact of Subordinate Attachment Style on Leader–Member Exchange: The Mediating E.ect of Emotional Expressivity 30 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 31 EXTENDED SUMMARY/IZVLECEK Ceprav se posamezniki v razlicnih situacijah razlicno vedejo, imajo koherentne in stabilne vzorce custvovanja in vedenja v tesnih razmerjih, ki lahko pomembno vplivajo na njihove odnose. Razširili smo teoreticno razumevanje izmenjave med vodjo in podrejenim z nudenjem novih vpogledov v ra­zloge, zakaj vodje razvijajo razlicne tipe odnosov s svojimi podrejenimi. Posebej predlagamo, kako stil navezanosti podrejenih vpliva na razvoj izmenjave med vodjo in podrejenim preko custvene izraznosti. Ta študija temelji na pozitivisticni filozofiji raziskovanja, pri cemer smo sledili deduktivnemu pristopu raziskovanju. Kot strategijo raziskovanja smo uporabili metodo ankete. Rezultati ankete med 258 zaposlenimi so razkrili, da so varni in preobremenjeni stili navezanosti pozitivno povezani, medtem ko so zavracajoci stili navezanosti negativno povezani s custveno izraznostjo. Poleg tega rezultati naše študije kažejo mocno pozitivno povezavo med custveno izraznostjo in izmenjavo vodja-sledilec. Dodatno, razen za prestrašen stil navezanosti, rezultati analize mediacije kažejo, da custvena izraznost mediira povezavo med stilom navezanosti in izmenjavo vodja-sledilec. Poleg tega naši rezul­tati kažejo, da posamezniki z varnimi in preobremenjenimi stili navezanosti razvijajo mocne pozitivne odnose izmenjave (odnosi znotraj skupine), medtem ko so posamezniki, ki so zavracajoci, slabi v gradnji odnosov. Podani so prispevki k literaturi o izmenjavi med vodji in sledilci in teoriji navezanosti. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 32 Rotumba Arachchige Ishanka Chathurani Karunarathne, S.S.Weligamage: Impact of Subordinate Attachment Style on Leader–Member Exchange: The Mediating E.ect of Emotional Expressivity Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 33 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 34 Rotumba Arachchige Ishanka Chathurani Karunarathne, S.S.Weligamage: Impact of Subordinate Attachment Style on Leader–Member Exchange: The Mediating E.ect of Emotional Expressivity Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 35 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 36 MANAGING THE DISTANCE WITH THE SUPERIOR: TOWARD A RESOLUTION OF A SUBORDINATE MANAGER’S DILEMMA Emil Nikolov Kotsev Business and Management Faculty, University of Ruse, Bulgaria ekotsev@uni-ruse.bg The paper explores the follower–leader distance orientation (FLDO) of subordinate managers in eight Bulgarian in­dustrial companies. The purpose was twofold: first, to study the FLDO of subordinate managers and its impact on work environment; and second, to propose a relational followership model which could lay the foundations for the resolution of the subordinate manager’s relational dilemma. The study applied a mixed-methods research design, using both qualitative and quantitative approaches within a combination of two research strategies—exploratory, and descriptive. A survey questionnaire, semi-structured interviews, and focus groups were used for primary data col­lection. Results indicate that Bulgarian managers tend to maintain social proximity with the immediate superior. The strengths and weaknesses of proximal and distant managers are outlined and discussed. A relational followership model is proposed to support lower-level managers in managing their distance with higher-level managers in a way that is favorable to team and organizational e.ectiveness. Keywords: Follower–leader distance orientation, Relational followership, Subordinate manager, Upward influence 1INTRODUCTION To friend or not to friend? This is not just a Facebook etiquette question. Social interactions de­velop workplace relationships in both digital envi­ronments and face-to-face encounters (Mikkola & Nykänen, 2019). Organizational members from dif­ferent levels and industries face such relational dilemmas constantly. Employees possess social at­tributes, and normally they want to develop rela­tionships with others, including superiors (Chen & Li, 2018), but they also are cautious when dealing with higher-level managers because there is a fairly low level of mutual trust (Robbins, 1985). Often the answer to the initial question is more than just yes or no, especially when it comes to fol­lower–leader relationships. Most researchers de­scribe and analyze the relationship dilemma from managers’ point of view (e.g., Taylor, Hanlon, & Boyd, 1992). Neilsen and Gypen (1979) were among the first to classify this relational issue as a dilemma that commonly confronts the subordinate. It was described and analyzed in detail by Biçer (2020), but no satisfactory solution was suggested. This paper focuses on how to solve the relation­ship dilemma on the part of managers as subordi­nates—they concurrently should recognize the importance of workplace relationships and should keep in mind that too much interference in seniors’ privacy may cause negative results (Kundi, Soomro, & Kamran, 2021). According to Howell and Shamir (2005), both superiors and inferiors in the work­place may play an active role in forming their mutual relationships. Due to their dichotomous place in the organizational structure, inferior managers have the opportunity to deal with both superiors and subor­dinates at once (Gjerde & Alvesson, 2020). Their du­alistic position provides enough resources (information, experience, time, authority, etc.) and opportunities to take an active role in managing fol­lower–leader distance—as stated by Chen, Hou, and Wu (2016), employees with resources are more adept at managing relationships with superiors. In today’s competitive business world successful man­agers need to work proactively out of their boxes (Howladar & Rahman, 2021) and to be influential both downwards and upwards (Singh, 1998). Here, the possibility of influencing relationships with the superior is not seen as an end in itself but as a means of increasing managerial e.ectiveness and organizational productivity. After a series of studies inspired mainly by Kahn’s work on this issue (Kahn 1990, 2001, 2010; Kahn and Heaphy, 2014), the quality of workplace atmosphere has been proven to be directly proportional to organizational productivity (Kavade & Nimkar, 2020), and the key role of human relationships in achieving organiza­tional goals currently is beyond doubt. Some schol­ars go even further and conceptualize organizations as systems of relationships (e.g., Trompenaars, 1985; Wheatley, 2006). Supervisor–subordinate relation­ships are an essential part of these systems, and are among the most frequently studied topics in organi­zational communication research (Sias & Shin, 2019). Nearly 3 decades ago, Napier and Ferris (1993) pointed out the main reasons that justify the need for enhancing our knowledge of supervisor–subor­dinate relationships: decentralization of certain oc­cupational types, globalization of the economy, workforce diversification, and corporate downsizing. Although today these processes deepen their impact on organizations, practical knowledge of relationship functioning between leaders and followers still is lim­ited (Hudson, 2013) and distance remains a leading question for organizations (Collinson, 2005). In the face of escalating competition and a global pan­demic, the opportunity to increase organizational ef­ficiency through a better understanding of the way subordinate managers can manage their distance to superiors deserves greater research attention. Therefore, this paper studied the follower–leader distance orientation (FLDO) of subordinate managers and its impact on the work environment. Driven by the assumption that a greater appreciation for and understanding of followership can lead to more gen­erative organizational processes (Duren, 2017), this study provides three extensions to contemporary fol­lowership research. First, a relational model of follow­ership is introduced as a logical continuation and addition to Uhl-Bien’s (2006) Relational Leadership Theory. Although somewhat reminiscent of the rela­tional leadership model developed by Komives, Lucas, and McMahon (2013), the model proposed here has a di.erent research postulate—it focuses on the idea that e.ective followership depends on relationships and encourages subordinates to approach their supe­riors relationally. Based on the conviction that follow­ers can partner with the leader to enhance outcomes through proactive participation (Read, 2021) and that present management practices are not ideal for fos­tering e.ective superior–inferior relationships (Farr-Wharton, Brunetto, & Shacklock, 2011), the model confronts subordinates’ intuitive decision-making and fills a gap between theory and practice. Second, considering the insu.cient understand­ing of low-power individuals (Schaerer et al., 2018), the paper extends the knowledge of current follow­ership research by dealing with managers in their role as subordinates. Specifically, it addresses an existing shortage in the literature in terms of guiding concepts that recommend certain inferior managers’ behaviors regarding the specifics of the situation (Kotsev, 2022). A particular contribution of this paper is the provision of distinctive information on relationships between management levels. Due to the opportunity to up­grade their experience as team leaders through the recommendations of this study, lower-level managers could assess the situation objectively and maintain an appropriate distance to the executive in favor of the organizational goals achievement. Third, the study identifies a gap in existing tools for measuring workplace relations. Until the begin­ning of this century, human relationships were mea­sured with universal instruments such as the Avoidant Attachment Questionnaire for Adults (West & Sheldon-Keller, 1992), the Measure of At­tachment Qualities (Carver, 1997), and the Experi­ences in the Close Relationships Scale (Brennan, Clark, & Shaver, 1998). The Relational Distance Index, proposed by Hess (2003), is more accurate but also does not measure explicitly the relation­ships at work. As stated by Shorey & Cha.n (2018), attachment measures of romantic relationships might not be appropriate for use in an organiza­tional context. It is only in the last decade that sev­eral specific tools for measuring work relationships have been developed, such as the Workplace Rela­tionships Inventory (Young, 2010), but they are de­signed primarily to study closeness and distance with colleagues in general rather than with higher-level managers. In a scale developed by Biggs, Swailes, and Baker (2016) three of the nine items concern the relationship with the superior, but the information provided is not su.cient for in-depth analysis. A scale proposed by Molero et al. (2019) assesses followers’ perceptions of a particular leader but does not examine their value orientation toward superiors. The six-item questionnaire sug­gested here tries to fill this gap by measuring the in­dividual follower–leader distance orientation from the point of view of the manager as a subordinate. This paper is organized into six sections. The next section provides the conceptual framework of the study. The methods used are described in the third section. The fourth presents the analysis and modeling of the empirical results obtained, and the fifth section is dedicated to their interpretation. Fi­nally, conclusions, limitations, and future research directions are outlined. 2CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK The paper builds upon two overlapping con­structs: managers’ upward influence and follower–leader distance. Almost 7 decades after March’s fundamental article (1955), the study of the influ­ence processes in organizations still is in its infancy (Alshenaifi & Clarke, 2014). As a result of the changes in organizational characteristics and re­quirements for managers that have occurred since the end of the 20th century, the attention of re­searchers gradually has shifted from downward to upward influence (Cohen & Bradford 2005; Steizel & Rimbau-Gilabert, 2013), which has been defined as the attempt “to influence someone higher in the formal hierarchy or authority in the organization” (Porter, Allen & Angle 2003, p. 433). After the reve­lation of the positive impact of managers’ upward influence on organizational adaptation (Floyd & Wooldridge, 1997), a number of studies have exam­ined the factors on which it depends—manager per­sonality and supervisor leadership style (Cable & Judge, 2003), gender (O’Neil, 2004), culture (Ralston et al., 2006), and political skills (Chaturvedi, Bahuguna, & Raghuvanshi, 2018). Most previous publications accepted upward influence as a desirable undertaking that brings only positives to an organization. Definitely, a subordi­nate’s proactive behaviors can directly enhance a superior’s overall e.ectiveness (Finlayson & Harvey, 2016). Moreover, managers tend to spend a lot of time and energy “for planning their own protection against mistakes and losses” (Zupan, 2012, p. 32) and in this sense, proactive behaviors seem natural. However, resorting to upward influence tactics too often could be risky, both for the contender and for the organization as a whole (Krone, 1992). The risk can be reduced significantly if the inferior manager recognizes the external and internal factors of influ­ence and is able to assess when and how to de­crease or increase his or her upward influence (Kotsev, 2021). Among the factors that need to be considered are follower–leader relationships. The relationship between leader and follower long has held the interest of researchers, and the im­pact of leader–follower distance on relationship qual­ity has been recognized (Garzaro et al., 2021). Although it has been emphasized constantly that “leadership and followership are two sides of the same coin” (Kleiner 2008, p. 93) and are equally important (Heilman, 2020), the analysis of publications shows some bias: of all the articles published in The Leader­ship Quarterly in the current century, the phrase “leader-follower relationship” (or a derivative) is used in 28 times more articles than the phrase “follower–leader relationship.” It seems that subconsciously scholars continue to view the superior as the defining figure in the dyadic interaction ,and may need some time to recognize the follower’s ability to manage the distance between the two. Considering followers first could highlight their important role in influencing re­lationships with or distance from leaders and reveal distinct contextual challenges and opportunities fol­lowers need to address (Wang, 2020), such as deter­mining a reasonable degree of distance in favor of the dyadic interaction e.ectiveness. Because people con­tinuously are getting closer and further apart (Cooper, 2016), the degree of follower–leader distance also can vary between proximity and detachment. Wang (2020; 49) argued that followers are “capable of making changes in the degrees of distance from their leaders.” In other words, not only leaders but followers also can manage the distance between them. Although workplace friendship can have unde­sirable outcomes at work (Elnafrawy, 2022), e.ec­tive management of follower–leader distance can reduce the risk significantly. However, it involves un­derstanding the multidimensionality of the distance between the “leadership actors,” as Psychogios and Dimitriadis (2021) call followers and leaders. Napier and Ferris were the first to suggest a three-dimen­sional model of dyadic distance in organizations. They defined distance as “the psychological, struc­tural and functional separation, disparity or discord between a supervisor and a subordinate” (Napier & Ferris, 1993, p. 326). According to their model, func­tional distance (the degree of closeness and rela­tionship quality) is caused by both psychological [power distance (PD), and demographic and value di.erences] and structural distance (o.ce design and opportunity to interact). Antonakis and Atwa­ter’s (2002) leader distance model divides Napier and Ferris’ structural distance into two dimensions (frequency of interaction, and physical distance) and combines functional and psychological distance into a third dimension: perceived social distance, mea­sured in terms of the intimacy of the relationship that one of the leadership actors would willingly ac­cept with regard to the other. Examining the third dimension (social distance) from the point of view of the inferior manager and its impact on organizational performance is the inno­vative point of the present study. Despite some com­mon features, social distance should not be confused with power distance, which is defined by Hofstede (2001, p. 83) as “a measure of the interpersonal power or influence between the boss and subordi­nate as perceived by the less powerful of the two.” Power distance is about the follower’s perceptions of the superior’s style of decision-making (Antonsen & Almklov, 2019), whereas social distance refers to the degree of intimacy or acceptance individuals feel to­ward others (Kim, Lee, & Wong, 2016). However, PD is likely to a.ect subordinate managers’ assessments of the legitimacy of social distance (Erskine, 2012). -(2019) confirmed that high PD is associated with higher social distance orientation, i.e., managers in countries with high-PD cultures, as is the case with Bulgaria (Davidkov, 2004), are expected to have more-detached relationships with the superior than are managers in low PD countries. Apart from the cultural aspect, distance within power relations is not felt equally by the leadership actors: low-power individuals feel less distant than their high-power counterparts, and vice versa (Magee & Smith, 2013). Indeed, asymmetries of power are inevitable, but they create opportunities (Van Kleef & Cheng, 2020). Actually, asymmetric so­cial distance a.rms the subordinate manager’s re­lational dilemma. For the successful resolution of the dilemma, superiors’ tendency to objectify and dimin­ish inferiors as human beings have to be considered, as well as the risk of being rejected—social rejection is proven to have more-detrimental psychological ef­fects on low-power individuals than on higher power individuals (Magee, 2020). Moreover, the main fac­tors that a.ect inferior–superior social relationship establishment must be taken into account. In addi­tion to subordinate managers’ personal factors (in­dividual characteristics, competencies, and motives), interpersonal and organizational factors such as work tasks and corporate culture influence man­ager–supervisor relationships (Astuti et al., 2020) and are the basis of the relational model proposed here. 3METHOD 3.1Aim, Objectives, and Research Questions The purpose of this paper was twofold: first, to study the follower–leader distance orientation of subordinate managers and its impact (advantages and disadvantages) on work environment; and sec­ond, to propose a relational followership model which can lay the foundations for the resolution of the lower-level managers’ relational dilemma. The main objectives were as follows: O1. To explore inferior managers’ FLDO in eight Bul­garian business organizations. O2. To identify and analyze the advantages and dis­advantages of relationally distant or proximal sub­ordinate managers. O3. To build a relational followership model recom­mending to lower-level managers the appropriate follower–leader distance. Taking into account the conceptual framework and objectives of the study, the following research ques­tions are addressed in this paper: Q1. What is the predominant orientation of Bulgar­ian managers as subordinates: to keep their dis­tance, or to maintain proximity with their immediate superiors? Q2. What are the strengths and weaknesses of prox­imal (low-distance oriented) subordinate managers? Q3. What are the strengths and weaknesses of dis­tant (high-distance oriented) subordinate managers? Q4. How can lower-level managers manage their distance with higher-level managers in a way that is favorable to team and organizational e.ectiveness? 3.2Research Design and Data Collection The research philosophy of this study is prag­matism because it focuses on the production of ac­tionable knowledge about the phenomenon studied (Kelly & Cordeiro, 2020). The study applied a mixed-methods research design, using both qualitative and quantitative ap­proaches to explore the complex phenomenon of follower–leader distance in detail (Halcomb, 2019) and to provide a better understanding of FLDO of subordinate managers toward their immediate su­periors. Empirical data were obtained through a combination of two research strategies. Because the study aimed to propose a new relational follower­ship model, exploratory research was involved. It also explored inferior managers’ FLDO and de­scribed its impact on work environment, which im­plies a descriptive research strategy. In the first phase of the study, a 10-item ques­tionnaire was developed. It was designed to mea­sure inferior managers’ FLDO regarding Research question Q1. Content and face validity of the ques­tionnaire were assessed by experts and a pilot study with a group of 17 business students. Reliability was tested by test-retest of the same respondents 2 weeks later (reliability coe.cient p = 0.73). As a sec­ond step to validate the questionnaire, the cognitive interviewing method was used. A group of 10 lower- and middle-level managers (leadership course at­tendees) gave their feedback through two well-rec­ognized techniques: verbal probing, and thinking aloud (Priede & Farrall, 2011). As a result of the pretesting, four items that did not load well were eliminated and one item was modified, and the re­liability was increased to 0.89. In its final version, the questionnaire consisted of six items (Table A-1). Each item contained two statements describing opposite attitudes. Respon­dents were asked to assign a score from 0 to 10 to each statement to show how strongly they agreed (0 = strong disagreement, and 10 = strong agree­ment). The points assigned for each pair had to total 10. The degree of individual FLDO was calculated using the formula FLDO = (a) + (c) + (e) + (h) + (i) + (l). A value close to zero indicated a proximity orien­tation. As the result approached 60, a higher dis­tance orientation gradually prevailed. As a measure of the central tendency of a set of quantitative observations with di.erent impor­tance, the weighted arithmetic mean is used (Pu­lamolu et al., 2017). The individual FLDOs were divided into four class intervals (0–15, 16–30, 31–45, and 46–60), and the weighted arithmetic mean was calculated as (1) where represents the number of managers (the weight) in the th interval; and represents the data values to be averaged. for Q2, Q3, and Q4, a qualitative approach was applied to gain an in-depth knowledge of the subject. Alongside the survey questionnaire, semi-structured interviews and focus groups were used for primary data collection (Saunders et al., 2019). These were conducted in eight Bulgarian industrial companies as a part of their in-company training programs. The semi-structured interviews were held with middle-level managers (N = 21), whereas focus group contributors were lower-level man­agers (N = 71). Thus homogeneity of 11 focus groups was provided. Prior to discussion of questions Q2, Q3, and Q4, all participants in the qualitative data collection an­swered the questionnaire. In addition, 127 lower managers from the same companies, who did not attend the training courses, also answered the ques­tionnaire. As a result, a total of 219 complete ques­tionnaires were returned. The respondents mainly were female (81.2%), aged 25–45 (57%), and had up to 3 years of work experience as managers (53.4%). Secondary data collection involved retrieving in­formation on managerial subordination and leader–follower relationship from scientific journals, reports, and books. 4.RESULTS 4.1Analysis The results of the survey indicate that 165 man­agers (75.3%) display themselves as proximal follow­ers (the first two intervals) to superiors, and 66 of them gave scores from 0 to 15, indicating that they considered themselves to have a high proximity ori­entation (Table A-2). The remaining 54 managers (24.7%), who ranked themselves in the third and fourth intervals, tend to keep their distance from immediate superiors, and three of them (1.4% of the sample) were high-distance oriented. By substitution in Equation (1), an arithmetic mean value of 21.88 was obtained. This clarifies the answer to the first research question: the majority of the managers surveyed tend to maintain social proximity with their immediate superiors. In addition to questioning previous research on the influence of power distance on social distance orientation (as presented in the conceptual framework section), the results obtained can be interpreted according to the e.ect of FLDO on follower–leader interaction and overall organizational performance. To put it simply: are the results good or bad news? Answering this question implies analysis of ad­vantages and disadvantages of the two extremes (high proximity versus high distance). This task was performed during the interviews and focus group discussions on Q2 and Q3. The ideas presented by the participants regarding the answer to Q2 (What are the strengths and weaknesses of low-distance-oriented subordinate managers?) are summarized here, starting with the strengths: •Existence of strong exchange links between the leadership actors makes the superior more in­clined to delegate responsibilities to the inferior—an assumption stated several decades earlier by Graen and Scandura (1987). •Close relationships with the superior allow proxi­mal managers to comfortably express personal opinions so that they can be recognized as a valu­able asset, especially when non-programmed de­cision-making is involved. •When closing the distance, leadership actors get to know each other better. This advantage can be considered from at least two aspects. On the one hand, the superior is able to assess accurately the inferior’s strengths and weaknesses regarding task assignments. On the other hand, by getting acquainted with inferior’s mentality, the superior can apply appropriate motivational tools. •Low-distance managers add emotional nuance to task execution. Often their attachment to the supe­rior is the reason for making extra e.ort to achieve desired results—they would not let a friend down. •Promising career opportunities are available to proximal managers. Although higher-level man­agers willingly share knowledge and experience with them, it is far from the only reason for their rapid growth—the superior’s subjective assess­ment of the inferior’s work performance also should be considered. However, as stated by Knight, “allowing yourself to be the manager’s darling is not always a smart career move” (2021). Qualitative data from the focus groups and interviews highlighted the follow­ing weaknesses of low-distance managers: •Often, leadership actors have to expend extra time and energy on maintaining close relation­ships. The opportunity of using these valuable re­sources for other more-urgent and important organizational tasks should not be overlooked. •In the case of gender di.erences, closeness be­tween managers rarely goes unnoticed by others. Rumors and gossip (whether reasonable or not) begin to shift the focus of general attention from organizational goals and individual tasks to the couple’s behavior. •Each of the two leadership actors has the oppor­tunity to misuse personal information received from the other, especially in the event of a cooling of the relationship. Disclosure of intimate infor­mation, whether intentional or not, can be dev­astating for the victim. •Subjectivity in decision-making is possible. It can be expressed both in the unwillingness of the in­ferior to criticize senior manager’s decisions as well as in the superior’s selective approach to task assignment and performance evaluation. Focus groups participants and interviewees also identified the strengths and weaknesses of man­agers who tend to keep their distance from the su­perior. Thus, the answer to Q3 was provided. The strengths of high-distance managers are as follows: •Distant managers’ orientation reduces the degree of subjectivity in management decisions. Without the interference of emotions, leadership actors can objectively select the optimal alternative in terms of organizational policies and goals. •Performance evaluation of high-distance oriented managers and their remuneration is based on real results. There is no risk of informal relationships predisposing the superior toward an unfair distri­bution of organizational rewards. •Distant managers do not burden the superior with their personal problems. This, on the one hand, reduces the time for interaction between leadership actors, and on the other hand, keeps their focus on organizational goals. •High-distance-oriented managers have a clear under­standing of their position in the organizational hier­archy. They stick to the role assigned to them in the company, without entering the personal space of the superior. In this manner, they indirectly support the formal communication channels in the organization. •Distant managers’ orientation limits the spread of rumors and gossip in the organization and en­ables them to maintain some personal freedom. They respect the superior’s right to privacy and wish to receive the same treatment. Most of these strengths mentioned are benefi­cial primarily for the organization, whereas the weaknesses of high-distance managers pose a threat mainly to themselves: •Distant managers’ skills and expertise are not al­ways adequate to the tasks assigned to them—because they keep their distance from the superior, in some cases their capabilities might be overestimated, and in other cases they might be underestimated. In addition, it is likely that the most desirable tasks will be assigned to closer subordinates, and the dirty work will be left to high-distance-oriented inferiors. •Higher distance to the superior does not favor growth in the organizational hierarchy. Moreover, in the event of redundancies in the organization, the probability that the names of distant man­agers will appear on the list of their immediate supervisor is not negligible. •It is possible at some point that the distant man­ager might be insu.ciently informed about inter­nal and external changes. Neglecting informal communication channels can slow the exchange of information and even isolate the inferior. •Often, distance orientation is accompanied by a lack of desire to work in a team. Thereby distant managers tend to avoid sharing their concerns with their immediate superior. Over time, they can become individuals who try to solve problems on their own, without the involvement of a superior, and that usually calls into question the final result. •By avoiding the expression of feelings, high-dis­tance managers accumulate a significant amount of stress. Sooner or later this a.ects the quality of their work. This analysis of the strengths and weaknesses sends a clear message: in some cases subordinate managers have to maintain proximity with the im­mediate superior, but in other cases, keeping a cer­tain amount of distance may be more appropriate. Based on this general inference and the concrete an­swers of the managers surveyed to Q4, a model was developed. It provides some guidelines to inferior managers in deciding what are these “other cases” and what does “a certain amount” exactly mean. 4.2Modeling Figure 1 presents the result of the individual in­terviews and group discussions on the subject—a behavior chain that covers all possible nuances of the behavior of subordinate managers in the low-distance–high-distance continuum. It was devel­oped through inductive thematic analysis of the responses received to Q4 and its subquestions. The chain comprises a series of behaviors classified ac­cording to the predominant orientation of inferior managers to maintain proximity or keep their dis­tance from the superior. The chain is composed of five basic managerial behaviors: •The manager establishes close relationships with the immediate superior, sharing and being the re­cipient of personal information about life values, motives, ambitions, beliefs. •The manager maintains mostly informal relation­ships with the superior by revealing information from her or his personal life that is relevant to the work, giving an impression of belonging and com­mitment. •The manager sustains balanced relationships with the superior by carefully considering what and when to share according to the situation. •The manager maintains mostly formal relation­ships with the superior, distinguishing between o.cial and personal matters. •The manager remains distant from the superior and upholds her or his independence, expecting to be evaluated solely on performance. Adopting a widely renowned leadership deci­sion tree approach (Vroom and Yetton 1973), the re­lational model of followership presented in Figure 2 enables the subordinate manager to independently determine an appropriate behavior and increases their chances to solve the relational dilemma. The model consists of four questions exploring the influ­encing factors presented in the literature review. The first three questions reflect the organizational factors of influence (culture and work tasks), whereas the fourth regards an interpersonal fac­tor—the inferior’s perception of the immediate su­perior. The answers form a tree of alternative decisions recommending relevant behaviors from the low-distance–high-distance continuum. As a precondition for the e.ective implementation of the model, consistent self-monitoring by the subordi­nate manager is required, because it is the key for balancing the right level of workplace relationships (Tasselli & Kildu., 2018). 5.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION The answer to the first question defines the be­havior that a manager can choose in order to com­ply with the norms established in the organization: “Does organizational culture support higher fol­lower–leader distance?” As far as Bulgarian industry is concerned, answering this question is not too dif­ficult—low-distance orientation was observed in all the companies surveyed, which makes it evident that close relationships with superiors are viewed as normal. However, if the answer to the question is yes, low-distance-oriented managers should try to resist their natural inclination, so as not to con­tradict established norms and become an object of ridicule by colleagues. The second question was intended to deter­mine whether the work of inferior managers is con­ducive to a closer relationship with the superior: “Does your work imply just occasional interaction with the superior?” A positive answer to this ques­tion suggests a low probability of a shift in relation­ships from formal to informal and a necessity for low-distance managers to readjust their orientation. If the answer is no, high-distance managers face a similar challenge. The third question concerned the need for im­partiality in the performance of management func­tions: “Does your work require objectivity?” In principle, every manager is expected to be objec­tive, but if in some activities the expression of sub­jectivism might be understandable, or even justified (e.g., in the daily work assignment by the foreman), in other activities (e.g., related to the control of quality) objectivism is mandatory. In such activities, it does matter whether the relationship with the manager is formal or informal—usually, close rela­tionships are a prerequisite for subjective assess­ment of the situation and biased decision-making. Therefore if objectivity is required in their work, subordinate managers should refrain from being too close to their superiors. The fourth question examined the personal preferences of the senior manager: “Would you de­scribe the superior as distant?” This question is al­most useless in practical terms—often in response to a perceived inclination of the higher-level man­ager, inferiors imperceptibly change their orienta­tion. For example, in the case of a superior who tends to avoid informal contact, subordinate man­agers usually respond by reinforcing a higher-dis­tance orientation. In event of a leader change, they may show a di.erent orientation. The findings presented in this paper have vari­ous practical implications. The relational model of followership can be used best by subordinates who possess the three key elements to being an e.ective follower: work-related knowledge, communication skills, and motivation (Yung, 2013). For them, the model reveals opportunities for resolving the rela­tional dilemma and improving their management performance. It supports managers in determining appropriate behaviors and provides options to avoid the negatives associated with the two continuum extremes. Following the model, subordinate man­agers can reduce their high-distance orientation in harmony with a low-distance culture and maintain closer relationships with the immediate superior if frequent interaction is needed. In other cases, when objectivity is key, the model may recommend a more distant approach to the superior. Both proximal and distant inferiors have their place and significance in the organizational hierar­chy. Subordinate managers can strengthen their ac­tive role in managing follower–leader relationships by overcoming the extremes in their FLDO. Adopting a balanced approach to follower–leader distance enables them to take full advantage of the oppor­tunities provided by the relational model of follow­ership. By analyzing the capability of the manager as a subordinate to decide when and how to influence the distance to the superior, the study reinforces and extends prior work on upward influence and follower–leader relationship. It builds on the under­standing that in some cases managers’ upward ex­change with their own supervisor can moderate their relationships (Huang et al., 2020). The paper broadens Boccialetti’s (1995) research and adds to his list of advantages and disadvantages of high and low distance. Shifting between following and man­aging, the study confirms that “following sometimes involves leading” (Morris, 2014, p. 58) and suggests four questions to be considered when managing re­lationships with superiors. Thus, it can be viewed as a natural extension of Wong’s (2019) research, tak­ing it a step further and o.ering a tool to influence superiors who do not pay attention to the expecta­tions of their subordinates. Among the theoretical contributions of the study is the validation of a new assessment tool, as well as the combination of qualitative and quantita­tive methods. The predominant FLDO of the man­agers surveyed was revealed—the majority of them tend to maintain closer relationships with their im­mediate superiors (thus answering Q1). The paper also identified the main strengths and weaknesses of proximal and distant managers (thus answering Q2 and Q3). On this basis, a relational followership model is proposed that provides some useful in­sights for lower-level managers into how to manage their distance with superiors in a way that is favor­able to team and organizational e.ectiveness (thus answering Q4). The results of this study could have additional practical and theoretical implications in future re­search. The model developed could facilitate the de­velopment of similar approaches to organizational subordination modeling that can be used in other behavioral challenges of inferior managers, such as deciding when to follow instructions and when to take the initiative. Similar decision trees could be a valuable guide for subordinate managers and could be used in managing relationships with superiors. However, the study is not without limitations. First, it covers only manufacturing industries. It is not clear whether the survey would generate similar results in the tertiary and public sectors. Second, it ignores the e.ect of individual diversity (gender, age, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc.) on follower–leader distance. Third, too much reliance is put on the presumably objective assessment of the situa­tion by subordinate managers in answering the de­cision tree questions. Fourth, the proposed rela­tional model of followership has not been tested in practice, and its reliability could be questioned. Finally, subordinate managers’ predicaments are not limited to the dilemma discussed here. Con­sidering their decisions and behaviors in a more sys­tematic way could stimulate a more rigorous analysis of subordinate managers’ followership styles, and many new questions could be addressed. How does the resolution of the relational dilemma refer to inferior’s propensity to follow instructions or take the initiative? How do their decisions corre­spond to other challenging questions faced by infe­rior managers, such as when to trust their own judgment and when to trust the superior? How do their competence, temperament, and other individ­ual specificities a.ect the way subordinate man­agers interact with higher-level managers? What in fact are the other dominant parameters of follow­ership that need to be considered by subordinate managers? These and many other questions still need to be addressed. REFERENCES Alshenaifi, N. & Clarke, N. (2014). Follower upward influ­ence tactics – key findings from the literature. In Uni­versity of Southampton file (database online), West Yorkshire, UK: University Forum for Human Resource Development. Antonakis, J. & Atwater, L. (2002). Leader distance: A re­view and a proposed theory. Leadership Quarterly, 13(6), 673-704. Antonsen, S., & Almklov, P. (2019). Revisiting the issue of power in safety research. Safety Science Research, 87-102. Astuti, T., Helmi, A. F., Haq, A. H. B., & Al Farauqi, M. D. A. (2020). The dynamic of performing social relations amongst managers and supervisors: A thematic anal­ysis. The Qualitative Report, 25(3), 700-720. Biçer, C. (2020). The Hedgehog’s dilemma in organizations: The pros and cons of workplace friendship. Hitit Univer­sity Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 13(1), 201-217. Biggs, D., Swailes, S., & Baker, S. (2016). The Measure­ment of Worker Relations: The Development of a Three-Component Scale. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 37(1), 2–12. Boccialetti, G. (1995). It Takes Two. Jossey-Bass Publishers, CA: San Francisco. Brennan, K. A., Clark, C. L., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Self-re­port measurement of adult attachment: An integrative overview. In Attachment theory and close relation­ships, edited by J. A. Simpson and W. S. Rholes, 46–76. NY: Guilford Press. Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (2003). Managers’ up­ward influence tactic strategies: The role of manager personality and supervisor leadership style. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(2), 197-214. Carver, C. S. (1997). Adult attachment and personality: Converging evidence and a new measure. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(8), 865-883. Chaturvedi, S., Bahuguna, P. C., & Raghuvanshi, J. (2018). Political skill as mediator of the upward influence and career success relationship. International Journal of Business Excellence, 15(3), 372-391. Chen, A. S. Y., Hou, Y. H., & Wu, I. H. (2016). Handling conflict at work – the impact of active and agreeable conflict styles. International Journal of Conflict Management, 27(1), 50-61. Chen H. & Li S. (2018). Measuring the psychological dis­tance between an organization and its members – The construction and validation of a new scale. Fron­tiers in Psychology, 8, 2296. Cohen, A. R. & Braford, D. L. (2005). Influence without Au­thority. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Collinson, D. (2005). Questions of distance. Leadership, 1(2), 235-250. Cooper, R. (2016). The generalized social body: distance and technology. In For Robert Cooper, edited by G. Burrell and M. Parker, 311-325. NY: Routledge. Davidkov, T. (2004). Where does Bulgaria stand. Papeles del este, 8(1), 1-22. Duren, D. (2017). Servant leadership: A new paradigm. In Servant Leadership and Followership: Examining the Impact on Workplace Behavior, edited by C. J. Davis, 225-260. NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Elnafrawy, A. A. R. (2022). Workplace spirituality, a.ective commitment, and mediating role of workplace friend­ship. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, 11(1), 69-82. Erskine. L. 2012. Defining relational distance for today’s leaders. International Journal of Leadership Studies, 7(1), 96-113. Farr-Wharton, R., Brunetto, Y., &Shacklock, K. (2011). Professionals’ supervisor-subordinate relationships, autonomy, and commitment in Australia: A leader-member exchange theory perspective. A Journal for the Australian Nursing Profession, 22(17), 3496-3512. Floyd, S. W. & Wooldridge, B. (1997). Middle manage­ment’s strategic influence and organizational per­formance. Journal of Management Studies, 34(3), 465-485. Garzaro, G., Gatti, P., Caputo, A., Musso, F., Clari, M., Di­monte, V., & Pira, E. (2021). Job demands and per­ceived distance in leader-follower relationships: A study on emotional exhaustion among nurses. Ap­plied Nursing Research, 61, 151455. Gjerde, S & Alvesson, M. (2020). Sandwiched: Exploring role and identity of middle managers in the genuine middle, Human Relations, 73(1), 124-151. Graen, G. & Scandura, T. (1987). Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing. Research in Organizational Behav­ior, 9, 175-208. Halcomb, E. J. (2019). Mixed methods research: The issues beyond combining methods. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 75(3), 499-501. Heilman, E. L. (2020). Linking E.ective Followership to Adap­tive Performance: The Moderation Role of Healthy Emo­tionality. Doctoral dissertation (database online), William James College: ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. Hess, J. (2003). Measuring distance in personal relation­ships: The Relational Distance Index. Personal Rela­tionship, 10(2), 197-216. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations across Nations, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Howell, J. M. & Shamir, B. (2005). The role of followers in the charismatic process: Relationships and their conse­quences. Academy of Management Review, 30, 96-112. Howladar M. & Rahman M. (2021). The influence of ser­vant leadership on organizational citizenship behavior: the mediating e.ect of organizational commitment. South East European Journal of Economics and Busi­ness, 16(1), 70-83. Huang, L., Krasikova, D. V., & Harms, P. D. (2020). Avoiding or embracing social relationships? A conservation of resources perspective of leader narcissism, leader–member exchange di.erentiation, and follower voice. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 41(1), 77-92. Hudson, D. L. (2013). Attachment theory and leader-fol­lower relationships. The Psychologist-Manager Jour­nal, 16(3), 147–159. Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692-724. Kahn, W. A. (2001). Holding environments at work. Jour­nal of Applied Behavioral Science, 37(3), 260-279. Kahn, W. A. (2010). The essence of engagement: lessons from the field. In Handbook of Employee Engage­ment, edited by S. L. Albrecht, 3-19, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. Kahn, W. A. & Heaphy, E. D. (2014). Relational contexts of personal engagement at work. In Employee En­gagement in Theory and Practice, edited by C. Truss, R. Delbridge, K. Alfes, A. Shantz, & E. Soane, 82-96, London: Routledge. Kavade A. & Nimkar N. (2020). Impact of employee friendship for productivity and job satisfaction. Ann Trop Med & Public Health, 23(17), 231703. Kelly, L. M. & Cordeiro, M. (2020). Three principles of pragmatism for research on organizational processes. Methodological Innovations, 13(2), 1-10. Kim, T. Y., Lee, D. R., & Wong, N. Y. S. (2016). Supervisor humor and employee outcomes: The role of social distance and a.ective trust in supervisor. Journal of Business and Psychology, 31(1), 125-139. Kleiner, K. (2008). Rethinking leadership and followership: A student’s perspective. In The art of followership, edited by R. E. Riggio, I. Chale., and J. Lipman-Blu­men, 89-93. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Knight, R. (2021). The hazards of being the boss’s favorite. In Managing Yourself (database online), Harvard Busi­ness Review, 5. Komives, S., Lucas, R., & McMahon, T. R. (2013). Revisit­ing the relational leadership model: Perspectives from the third edition of exploring leadership. Eugene, Ore­gon: The University of Oregon. Kotsev, E. (2021). The dual role of managers as an object and subject of influence. In Book of proceedings, In­ternational May Conference on Strategic Manage­ment IMCSM21, 46-56. Kotsev, E. (2022). Knowing when and how to trust supe­riors’ decisions: Toward a conceptual model of subor­dinate managers’ behavior. Organizacija, 55(1), 50-63. Krone, K. J. (1992). A comparison of organizational, struc­tural, and relationship e.ects on subordinates’ up­ward influence choices. Communication Quarterly, 40(1), 1-15. Kundi, Y. M., Soomro, S. A., & Kamran, M. (2021). Does social support at work enhance subjective career suc­cess? The mediating role of relational attachment. In­ternational Journal of Organizational Analysis, https://doi.org/10.1108/ijoa-08-2020-2379. Magee, J. C. (2020). Power and social distance. Current Opinion in Psychology, 33, 33-37. Magee, J. C. & Smith, P. K. (2013). The social distance the­ory of power. Personality and Social Psychology Re­view, 17, 158-186. March, J. G. (1955). An introduction to the theory and measurement of influence. American Political Science Review, 49(2), 431-451. Mikkola, L. & Nykänen, H. (2019). Workplace relation­ships. In Workplace Communication, 15-27. London: Routledge. Molero, F., Mikulincer, M., Shaver, P. R., Laguía, A., & Mo­riano, J. A. (2019). The development and validation of the leader as security provider scale. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 35(3), 183-193. Morris, R. (2014). Constructions of following from a rela­tional perspective: A follower-focused study, Journal of Leadership Education, 13(4), 51-62. Napier, B. J. & Ferris, G. R. (1993). Distance in organiza­tions. Human Resource Management Review, 3(4), 321-357. Neilsen, E. H. & Gypen, J. (1979). The subordinate’s predica­ments. Harvard Business Review, 57(5), 133-143. O’Neil, J. (2004). E.ects of gender and power on PR man­agers’ upward influence. Journal of Managerial Is­sues, 16(1), 127-144. Porter, L., Allen, R., & Angle, H. (2003). The politics of up­ward influence in organizations. In Organizational In­fluence Processes, 2nd ed., edited by L. Porter, H. Angle, and R. Allen, 431-445. Oxfordshire, UK: Routledge. Psychogios, A. & Dimitriadis, A. (2021). Brain-adjusted re­lational leadership: A social-constructed conscious­ness approach to leader-follower interaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 672217. Pulamolu, K. K., Bhavani, T., & Subramanian, D. V. (2017). Intra-Tenant resource sharing in yarn based on weighted arithmetic mean. In 2017 International Con­ference on Networks & Advances in Computational Technologies (NetACT), 262-265. Ralston, D. A., Terpstra-Tong, J., Maignan, I., & Napier, N. K. (2006). Vietnam: A cross-cultural comparison of up­ward influence ethics. Journal of International Man­agement, 12(1), 85-105. Read, J. B. (2021). A decade of teaching followership: ret­rospective and guide. Industrial and Commercial Training, 53(2), 166-174. Robbins, D. (1985). Synthesis of leadership theory to date, In ScholarWorks at University of Montana (database online), University of Montana. https://scholarworks.umt.edu. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill A. (2019). Research methods for business students. 8th ed. Harlow, UK: Pearson. Schaerer, M., du Plessis, C., Yap, A. J., & Thau, S. (2018). Low power individuals in social power research: A quantitative review, theoretical framework, and em­pirical test. Organizational Behavior and Human De­cision Processes, 149, 73-96. Shorey, H. S. & Cha.n, J. S. (2018). Leader–follower at­tachment: Implications for personality assessment in organizational contexts. Journal of Personality Assess­ment, 100(5), 518-528. Sias, P. M. & Shin, Y. (2019). Workplace relationships. In Ori­gins and Traditions of Organizational Communication, edited by A. Nicotera, 187-206. New York: Routledge. Singh, A. K. (1998). Influencing the superior: A factor an­alytical study. Vikalpa, 23(2), 47-52. Steizel, S. & Rimbau-Gilabert, E. (2013). Upward influence tactics through technology-mediated communication tools. Computers in Human Behaviour, 29(2), 462-472. Tasselli, S. & Kildu., M. (2018). When brokerage between friendship cliques endangers trust: a personality–net­work fit perspective. Academy of Management Jour­nal, 61(3), 802-825. Taylor, R. R., Hanlon, S. C., & Boyd, N. G. (1992). Can leaders and subordinates be friends? A classroom approach for addressing an important managerial dilemma. Journal of Management Education, 16(1), 39-55. Trompenaars, A. M. R. (1985). The organization of mean­ing and the meaning of organization: A comparative study on the conceptions of organizational structure in di.erent cultures (brain). In ProQuest dissertations. AAI8515460 (database online). Pennsylvania: Penn Li­braries. Uhl-Bien, M. (2006). Relational Leadership Theory: Ex­ploring the social processes of leadership and orga­nizing. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 654-676. Van Kleef, G. A., & Cheng, J. T. (2020). Power, status, and hierarchy: current trends and future challenges. Cur­rent Opinion in Psychology, 33, iv-xiii. Vroom, V. H. and Yetton, P. W. (1973). Leadership and de­cision-making. 110, University of Pittsburgh Press. Wang, D. (2020). How do followers distance themselves from leaders? An interpretive study of followership in physical and non-physical contexts. Doctoral disserta­tion (database online), Lancaster, UK: Library of Lan­caster University. West, M. & Sheldon-Keller, A. (1992). The assessment of dimensions relevant to adult reciprocal attachment. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 37(9), 600-606. Wheatley, M. (2006). Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a chaotic world. 3rd ed. San Fran­cisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Wong, S. I. (2019). Influencing upward: Subordinates’ re­sponses to leaders’(un)awareness of their empower­ment expectations. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30(10), 1604-1634. Young, D. M. (2010). Validation study of the workplace relationships inventory: A workplace self-report mea­sure of adult attachment style. Doctoral dissertation (database online), UT Southwestern Institutional Repository. https://utswmed-ir.tdl.org Yung, C. T. & Tsai, K. C. (2013). Followership: An important partner of leadership. Business and Management Horizons, 1(2), 47-55. Zheng, X., Li, L., Zhang, F., & Zhu, M. (2019). The roles of power distance orientation and perceived insider sta­tus in the subordinates’ Moqi with supervisors and sus­tainable knowledge-sharing. Sustainability, 11(5), 1421. Zupan, M. K. (2012). Relationship between management and leadership and characteristics of Slovenian man­agers. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, 1(2), 21-34 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 37 Abstract Vol. 13, No. 1, 37-51 doi:10.17708/DRMJ.2024.v13n01a03 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 38 Emil Nikolov Kotsev: Managing the Distance with the Superior: Toward a Resolution of a Subordinate Manager’s Dilemma Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 39 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 40 Emil Nikolov Kotsev: Managing the Distance with the Superior: Toward a Resolution of a Subordinate Manager’s Dilemma Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 41 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 42 Emil Nikolov Kotsev: Managing the Distance with the Superior: Toward a Resolution of a Subordinate Manager’s Dilemma Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 43 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 44 Emil Nikolov Kotsev: Managing the Distance with the Superior: Toward a Resolution of a Subordinate Manager’s Dilemma Figure 1: Behavior chain Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 45 Figure 2: Relational model of followership Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 46 Emil Nikolov Kotsev: Managing the Distance with the Superior: Toward a Resolution of a Subordinate Manager’s Dilemma Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 47 EXTENDED SUMMARY/IZVLECEK Clanek raziskuje usmerjenost razdalje med sledilci in vodji pri srednjih managerjih v osmih bol­garskih industrijskih podjetjih. Namen je bil dvojen: prvic, preuciti usmerjenost razdalje med sledilci in vodji srednjih managerjev in njen vpliv na delovno okolje; in drugic, predlagati relacijski model sle­denja, ki bi lahko postavil temelje za rešitev relacijskih dilem srednjega managementa. Študija je upora­bila kombinirani raziskovalni nacrt z mešanimi metodami, ki združuje tako kvalitativne kot kvantitativne pristope v kombinaciji dveh raziskovalnih strategij - raziskovalne in opisne. Za primarno zbiranje po­datkov so bili uporabljeni anketni vprašalnik, polstrukturirani intervjuji in fokusne skupine. Rezultati kažejo, da bolgarski managerji težijo k vzdrževanju družbene bližine z neposrednim nadrejenim. Clanek izpostavlja ter razpravlja o prednostih in slabostih managerjev, ki so bližje ali bolj oddaljeni. Predlaga se relacijski model sledenja, ki bi podrejenim managerjem pomagal bolje ravnati z njihovo razdaljo do managerjev višjih ravni na nacin, ki je ugoden za ucinkovitost tima in organizacije. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 48 Emil Nikolov Kotsev: Managing the Distance with the Superior: Toward a Resolution of a Subordinate Manager’s Dilemma Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 49 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 Emil Nikolov Kotsev: Managing the Distance with the Superior: Toward a Resolution of a Subordinate Manager’s Dilemma 50 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 51 Table A-1: Follower–leader distance orientation questionnaire Appendix 1 Table A-2: Distinctive orientations, number of respondents, and data values to be averaged Appendix 2 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 52 THE YESTERDAY, TODAY AND TOMORROW OF EMPLOYEE AUTONOMY: A BIBLIOMETRIC REVIEW AND RESEARCH AGENDA Ljupcho Eftimov Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje, Faculty of Economics – Skopje, Republic of North Macedonia ljupco.eftimov@eccf.ukim.edu.mk Violeta Cvetkoska Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje, Faculty of Economics – Skopje, Republic of North Macedonia vcvetkoska@eccf.ukim.edu.mk Bojan Kitanovikj Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje, Faculty of Economics – Skopje, Republic of North Macedonia bojan.kitanovikj@eccf.ukim.edu.mk Employee autonomy, which concerns the em­powerment of employees and redefines the role of employees in how organizations work has been ex­tensively researched in the last decades, mostly inFollowing the phenomena of the Great Resignation, quiet quitting, and ubiquitous remote work in post-COVID human resource management, researchers’ interest in job autonomy has grown to an all-time high. Besides the growing sci­entific maturity of the field, the extent to which employees should enjoy autonomy in crafting their workload, choosing their work methods and workplace, and the impact on the work outcomes is not synthesized and open to debates. We address the evolutionary development track of this concept using a multitechnique bibliometric analysis of em­ployee autonomy and the invisible colleges framework. Moreover, the research presents a combination of descriptive bibliometric analysis, co-authorship, and keyword co-occurrence analysis, to investigate the state-of-the-art research and past scholar directions about job autonomy. Thus, we contribute to academic research by revealing job autonomy’s inherent intellectual structure, investigating the most influential concepts and hotspots, and portraying new paths for future research. Namely, the analysis pointed out core themes including benefits of employee autonomy, job satis­faction and well-being, environmental context, motivation, employee behavior, organizational psychology, work or­ganization, leadership, digitalization, and performance, and five paths for future studies. This leaves space for the topic to be further cross-pollinated with other managerial concepts. The findings have the potential to benefit policy­makers, practitioners, and the academic community as crucial stakeholders in the field. Keywords: employee autonomy, job autonomy, bibliometric review, co-citation analysis, keyword co-occurrence analysis fields such as organizational psychology, organiza­1INTRODUCTION Definitions describe employee autonomy or job autonomy as the degree to which the job en­ables a significant portion of freedom, discretion, and independence in employees to determine how, when, and where they perform their work (Kubicek et al., 2017). tional behavior, strategic management, and most dominantly in human resource management (HRM). Both human resource (HR) practitioners and schol­ars have emphasized employee autonomy as a con­tributing factor to individual, team, and organiza­tional performance. In this sense, many scholars view job autonomy as a core element of the job de­sign function in HRM, which is tasked with establish­ing employees’ duties, roles, and responsibilities (Ilgen & Hollenbeck, 1991). As one of the most prevalent models in job design, the job characteris­tics model centers employee autonomy as one of the fundamental dimensions together will skill vari­ety, task identity and significance, and feedback that lead to increased motivation and satisfaction (Ali et al., 2014). To date, published research has focused mainly on determining various relationships between em­ployee autonomy and employees’ cognitive abilities and job-related skills (Morgeson et al., 2005), com­munication quality and managerial support (Parker et al., 2001), intrinsic motivation (Dysvik & Kuvaas, 2011), perceived control, family support, self-e.­cacy, and similar (Federici, 2013), and assessing its influences on employee wellbeing, work-life balance, job performance, and work outcomes (Clausen et al., 2022; De Clercq & Brieger, 2021; Cho et al., 2021). Additionally, several meta-literature reviews exist on the topic, yet are predominantly partial and focused on specific relationships between constructs (Khosh­naw & Alavi, 2020) or are in turn industry-specific (Pursio et al., 2021). This is why we believe that an overarching aerial view of this concept is needed using biblio­metric analysis, which has recently gained popular­ity among researchers as a method for achieving objectivity and comprehensiveness in reviewing ef­forts (Donthu et al., 2021). Bibliometric methods have the potential to shed light on articles’ impor­tance and connections to other articles in the field, presenting these links in a network by clusters. In turn, these connections can remain hidden with sys­tematic literature reviews or meta-reviews. Further, in the case of bibliometric analyses, researcher bias is rarely present, and the sample size is much larger as it often comprises several hundred articles (Zupic & Cater, 2013). Despite all these benefits, very few bibliometric reviews on employees’ and job auton­omy have been published so far (Zychová et al., 2023), which represented additional motivation for us to carry out this research. We conducted a quantitative systematic review grounded in bibliometrics and compliant with the PRISMA protocol for acquiring data (Moher et al., 2015). The analyzed period covers all published ar­ticles in double-blind peer-reviewed journals until the end of 2023. To contribute to a wider perspec­tive and to ensure an increased level of objectivity, we perform a multitechnique bibliometric analysis containing a descriptive bibliometric analysis, co-au­thorship analysis, and keyword co-occurrence anal­ysis (Porter et al., 2002). Through using advanced bibliometric techniques, this study attempts to com­plement prior literature and trace the historical evo­lution of employee autonomy research, uncover present influential and popular themes and hotspots, and eventually point out directions for fu­ture research in the field. With that in mind, we look to answer the following research questions: RQ1: What is the inherent intellectual structure of the employee autonomy body of research? RQ2: What are the most influential and impactful concepts, themes, and hotspots nowadays? RQ3: What is the potential of employee autonomy research and what new paths for future re­search on the topic exist? With this, the article’s attempted contributions are twofold. To begin with, this bibliometric review un­derscores the most impactful articles, and the themes they investigate, and pinpoints the current trends of the research trends, which serve as a basis for new in­vestigations in future research endeavors. Then, the second contribution can be seen in the attempt to el­evate the existing employee autonomy literature through a more comprehensive and objective point of view in terms of the review. This holds potential theo­retical contributions as the dominant job autonomy research is synthesized around the backbone of the bibliometric method comprised of three bibliometric techniques, while also benefitting a range of di.erent stakeholders such as business leaders, managers, HR professionals, who can practically act on the findings in their everyday work towards improving their orga­nizations. Additionally, policymakers can find the con­tributions useful when regulating unionization and forms of increased employee participation. To address the above-mentioned research questions, we first provide a theoretical perspective of employee autonomy, followed by an in-depth de­scription of the process of selecting and analyzing data for the three bibliometric techniques. Then, the study will outline the summary of the results in a review grounded in the invisible colleges frame­work and lastly recommend future research direc­tions in the field in question, as well as underline potential limitations of the bibliometric method. 2THEORETICAL BACKGROUND As stated, for this article, we understand em­ployee autonomy in the broadest sense as the level of freedom and discretion employees have in terms of their workplace autonomy, worktime autonomy, and methods autonomy (Kubicek et al., 2017). Other definitions broaden the power delegated to employees with this concept, so they understand it to mean a set of practices that involve the delega­tion of responsibility in the hierarchy to give the workforce enhanced authority and decision-making (Lin et al., 2013). Besides the work-related aspects, some researchers believe that employee autonomy also translates to allowing workers to regulate and show their feelings, emotions, and behaviors to pur­sue the fulfillment of the objectives, which are grounded in their personal values and belief systems (Wu et al., 2015). Moreover, the dimensions of job autonomy have significantly varied over time as more re­searchers added new constructs to this umbrella concept. One of the first conceptualizations of em­ployee autonomy stress job schedule or the auton­omy to schedule the work on one’s own and job procedures or the autonomy to opt for the ap­proach one believes is the most adequate one for performing a certain task (De Spiegelaere et al., 2016). Then, other dimensions were considered such as autonomy in choosing the job criteria, goals, pace of work, the workplace, workload, and working hours – the latter gaining new ground with the ubiq­uitous character of remote work and hybrid work practices (Muecke & Iseke, 2019; Sewell & Taskin, 2015). Some later additions to the dimensions of job autonomy include decision-making and self-reflec­tion (Theurer et al., 2018). A concept that is commonly mistaken for job autonomy is independence in the workplace. While they have similarities, the concepts di.er widely one from the other. According to the self-determi­nation theory, job autonomy can be characterized by having free will at work and standing behind the actions and values one believes in (Deci et al., 2017). On the other hand, independence means that one does not need nor accept any help or resources to perform the task, so one does not require others to perform the tasks and can function on one’s own (Tsen et al., 2021). In other words, job autonomy does not neces­sarily require an employee to be independent – in fact, an employee can be autonomous while depend­ing on co-workers and managers for support and help with the workload. With that in mind, the positive ef­fects of increased autonomy in the workplace are often associated with work outcomes like increased employee satisfaction, motivation, engagement, commitment, and self-e.cacy, while mitigating work-related stress and nurturing trustworthy relationships with the top managers (Clausen et al., 2022; Cho et al., 2021; Morgeson et al., 2005). Yet, a body of empirical work indicates that negative e.ects are more likely to be seen on em­ployees’ well-being when employees have the power to decide when and where they perform their work tasks and duties, leading to possible de­viations from the organizational objectives (Kubicek et al., 2017). These negative e.ects can be at­tributed to the di.erences in the characteristics of each employee as well as the various groups of job features (Lu et al., 2017). The way job autonomy is perceived is also di.erent among cultures; while some fully embrace it, others shun it, preferring to widen the gap between management and employ­ees. These di.erences further fuel the debate and the scientific discourse surrounding this concept. 3METHODS AND DATA The objective of bibliometric methods as re­search instruments is the evaluation and analysis of scientific literature to uncover the structure and dy­namics of a scientific field with classification and visu­alization (Zupic & Cater, 2013). This is why these techniques are often equated with science mapping, as they tend to shed light on relationships between publications. Despite being a well-established method (Kessler, 1963), bibliometric analysis has recently gained the researchers’ interest partly because of the accessible online databases for retrieving data and then because of the objective, aerial, synthesized view on a particular subject matter, which is useful for other scholars and future research endeavors. En­hanced bibliometric software like VOSviewer, R, Bibex­cel, and similar played a big role in the proliferation of bibliometric studies. To fulfill our research objectives, we conduct descriptive bibliometric analysis, co-authorship analysis, and keyword co-occurrence bibliometric analysis. The co-citation technique is based on the frequency at which articles, authors, or journals are cited together, meaning that if a pair of co-cited ar­ticles frequently appears in a body of work, their connection or link strength is stronger and the con­cepts they elaborate are more closely tied together. The descriptive and co-authorship analyses were some of the first bibliometric techniques fol­lowed by keyword co-occurrence analysis, which was introduced later in the bibliometric development journey. It focuses on the content of the article, and establishing relationships based on keywords from article titles and abstracts (Zupic & Cater, 2013). A rule of thumb of this technique is that the connec­tion between two keywords and concepts is as strong as the number of articles in which two impor­tant words appear. As a result, the network map gen­erated as an output of this analysis places the keywords closer to each other if they are more con­nected and appear more frequently (Wallin, 2005). With this study, we also wanted to analyze the field’s development across time. We interpret these evolutionary rather than revolutionary changes in the field by incorporating them into the conceptual framework of invisible colleges, which is typically utilized for investigating scientific communication to expose the dynamic transformations across the an­alyzed period (Vogel, 2012). The framework pro­poses several patterns evident in the evolutionary development of invisible colleges from the emer­gence of a new college without its predecessors until two or more colleges combine and merge into a scientific thought: college appearance, transfor­mation, drift, di.erentiation, fusion, implosion, and revival (Vogel, 2012). In terms of the data, a search query was per­formed in the Scopus database, one of the leading databases that index global, high-quality research on 17 December 2023. The subject area was limited to business, management, and accounting, and only peer-reviewed articles in scientific journals were in­cluded in the query. Moreover, we used the following search syntax: (“EMPLOYEE*” AND “AUTONOM*”), (“JOB” AND “AUTONOM*”), and (“WORK*” AND “AU­TONOM*”). The search generated a total of 1565 ar­ticles. The inclusion criteria to determine the final dataset for this study included original scientific ar­ticles that analyze an aspect of employee autonomy, written in the English language, and indexed in the Scopus database. On the other hand, commen­taries, country reports, governmental reports, ab­stracts, editorials, posters, research protocols, white papers, so-called gray literature, and thesis disser­tations were excluded from consideration. To clean the data and get to the dataset of in­cluded articles, we followed the PRISMA protocol (Moher et al., 2015). The steps and a detailed de­scription of the performed action per this protocol are given in Figure 1. The data sample eventually consisted of 1041 articles. 4RESULTS AND FINDINGS 4.1Descriptive Analysis A total of 1041 articles on employee autonomy were published from 1957 onwards: that year mark­ing the publication of the first article mentioning job autonomy in the context of determining job satis­faction and employee turnover (Ross & Zander, 1957). The last five years have been instrumental in employee autonomy research as is evident in Fig­ures 2 and 3, which display the timeline of published articles per year. In the early years, employee autonomy was viewed as just an integral part of job characteristics and demands, which is why it was researched paired with the rest of the constructs of models like the job demands-resources model (Taipale et al., 2011). It was not until the 2010s that scholars started mas­sively singling out employee autonomy as a sepa­rate concept worth analyzing. Furthermore, from the large research body, some foundational articles stand out; the most-cited ones are presented in Table 1. The interest in this field is evident in the fact that since 2010, more than 900 articles have been written about the level of autonomy of employees and its impact on other organizational phenomena, which is nine times more than in all years before 2010 combined. Journals which have published the most employee autonomy-related articles are Inter­national Journal of Human Resource Management (36), European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology (26), Personnel Review (21), Journal of Managerial Psychology (20), Employee Relations (18), Human Relations (18), and Journal of Voca­tional Behavior (17), signaling the main research areas featuring job autonomy literature to be human resource management, organizational psy­chology, leadership, and organizational behavior. The most-cited authors who have achieved that with the fewest published articles are presented in Table 2. They reflect the diverse landscape of em­ployee autonomy research, confirming the various research contexts where this field has developed. 4.2Co-authorship Bibliometric Analysis Connected with authorship, the following bib­liometric technique analyzes co-authorship among authors and country-wise. To achieve this, all arti­cles from the identified data sample were imported into the software VOSviewer, one of the leading pro­grams for multitechnique bibliometric analysis (Van Eck & Waltman, 2010). There are several mini clus­ters and connections between the authors out of which most notable for the bibliometric analysis are the green, blue, and red clusters shown in Figure 4 due to their size and biggest link strengths. The green cluster is represented by the inclu­sion of employee autonomy measurement as part of the job demands-resources (JD-R) theory. These co-authorship collaborations have found that the feeling of increased employee autonomy can com­bat burnout (Bakker et al., 2014), boost employee engagement levels (Demerouti et al., 2010), em­power employees to participate in crafting their jobs (Demerouti et al., 2015). In recent years, the rela­tionship between job demands and resources, which includes employee autonomy, has gained new popularity when researched in the context of organizational and environmental crises. The blue cluster sees autonomy as an integral part of employ­ees’ basic needs satisfaction (Van den Broeck et al., 2010). Additionally, the scholars analyzing this con­cept connected employee autonomy with the ful­fillment of needs and the e.ect on autonomous motivation, meaning that employees who feel they have higher levels of freedom and discretion in their work will have fulfilled such psychological needs, thus making them more self-motivated in their per­formance (De Cooman et al., 2013). Findings in this cluster also suggest that senior employees value higher job autonomy and, in such cases, may be more willing to work until retirement age (Vanbelle et al., 2017). Rea.rming these findings, authors in the red cluster also find that higher levels of auton­omy are associated with enhanced autonomous motivation (Sandrin et al., 2022), which can result in improved performance and commitment to the organization on one hand, and lower turnover rates on the other (Fernet et al., 2021). Country co-authorship is another important bibliometric technique for determining the research contexts of existing employee autonomy research. For the analysis, the country co-authorship mini­mum threshold was set to two articles, so that more countries can be represented. This translated into a map of 64 countries, which are categorized into 11 clusters, each represented with a separate color (Figure 5). Most authors tend to collaborate with their peers from the cluster itself. Additionally, the major­ity of countries in a single cluster have other contex­tual, historical, cultural, or geographical connections. Illustratively, the green cluster is composed mainly of European countries or countries that speak similar languages. This includes the Netherlands, Spain, Por­tugal, Brazil, Italy, Belgium, Poland, Lithuania, and more. While some authors like ones from the United States and the United Kingdom often pair up with counterparts from their cluster, they are an example of cross-regional collaboration as can be demon­strated through the strong link connection between these two countries and China. Chinese authors also contribute to employee autonomy literature with Pakistani, Taiwanese, and Sri Lankan authors, to name a few, too. Tables 3 and 4 present a ranking of countries where employee autonomy researchers come from in terms of the total number of citations and the number of published articles in the field. When it comes to the former, the most productive were Eu­ropean authors, whose countries make up half of the top 10 countries in this aspect with countries from the Americas and Asia, following closely behind. The situation is changed when the total cita­tions are accounted for. While the first four coun­tries are still present, their positions have slightly changed. It can be concluded that the United States authors have both the most published articles and the most citations. Interestingly, Belgium and Spain were not among the 10 most productive countries, but in turn, entered the 10 most-cited countries. 4.3Keyword Co-occurrence Bibliometric Analysis This bibliometric technique aims to identify key themes and topics in employee autonomy research. Each cluster of keywords in the bibliographic map corresponds with the subfields of the bigger em­ployee autonomy field (Van Raan, 2014). Moreover, for this analysis, the same dataset consisting of 1041 articles was used. Due to the size, the number of keywords for the semantic map had to be minimized by determining the most adequate threshold. This was done through trial and error and eventually, the minimum number was set to two articles mention­ing a certain keyword to gain a more aerial perspec­tive of the employee autonomy field. After the abstract and keyword mining and man­ually selecting the relevant keywords, 654 keywords were included in the network visualization map (Fig­ure 6). These keywords are connected with 6067 links and their total link strength is 1674.49. In this sense, the five keywords with the highest occurrences across the research landscape include ‘autonomy’ (links: 329, total link strength: 185, occurrences: 191), ‘job auton­omy’ (links: 234, total link strength: 120, occurrences: 126), ‘job satisfaction’ (links: 212, total link strength: 92, occurrences: 96), ‘self-determination’ (links: 138, total link strength: 66, occurrences: 67), ‘motivation’ (links: 151, total link strength: 46, occurrences 46). The keywords were separated into 10 intercon­nected clusters: 1) red cluster: Benefits of employee autonomy, 2) green cluster: Job satisfaction and wellbeing, 3) dark blue cluster: Environmental con­text, 4) yellow cluster: Motivation, 5) purple cluster: Employee behavior, 6) light blue cluster: Organiza­tional psychology, 7) orange cluster: Work organiza­tion, 8) brown cluster: Leadership, 9) pink cluster: Digitalization, and 10) magenta cluster: Perfor­mance. In the next paragraphs, we examine the clusters with the highest keyword occurrences in further detail. Red cluster: Benefits of employee autonomy The red cluster is the largest one, encompass­ing 173 distinct keywords, which are related to the various relationships that employee autonomy has with other constructs. The most frequent keywords are ‘autonomy’, ‘leadership’, ‘human resource man­agement’, ‘innovation’, and ‘personnel’, which are in turn connected with other items like ‘knowledge management’, ‘empowerment’, ‘employee engage­ment’, ‘control’, ‘entrepreneurship’, and similar. De­spite the negative aspects of this concept, existing research mainly focuses on the positives. When em­ployees feel they are more autonomous, this can highly likely translate into a higher absorptive capac­ity, need satisfaction, commitment, willingness for continuous improvement, creativity, and innovative work behavior (Chung-Yan, 2010; Langfred & Moye, 2004; Cho et al., 2021). Ultimately, this makes the entire employee experience at work better, which is one of the primary domains of HRM. The research in the cluster has mostly been done in the Asian context and industries such as banking and health­care and family businesses and startups. Recently, research on work-from-home practices demon­strated the e.ects of perceived autonomy in this context, too (Galanti et al., 2021). Green cluster: Job satisfaction and wellbeing The second largest cluster consists of 147 key­words, which are mostly connected with this cluster’s highest-occurring keywords ‘job satisfaction’ and ‘wellbeing’. Other notable keywords include ‘job craft­ing’, ‘work-life balance’, ‘working conditions’, ‘work­place’, ‘burnout’, ‘emotional exhaustion’, ‘personality’, and more. Scholars point out that lower levels of au­tonomy may result in higher absenteeism and this or­ganizational phenomenon may mitigate the e.ects of burnout, customer aggression, emotional exhaustion, and dissonance, especially in knowledge-intensive or­ganizations (Kim et al., 2019). The level of hierarchy and management support can play a role in this as­pect when crafting the job characteristics together with the HR team and the employees. The research context is a diverse one, including countries from Eurasia, Canada, South Africa, and more, with meth­ods like thematic analysis, regression analysis, and qualitative research predominantly used. Dark blue cluster: Environmental context Keywords like ‘self-determination’, ‘covid-19’, ‘organizational commitment’, and ‘job design’ dom­inate this cluster and are linked with similar ones re­lating to the context of the surrounding one finds themselves in such as ‘co-workers support’, ‘crisis’, ‘employee development’, ‘flexible working’, ‘hybrid work’, ‘justice’, and others. The total number of key­words in this cluster is 83. Further, research endeav­ors signal that the level of autonomy workers enjoy may vary in di.erent critical situations and this feel­ing can be a potent mediating factor when the or­ganization is facing a crisis (Frare & Beuren, 2021). While employees are more autonomous when working remotely, this can impact their feelings of loneliness on one hand or make them more e.cient in some cases due to their self-e.cacy and self-de­termination (Mohammed et al., 2022). Yellow cluster: Motivation This cluster considers the e.ect of employee au­tonomy on the motivation or engagement to per­form the required tasks. Of the 67 distinct keywords, the ones that occur the most are ‘work engagement’ and ‘motivation’, which further link with ‘job charac­teristics’, ‘organizational citizenship’, ‘self-employ­ment’, and other keywords. As workplaces become more diverse generation-wise, multiple studies con­firm that workers from Generation Y value their au­tonomy as a motivational factor and see it as a core value for making sure the employee’s voice is heard (Rice et al., 2022). Autonomy has been found to be crucial for female employees as another category, especially if they choose to start a family (Halldén et al., 2012). The sense of increased freedom about how, where, and when the job is done is also one of the reasons why entrepreneurs tend to launch their businesses instead of opting to work for someone else (Van Gelderen & Jansen, 2006). European coun­tries like Greece, Norway, and Finland appear as the backdrop of these findings while studies in the public sector and the hospitality sector dominate. Purple cluster: Employee behavior Consisting of 60 keywords, this cluster rea.rms that employee autonomy can impact how employ­ees act not simply how they feel. The main item in the cluster is ‘job autonomy’ with ‘job performance’ trailing behind, connecting with keywords such as ‘employee relations’, ‘employee retention’, ‘em­ployee turnover’, ‘innovative work behavior’, ‘proac­tivity, ‘participative decision-making’, and more. While employee autonomy can a.ect whether the worker perceives the work as meaningful or not, it can also help them decide if they want to stay or leave the organization (Dysvik & Kuvaas, 2013). Task and structural autonomy are highlighted as auton­omy types that can particularly leverage employee behavior in a way that drives job performance fur­ther and stimulates innovation as a key competitive­ness factor (Pattnaik & Sahoo, 2021). 5REVIEW OF THE EVOLUTION OF EMPLOYEE AUTONOMY AND DISCUSSION As described in the section dedicated to the used methodology, besides the bibliometric analy­sis, we interpret the field’s development across four phases from its origins in the 1950s until now through the framework of invisible colleges (Vogel, 2012), including college transformation, drift, di.er­entiation, and fusion. This framework has also been used by other researchers to track the evolutionary patterns and paths of di.erent organizational phe­nomena like work mindfulness (Bunjak et al., 2022). The findings from the clusters of the bibliometric techniques are synthesized in the framework. The framework, presented in Figure 7, indicates that employee autonomy research has first been de­fined, assessed, and measured using di.erent scales and methods. With that in mind, employee auton­omy as a concept has been included in the job en­gagement scale and performance questionnaire, training, information, participation, and autonomy (TIPA) scale, the measure of disorganization, the basic psychological needs at work scale (BPNWS), the job quality scale, and the work autonomy scales. Then, it was paired up with other organizational phenomena in theoretical models which in their in­ception were used for evaluating their impact on job satisfaction, well-being, behavior, and similar. After developing several autonomy types, researchers an­alyzed the impact of leadership and other facilitat­ing conditions on this construct. In its final stages of development so far, new technologies such as arti­ficial intelligence, digitalization, flexible working ar­rangements, and individual and team job crafting have reinvigorated job autonomy as an organiza­tional segment. Now, it is often fused with other employee-centered aspects like empowerment and participative decision-making. It is worth noting that it didn’t take for a phase to end so that another could start, instead, they over­lapped and even in recent years, scholars have found di.erent ways for comprehensively measuring the impact of employee autonomy on as many spheres of the professional and personal lives of workers. The foundation of most employee autonomy research is a solid theoretical framework and a the­oretical background that has incorporated this con­cept when analyzing organizational phenomena. Subsequently, Figure 8 presents a word cloud of the theories that have attempted to incorporate, define, or explain employee autonomy across the historic development of the concept. Looking at the roots of HRM historically, one of the reasons for establishing the HR profession was to enable employee autonomy (Hansen et al., 1994) as a healthy concept that views each employee as his/her whole self, who should be free to some extent make work-related decisions that a.ect them. This relates to the early e.orts of increasing employee participation and the growing need for unionization across di.erent industries (Chang et al., 2017). Job autonomy is especially analyzed between employees and entrepreneurs with the former stat­ing that this can be a reason for starting a new busi­ness (De Clercq & Brieger, 2021). Furthermore, managerial and employee autonomy is perceived as a significant career development step (Lartey, 2021), which means that workers can self-direct their ca­reers and learn at their own pace. Employee autonomy research has been a.li­ated with the di.erent types of leadership, too. Often, cultures that promote ethical, transforma­tive, and Laissez-faire leadership styles tend to value a higher degree of job autonomy for the workforce (Gao & Jiang, 2019). Not only leadership types, but several management styles like lean management, agile, and amoeba management also tend to favor the wide expansion of this concept (Butollo et al., 2019). Additionally, since employees don’t neces­sarily depend on each other, autonomous jobs in­voke the discussion of work alienation as well as organizational knowledge sharing and hiding (Peng et al., 2022). As a result, if there is a lack of commu­nication, too autonomous employees may choose to withhold information from their co-workers. Recent research has put the focus on using em­ployee autonomy to build a resilient workforce that finds meaningfulness in the work, while improving their psychological wellbeing (Martela et al., 2021). Even though employees are freer to make decisions about their work, when they feel autonomous, they are more likely to display positive organizational citi­zenship and innovative work behavior (De Spiege­laere et al., 2016). Yet, researchers have pointed out the autonomy paradox, meaning that too much of a good thing, or in our case, employee autonomy can lead to destructive e.ects on the organizational core and fabric (Fürstenberg et al., 2021). 6PATHS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH A significant part of bibliometric analysis is to identify the latest trends and potential future re­search pathways in the field. Our quantitative ap­proach takes a look at the latest themes in employee autonomy research presented historically in the overlay visualization map in Figure 9. The circles in the map are colored in yellow and darker colors, meaning that the brighter the circle is, the more re­cently this theme has been researched. There is still room for studies of employee au­tonomy in di.erent research contexts in terms of geographically less-represented regions like the Balkan region, Latin America, South-East Europe, Central Africa, and more, as well as sectors including non-profit, manufacturing, social, and green econ­omy, and similar. Contemporary technologies such as artificial in­telligence and its a.liated methods are predicted to continue widening the impact on employee au­tonomy. In this sense, there is a gap in the literature about how generative artificial intelligence can help with individual job crafting and the impact of human-artificial intelligence collaboration (Calvo et al., 2020). Other types of technologies making the head­lines include wearable technology and employee behavior tracking, which significantly impacts work­ers’ autonomy (Van Acker et al., 2021). Scholars can explore this relationship and if or to what extent should these technologies be present in the work­place for monitoring employee behavior. While worker co-operatives aren’t a fresh con­cept, we see a resurgence in their popularity, poten­tially motivated by the growing debate about giving more voice to employees. As unique types of orga­nizations governed by the workers, it may be bene­ficial to further analyze the concept of employee autonomy when this type of organization is trans­lated to other industries, especially for-profit ones (Sacchetti & Tortia, 2021). Furthermore, flexible working arrangements tend to blur the lines when it comes to establishing and maintaining employee autonomy and control in the workplace as an increasing portion of the work­force can work remotely or hybrid (Metselaar et al., 2023). How this a.ects gig workers and digital no­mads may be an interesting research path. 7CONCLUSION Through a multitechnique bibliometric analysis of the employee autonomy concept from a dataset of 1041 articles indexed in the Scopus database, our objective was to answer what the inherent intellec­tual structure of the employee autonomy body of re­search is, what the most influential concepts, themes, and hotspots are, and what new paths for future research on the topic exist. The findings from the descriptive bibliometric analysis, co-authorship, and keyword co-occurrence analysis, which were ad­ditionally synthesized in the invisible colleges frame­work for tracing the evolutionary development of the field, we focus on a few core themes such as benefits of employee autonomy, job satisfaction and wellbe­ing, environmental context, motivation, employee behavior, organizational psychology, work organiza­tion, leadership, digitalization, and job performance. The study doesn’t come free of some limita­tions as all bibliographic methods tend to have. This is why they should be complemented by other re­view types. To begin with, the dataset relies only on the Scopus database, which future studies can use as a motivation to further incorporate articles in­dexed in other databases like the Google Scholar database, too. Then, di.erent reasons for low cita­tion rates, citing certain publications as well as self-citation cannot be fully established. In this sense, the clusters generated by the bibliometric software are not grounded in science and there is some dose of researcher’s input regarding decisions for citation and article thresholds. All in all, the analysis identified five paths for fu­ture studies, focusing on the impact of artificial in­telligence-human collaboration and wearable technology on autonomy, the need for widening the research context to less-represented regions, and the rising popularity of worker co-operatives and flexible working arrangements. As a result, the study makes several contributions. Firstly, policymakers can benefit from these findings when regulating unionization and forms of increased employee par­ticipation to further democratize workplaces. Addi­tionally, practitioners and the academic community can benefit from the synthesized findings enriched with the invisible colleges framework for elevating the existing employee autonomy literature through a more comprehensive and objective review and analysis. REFERENCES: Ali, S.A.M., Said, N.A., Abd Kader, S.F., Ab Latif, D.S. & Munap, R. 2014. Hackman and Oldham’s job charac­teristics model to job satisfaction. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 129, 46-52. Alper, S., Tjosvold, D. & Law, K.S. 2000. Conflict manage­ment, e.cacy, and performance in organizational teams. Personnel psychology, 53(3), 625-642. Ashforth, B.E. 1989. The experience of powerlessness in organizations. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 43(2), 207-242. Bakker, A.B. & Bal, M.P. 2010. Weekly work engagement and performance: A study among starting teachers. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 83(1), 189-206. Bakker, A.B., Demerouti, E. & Sanz-Vergel, A.I. 2014. Burnout and work engagement: The JD–R approach. Annual Re­view of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior., 1(1), 389-411. Bell, S.J. & Menguc, B. 2002. The employee-organization relationship, organizational citizenship behaviors, and superior service quality. Journal of retailing, 78(2), 131-146. Bunjak, A., Cerne, M., & Schölly, E. L. 2022. Exploring the past, present, and future of the mindfulness field: A multitechnique bibliometric review. Frontiers in psy­chology, 13, 792599. Butollo, F., Jürgens, U. & Krzywdzinski, M. 2019. From lean production to Industrie 4.0: More autonomy for em­ployees? (pp. 61-80). Springer International Publishing. Cabrera, A., Collins, W.C. & Salgado, J.F. 2006. Determi­nants of individual engagement in knowledge shar­ing. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 17(2), 245-264. Calvo, R.A., Peters, D., Vold, K. & Ryan, R.M. 2020. Sup­porting human autonomy in AI systems: A framework for ethical enquiry. Ethics of digital well-being: A mul­tidisciplinary approach, 31-54. Chang, J., Travaglione, A. & O’Neill, G. 2017. Job attitudes between unionized and non-unionized employees. In­ternational Journal of Organizational Analysis, 25(4), 647-661. Cho, J., Schilpzand, P., Huang, L. & Paterson, T. 2021. How and when humble leadership facilitates employee job performance: the roles of feeling trusted and job au­tonomy. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Stud­ies, 28(2), 169-184. Chung-Yan, G.A. 2010. The nonlinear e.ects of job com­plexity and autonomy on job satisfaction, turnover, and psychological well-being. Journal of occupational health psychology, 15(3), 237. Clausen, T., Pedersen, L.R.M., Andersen, M.F., Theorell, T. & Madsen, I.E. 2022. Job autonomy and psychological well-being: A linear or a non-linear association?. Eu­ropean Journal of Work and Organizational Psychol­ogy, 31(3), 395-405. De Clercq, D. & Brieger, S.A. 2021. When discrimination is worse, autonomy is key: How women en­trepreneurs leverage job autonomy resources to find work–life balance. Journal of Business Ethics, 1-18. De Cooman, R., Stynen, D., Van den Broeck, A., Sels, L. & De Witte, H. 2013. How job characteristics relate to need satisfaction and autonomous motivation: Impli­cations for work e.ort. Journal of Applied Social Psy­chology, 43(6), 1342-1352. De Spiegelaere, S., Van Gyes, G. & Van Hootegem, G. 2016. Not all autonomy is the same. Di.erent dimen­sions of job autonomy and their relation to work en­gagement & innovative work behavior. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 26(4), 515-527. Deci, E.L., Olafsen, A.H. & Ryan, R.M. 2017. Self-determi­nation theory in work organizations: The state of a sci­ence. Annual review of organizational psychology and organizational behavior, 4, 19-43. Demerouti, E., Bakker, A.B. & Halbesleben, J.R. 2015. Pro­ductive and counterproductive job crafting: A daily diary study. Journal of Occupational Health Psychol­ogy, 20(4): 457. Demerouti, E., Mostert, K. & Bakker, A.B. 2010. Burnout and work engagement: a thorough investigation of the independency of both constructs. Journal of oc­cupational health psychology, 15(3), 209. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N. & Lim, W.M. 2021. How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of business re­search, 133, 285-296. Dysvik, A. & Kuvaas, B. 2011. Intrinsic motivation as a moderator on the relationship between perceived job autonomy and work performance. European journal of work and organizational psychology, 20(3), 367-387. Dysvik, A. & Kuvaas, B. 2013. Perceived job autonomy and turnover intention: The moderating role of perceived supervisor support. European Journal of Work and Or­ganizational Psychology, 22(5), 563-573. Federici, R.A. 2013. Principals’ self-e.cacy: Relations with job autonomy, job satisfaction, and contextual constraints. European journal of psychology of educa­tion, 28, 73-86. Fernet, C., Gillet, N., Austin, S., Trépanier, S.G. & Drouin-Rousseau, S. 2021. Predicting nurses’ occupational commitment and turnover intention: The role of au­tonomous motivation and supervisor and coworker behaviors. Journal of Nursing Management, 29, 2611-2619. Frare, A.B. & Beuren, I.M. 2021. Job autonomy, un­scripted agility and ambidextrous innovation: analysis of Brazilian startups in times of the Covid-19 pan­demic. Revista de Gestăo, 28(3), 263-278. Fürstenberg, N., Alfes, K. & Kearney, E. 2021. How and when paradoxical leadership benefits work engagement: The role of goal clarity and work autonomy. Journal of Occu­pational and Organizational Psychology, 94(3), 672-705. Galanti, T., Guidetti, G., Mazzei, E., Zappalŕ, S. & Toscano, F. 2021. Work from home during the COVID-19 out­break: The impact on employees’ remote work produc­tivity, engagement, and stress. Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 63(7), e426. Gao, A. & Jiang, J. 2019. Perceived empowering leader­ship, harmonious passion, and employee voice: the moderating role of job autonomy. Frontiers in psy­chology, 10, 1484. Halldén, K., Gallie, D. & Zhou, Y. 2012. The skills and auton­omy of female part-time work in Britain and Sweden. Research in Social Stratification and Mobil­ity, 30(2), 187-201. Hansen, C.D., Kahnweiler, W.M. & Wilensky, A.S. 1994. Human resource development as an occupational cul­ture through organizational stories. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 5(3), 253-268. Ilgen, D.R. & Hollenbeck, J.R. 1991. Job design and roles. Handbook of industrial and organizational psy­chology, 2, 165-207. Khoshnaw, S. & Alavi, H. 2020. Examining the interrela­tion between job autonomy and job performance: A critical literature review. Multidisciplinary Aspects of Production Engineering, 3(1), 606-616. Kim, B., Liu, L., Ishikawa, H. & Park, S.H. 2019. Relation­ships between social support, job autonomy, job satis­faction, and burnout among care workers in long-term care facilities in Hawaii. Educational Geron­tology, 45(1), 57-68. Kubicek, B., Paškvan, M. & Bunner, J. 2017. The bright and dark sides of job autonomy. Job demands in a changing world of work: Impact on workers’ health and perfor­mance and implications for research and practice, 45-63. Langfred, C.W. & Moye, N.A. 2004. E.ects of task auton­omy on performance: an extended model considering motivational, informational, and structural mecha­nisms. Journal of applied psychology, 89(6), 934. Lartey, F.M. 2021. Impact of career Planning, employee autonomy, and manager recognition on employee en­gagement. Journal of Human Resource and Sustain­ability Studies, 9(02), 135. Lin, B.Y.J., Lin, Y.K., Lin, C.C. & Lin, T.T. 2013. Job autonomy, its predispositions and its relation to work outcomes in community health centers in Taiwan. Health pro­motion international, 28(2), 166-177. Lu, J.G., Brockner, J., Vardi, Y. & Weitz, E. 2017. The dark side of experiencing job autonomy: Unethical behavior. Jour­nal of Experimental Social Psychology, 73, 222-234. Martela, F., Gómez, M., Unanue, W., Araya, S., Bravo, D. & Espejo, A. 2021. What makes work meaningful? Longitudinal evidence for the importance of auton­omy and beneficence for meaningful work. Journal of vocational behavior, 131, 103631. Metselaar, S.A., den Dulk, L. & Vermeeren, B. 2023. Tele­working at di.erent locations outside the o.ce: Con­sequences for perceived performance and the mediating role of autonomy and work-life balance satisfaction. Review of Public Personnel Administra­tion, 43(3), 456-478. Mohammed, Z., Nandwani, D., Saboo, A. & Padakannaya, P. 2022. Job satisfaction while working from home dur­ing the COVID-19 pandemic: do subjective work auton­omy, work-family conflict, and anxiety related to the pandemic matter?. Cogent Psychology, 9(1), 2087278. Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., Stewart, L.A. & Prisma-P Group, 2015. Preferred reporting items for system­atic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic reviews, 4, 1-9. Morgeson, F.P., Delaney-Klinger, K. & Hemingway, M.A. 2005. The importance of job autonomy, cognitive abil­ity, and job-related skill for predicting role breadth and job performance. Journal of applied psychol­ogy, 90(2), 399. Muecke, S. & Iseke, A. 2019, July. How does job auton­omy influence job performance? A meta-analytic test of theoretical mechanisms. In Academy of manage­ment proceedings (Vol. 2019, No. 1, p. 14632). Briar­cli. Manor, NY 10510: Academy of Management. Parker, S.K., Axtell, C.M. & Turner, N. 2001. Designing a safer workplace: importance of job autonomy, com­munication quality, and supportive supervisors. Jour­nal of occupational health psychology, 6(3), 211. Pattnaik, S.C. & Sahoo, R. 2021. Employee engagement, creativity and task performance: role of perceived workplace autonomy. South Asian Journal of Business Studies, 10(2), 227-241. Peng, Q., Zhong, X., Liu, S., Zhou, H. & Ke, N. 2022. Job autonomy and knowledge hiding: the moderating roles of leader reward omission and person–supervi­sor fit. Personnel Review, 51(9), 2371-2387. Porter, A.L., Kongthon, A. & Lu, J.C. 2002. Research pro­filing: Improving the literature review. Scientomet­rics, 53, 351-370. Pursio, K., Kankkunen, P., Sanner-Stiehr, E. & Kvist, T. 2021. Professional autonomy in nursing: An integra­tive review. Journal of Nursing Management, 29(6), 1565-1577. Rice, B., Martin, N., Fieger, P. & Hussain, T. 2022. Older healthcare workers’ satisfaction: managing the inter­action of age, job security expectations and auton­omy. Employee Relations: The International Journal, 44(2), 319-334. Ross, I.C. & Zander, A. 1957. Need satisfactions and em­ployee turnover. Personnel psychology, 10(3), 327-338. Sacchetti, S. & Tortia, E.C. 2021. Governing cooperatives in the context of individual motives. International Journal of Social Economics, 48(2), 181-203. Sandrin, E., Morin, A.J., Fernet, C., Huyghebaert-Zouaghi, T., Suarez, M., Duarte, F. & Gillet, N. 2022. Nature, pre­dictor, and outcomes of motivation trajectories during a professional training program. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 31(2), 226-244. Sewell, G. & Taskin, L. 2015. Out of sight, out of mind in a new world of work? Autonomy, control, and spa­tiotemporal scaling in telework. Organization stud­ies, 36(11), 1507-1529. Taipale, S., Selander, K., Anttila, T. & Nätti, J. 2011. Work en­gagement in eight European countries: The role of job demands, autonomy, and social support. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 31(7/8), 486-504. Tangirala, S. & Ramanujam, R. 2008. Exploring nonlinear­ity in employee voice: The e.ects of personal control and organizational identification. Academy of Man­agement Journal, 51(6), 1189-1203. Theurer, C.P., Tumasjan, A. & Welpe, I.M. 2018. Contex­tual work design and employee innovative work be­havior: When does autonomy matter?. PloS one, 13(10), p.e0204089. Tims, M., Derks, D. & Bakker, A.B. 2016. Job crafting and its relationships with person–job fit and meaningful­ness: A three-wave study. Journal of Vocational Be­havior, 92, 44-53. Tsen, M.K., Gu, M., Tan, C.M. & Goh, S.K. 2021. E.ect of flexible work arrangements on turnover intention: does job independence matter?. International Journal of Sociology, 51(6), 451-472. Van Acker, B.B., Conradie, P.D., Vlerick, P. & Saldien, J. 2021. Employee acceptability of wearable mental workload monitoring: exploring e.ects of framing the goal and context in corporate communication. Cogni­tion, Technology & Work, 23, 537-552. Van den Broeck, A., Vansteenkiste, M., De Witte, H., Soe­nens, B. & Lens, W. 2010. Capturing autonomy, com­petence, and relatedness at work: Construction and initial validation of the Work-related Basic Need Satis­faction scale. Journal of occupational and organiza­tional psychology, 83(4), 981-1002. Van Eck, N. & Waltman, L. 2010. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523-538. Van Gelderen, M. & Jansen, P. 2006. Autonomy as a start-up motive. Journal of small business and enter­prise development, 13(1), 23-32. Van Raan, A.F. 2014. Advances in bibliometric analysis: research performance assessment and science map­ping. Bibliometrics Use and Abuse in the Review of Re­search Performance, 87, 17-28. Vanbelle, E., Van Den Broeck, A. & De Witte, H. 2017. Job crafting: Autonomy and workload as antecedents and the willingness to continue working until retirement age as a positive outcome. Psihologia Resurselor Umane, 15(1), 25-41. Vansteenkiste, M., Neyrinck, B., Niemiec, C.P., Soenens, B., De Witte, H. & Van den Broeck, A. 2007. On the re­lations among work value orientations, psychological need satisfaction and job outcomes: A self-determi­nation theory approach. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 80(2), 251-277. Vogel, R. 2012. The visible colleges of management and or­ganization studies: A bibliometric analysis of academic journals. Organization Studies, 33(8), 1015-1043. Wallin, J.A. 2005. Bibliometric methods: pitfalls and pos­sibilities. Basic & clinical pharmacology & toxicol­ogy, 97(5), 261-275. Willmott, H. 1993. Strength is ignorance; slavery is free­dom: Managing culture in modern organizations. Jour­nal of management studies, 30(4), 515-552. Wu, C.H., Gri.n, M.A. & Parker, S.K. 2015. Developing agency through good work: Longitudinal e.ects of job autonomy and skill utilization on locus of control. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 89, 102-108. Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A.B., Demerouti, E. & Schaufeli, W.B. 2009. Work engagement and financial returns: A diary study on the role of job and personal re­sources. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 82(1), 183-200. Zupic, I. & Cater, T. 2013. Bibliometric methods in man­agement and organization: A review. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2013, No. 1, p. 13426). Briarcli. Manor, NY 10510: Academy of Man­agement. Zychová, K., Šímová, T. & Fejfarová, M. 2023. A bibliomet­ric analysis of team autonomy research. Cogent Busi­ness & Management, 10(1), 2195024. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 53 Abstract Vol. 13, No. 1, 53-70 doi:10.17708/DRMJ.2024.v13n01a04 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 54 Ljupcho Eftimov, Violeta Cvetkoska, Bojan Kitanovikj: The Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow of Employee Autonomy: A Bibliometric Review and Research Agenda Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 55 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 56 Ljupcho Eftimov, Violeta Cvetkoska, Bojan Kitanovikj: The Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow of Employee Autonomy: A Bibliometric Review and Research Agenda Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 57 Figure 1: Visual presentation of the applied PRISMA protocol Figure 2: Annual trend of published articles on employee autonomy Source: Authors’ analysis Source: Authors’ analysis Figure 3: Five-year trend of published articles on employee autonomy Source: Authors’ analysis Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 58 Ljupcho Eftimov, Violeta Cvetkoska, Bojan Kitanovikj: The Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow of Employee Autonomy: A Bibliometric Review and Research Agenda Table 1: Most-cited articles on employee autonomy Source: Authors’ analysis Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 59 Table 2: Most-cited authors on employee autonomy Source: Authors’ analysis Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 60 Ljupcho Eftimov, Violeta Cvetkoska, Bojan Kitanovikj: The Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow of Employee Autonomy: A Bibliometric Review and Research Agenda Figure 4: Co-authorship network visualization map Figure 5: Country co-authorship map Source: Authors’ analysis Source: Authors’ analysis Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 61 Figure 3: Structural model of CXM framework for loyalty Table 4: Country co-authorship by number of total citations Source: Authors’ analysis Source: Authors’ analysis Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 62 Ljupcho Eftimov, Violeta Cvetkoska, Bojan Kitanovikj: The Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow of Employee Autonomy: A Bibliometric Review and Research Agenda Figure 6: Network visualization of keyword co-occurrence analysis Source: Authors’ analysis Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 63 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 64 Ljupcho Eftimov, Violeta Cvetkoska, Bojan Kitanovikj: The Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow of Employee Autonomy: A Bibliometric Review and Research Agenda Figure 7: Evolutionary development patterns of employee autonomy research grounded in the invisible colleges framework Source: Authors’ analysis Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 65 Source: Authors’ analysis Figure 8: Word cloud of employee autonomy theories Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 66 Ljupcho Eftimov, Violeta Cvetkoska, Bojan Kitanovikj: The Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow of Employee Autonomy: A Bibliometric Review and Research Agenda Figure 9: Overlay visualization map on employee autonomy Source: Authors’ analysis Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 67 EXTENDED SUMMARY/IZVLECEK V obdobju po fenomenih velikega odstopa, tihega odstopa in vseprisotnega dela na daljavo, povezanimi z managementom cloveških virov po COVID-19, se je zanimanje raziskovalcev za avtonomijo pri delu povecalo na rekordno visoko raven. Poleg narašcajoce znanstvene zrelosti po­drocja obseg, v katerem bi morali zaposleni uživati avtonomijo pri oblikovanju svoje delovne obre­menitve, izbiri metod dela in delovnega mesta ter vpliv na delovne rezultate, ni sintetiziran in je odprt za razprave. Obravnavamo evolucijsko razvojno pot tega koncepta z uporabo vec tehnik bib­liometricne analize hkrati in okvira nevidnih struktur raziskovalnega sodelovanja. Poleg tega raziskava predstavlja kombinacijo opisne bibliometricne analize, soavtorstva in analize socasnega pojavljanja kljucnih besed, da preuci najnovejše raziskave in pretekle usmeritve raziskovalcev o avtonomiji pri delu. Tako prispevamo k akademskemu raziskavanju z razkrivanjem inherentne intelektualne struk­ture avtonomije pri delu, raziskovanjem najvplivnejših konceptov in aktualnih tem ter prikazovanjem novih poti za prihodnje raziskave. Analiza je izpostavila osrednje teme, vkljucno s koristmi avtonomije zaposlenih, zadovoljstvom in dobrem pocutju pri delu, okoljskim kontekstom, motivacijo, vedenjem zaposlenih, organizacijsko psihologijo, organizacijo dela, vodenjem, digitalizacijo in uspešnostjo ter pet poti za prihodnje študije. To pušca prostor za nadaljnje navzkrižno opraševanje teme z drugimi managerskimi koncepti. Ugotovitve imajo potencial, da koristijo oblikovalcem politik, praktikom in akademski skupnosti kot kljucnim deležnikom na podrocju. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 68 Ljupcho Eftimov, Violeta Cvetkoska, Bojan Kitanovikj: The Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow of Employee Autonomy: A Bibliometric Review and Research Agenda Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 69 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, May 2024 Ljupcho Eftimov, Violeta Cvetkoska, Bojan Kitanovikj: The Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow of Employee Autonomy: A Bibliometric Review and Research Agenda 70 ATTRACTIVENESS, POWER AND AGGRESSIVENESS NETWORKS: USING MANPOWER EMPLOYMENT ORGANIZATION AS AN ILLUSTRATION Maria Litsa University of Thessaly, Greece maria.litsa@hotmail.gr Aleksandra Bekiari University of Thessaly, Greece sandrab@pe.uth.gr Koustelios Athanasios University of Thessaly, Greece akoustel@uth.gr The purpose of this study is the investigation of attractiveness, power and aggressiveness. The authors aim to inves­tigate attractiveness, power and aggressiveness as structural phenomena and the e.ects they have on organizational structures. The study focuses on a public organization implementing employment policies in Greece and draws on data from this context. A sample of 4 branches of the organization of totally 108 employees (49 male, 59 female) was examined through social network analysis concerning the behaviours of attractiveness, aggressiveness and power. Questionnaires consisting of non-network and network parts were distributed. Visone 1.1 software was implemented for calculating network variables (network analysis algorithms were used: indegree, outdegree, Katz status, PageRank, authority. Social Network Analysis and Spearman test (SPSS 26) have been applied. Main results: The socially and task attractive employees concentrate power in the organization developing the profile of a mentor, trusted by col­leagues, but they may accept verbal aggressiveness in the form of irony and hurting comments. The study’s results suggest that, at least in public organization contexts, practitioners should “exploit” the socially and task attractive employees as they seem to inspire trust in colleagues, a.ecting the overall culture of the organization. Also, knowing that socially and task attractive employees may be targeted verbally, they can implement strategies protecting the workplace from verbal aggressiveness use. The present study contributes to a better understanding of the informal relationships of attractiveness, aggressiveness and power developed among employees through their graphic repre­sentation via social network analysis in order to achieve e.ective organization structures in public sector. Keywords: organization, network analysis, attractiveness, aggressiveness, power ture (Cyert and March 1963; Pfe.er and Salancik So far, research has dealt with the issue of at­tractiveness in the organizations, focusing mainly on the aspect of physical attractiveness. Attractiveness 1INTRODUCTION Robbins and Judge (2009) have defined the or­ganization as a social unit consisting of two or more people who coordinate their actions in order to achieve a common goal. Many definitions of the or­ganization have been proposed regarding their na­and initial impressions have been an issue (Berscheid and Walster 1978; Eagly et al. 1991; Jack­son et al. 1995). How physical attractiveness can af­fect one’s evolution in the workplace in terms of qualifications (Quereshi and Kay 1986), hiring pro­cess (Gilmore et al. 1986), success and financial re­wards (Spencer and Taylor 1988; Morrow et al. 1990; Frieze et al. 1991; Parrett 2015; Shtudiner and Klein 2019) or as a status characteristic (Wolbring and Riordan 2016) has been of interest in many studies about organizations as well. However, no studies so far have attempted to approach attrac­tiveness in organizations as defined by McCroskey and McCain (1974) and McCroskey et al. (2006), consisting of three dimensions, physical attractive­ness, based on outer characteristics, social attrac­tiveness based on the desire to befriend others and task attractiveness, defined as the desire to collab­orate with others. “Work aggressiveness” can be defined as a be­havior including verbal threats, ridicules, profanity, devaluation, deliberate but wrong accusations, propagations of malicious comments intended to harm others in the workplace (Neuman and Baron 1998: 393). Verbal aggressiveness is widely found in the workplace (Neuman and Baron 1998), and ex­pressed through specific vocabulary, tone and man­ner with the aim of harming colleagues in the workplace because of gender, race, age or other personal characteristics (Chamberlain et al. 2008). Infante et al. (1994) examined seventy-four specific corporate disagreements and discovered that the ones with devastating e.ects were characterized by verbal aggressiveness. The majority of studies re­garding verbal aggressiveness in the workplace deals with the e.ects managers’ verbal aggressive­ness has on the organizations’ sta. (Görden et al. 1988; Infante and Görden 1985; 1987; 1991; Heisel 2000; Infante 1987; Madlock and Kennedy-Lightsey 2009). Some research focuses on how abusive su­pervision negatively a.ects employee e.ectiveness (Tepper 2007; Harris et al. 2011; Vogel et al. 2015; Morsch et al. 2020), deterring promotive voice be­havior (Rani et al. 2021) or on the role employees’ cognitive reappraisal can have on handling abusive supervision (Dedahanov et al. 2020). However, no studies so far have examined verbal aggressiveness among colleagues of an organization. Weber (1978) has defined power as forcing one’s will on others. Popitz (1992) has attempted a typol­ogy of power consisting of the following: power of action (pushing), of external control (institutional de­pendence on a colleague), internalized control (trust based on advice or emotional influence through at­tractiveness and verbal aggressiveness). So far, orga­nization research has focused on leadership (Epitropaki et al. 2017; Haslam et al. 2020) and on the personality traits that a leader may have (Bono and Judge, 2004; Ilies et al, 2005; Kashoven et al. 2011; Shahzad 2021). As Krug et al. (2021) have pointed out group membership is the context in which leadership burgeons and leaders are actually members of their group who acquire power, since every relationship no matter how friendly or not, is in fact a relationship of power (Popitz 1992). In our study, we attempt to show that leadership does not lie only in obvious hor­izontal hierarchies of an organization, but it may be latent in its informal hierarchies as well. The aim of this study is the social network analysis of structures of a) attractiveness, b) power and c) ver­bal aggressiveness among employees in organizations, as well as the parameters that a.ect the above net­work variables (structures) as they are formed and per­ceived by employees of a public organization, Manpower Employment Organization in Thessaly, Greece. Hierarchy structures emerge in terms of: a) at­tractiveness b) power and c) aggressiveness. At the same time, individual factors as independent and non-network variables will be detected, such as age, gen­der, socio-economic parameters, etc. Social network analysis, takes place to highlight structures, considering employees as nodes (all employees of organization form a complete network, which is taken as a sample for examination). Using conventional statistics, the cor­relation of network variables with non-network vari­ables will be investigated, thus we may identify the possible causes and conditions (e.g. age, gender, socio-economic characteristics, etc.) that favor or not the above behaviors and attitudes (attractiveness, power, aggressiveness), which tend to appear in organizations. The main academic added value of network anal­ysis lies in the fact that employees of the same organi­zation are examined on equal terms (in a common hierarchy of the same kind of relationship) regarding the three types of relationships (attractiveness, power, aggressive behavior). Practically, the identification of the nodes of main influence in attractiveness and power and of targets of aggressive behavior, is useful for taking preventive measures, limiting aggressive be­haviour and making the most of the most influential nodes for the overall performance of the organization. 2METHODOLOGY 2.1Sampling and data collection Complete social network analysis has been ap­plied to 108 employees (49 male, 59 female) of Man­power Employment Organisation in Greece. Each employee community is a network of relationships, e.g., attractiveness, trust, emotional dependence (Popitz 1992; Bekiari & Hasanagas 2016). Standardized (“closed-ended”) questionnaires for both network and non-network variables have been used. As network variables attractiveness, power and verbal aggressive­ness have been measured. Each network has been im­printed as a polygon where its vertices correspond to the respondents (members of the network) and the (existing) diagonals constitute the various relation­ships. At the same time, basic types of power, such as trust and sympathy have been measured. Essentially, network analysis is a functionalization of Systems The­ory. According to it, each node (member) of the net­work acquires its properties (power or weakness) through the interactions it has with the other nodes. 2.2Measures Using older tested questionnaires as role models (McCroskey et al. 2006; Popitz 1992; Infante and Wigley 1986) standardized questionnaires of com­plete network analysis have been developed and im­proved after a pilot application (Bekiari & Digelidis 2015; Bekiari & Spyropoulou 2016). They include net­work variables (relationships of attractiveness, power and aggressiveness) e.g. “Who would you advise on work-related issues?” (trust-power), “Who has hurt you with their words?” (hurting- verbal aggressive­ness), “Who is friendly with you? (social attractive­ness), “Who would you ask to help you complete a task at work?” (task attractiveness) and non-network variables (personal characteristics such as age, gen­der, social class, urbanity etc.). For the network part of the questionnaire each employee had a code num­ber attached that replaced their name. 2.3Statistical data processing A plethora of algorithms, such as in-degree, outdegree, Katz status, pagerank, authority 1 high­light obvious, as well as more latent targeting struc­tures for verbal aggressiveness and hierarchies of trust, dependencies. The algebraic indicators used are the following: a) In-degree and Out-degree “occasional influ­ence”, which is the direct contact (influence) that one receives from the other nodes (in-de­gree) and the e.ect - influence that a node cre­ates towards the others with which it comes into contact (outdegree). (b)Katz status “cumulative influence”. Influence is seen as a cumulative process in which it creates “chains” of relationships. The number and size of the “chains” that lead to a node also deter­mine its influence, which is not just occasional but chained, and therefore has a greater depth. c) Pagerank “partitioning influence” or “distribut­ing influence”, although similar to the Katz sta­tus, it monitors the influence that is transferred from node to node, measuring the number of nodes that come into contact with each other, overlooking the size – length of the chain – re­lationship. d) Authority “special competitiveness” or “special dominance”; it points to the top those nodes that attract more nodes than the other nodes, in terms of a particular relationship. For exam­ple, when a node (student) is at the top of the hierarchy of specific competitiveness for task at­tractiveness, it has attracted other nodes (stu­dents) that consistently and not occasionally pursue task/scientific attractiveness. This indi­cator shows a general tendency to become a target in the context of a relationship within the network. Network analysis software (Visone 1.1) has been used to visualize the various structures (pyra­mid hierarchies), highlighting who is first or last in them. Also, SPSS 26.0 was used for statistical tests like Spearman (correlations) to identify factors that a.ect (strengthen or weaken) one’s position in each hierarchy. Spearman test was used [p0.01 (*) and p0.05(**)]. This bivariate test was preferable to mul­tivariate analysis as it is a non-parametric test. The centrality values of nodes (not of ties) have been correlated with non-network variables and with each other (techniques like QAP or ERGM are not necessary in study, as it focuses on correlations con­cerning centralities of nodes and not ties among nodes) (Author, 2015). 2.4Approval required In order to carry out the research, relevant per­missions have been requested from the participants and central administration of the Manpower Em­ployment Organization. 2.5Criteria for Participation in the Study The survey has been conducted on all partici­pants (employees), regardless of their gender, per­formance, particular interests, any duties, etc. 2.6Exclusion Criteria The criterion for exclusion from the survey is only the possible refusal of individuals to participate in it. 3RESULTS In figures 1, 2 and 3, networks of interpersonal attractiveness are depicted. Figure 4 depicts a net­work of power and figures 5 and 6 depict networks of verbal aggressiveness among employees. The analysis of social networks can be approached with the “community” analysis which at first place de­picts the density of the network and is represented by a general indicator that shows how extensively or not the individuals of the network are connected, i.e., the ratio of direct connections in relation to the total possible number of connections, proving how intensive or not the presence of a particular activity within the network is. Therefore, high density values reflect densely connected networks and low prices sparsely connected networks (Scott,1987; Wasser­man and Faust, 1994; Tabassum et al., 2018). In our study, the densest network is the one of social at­tractiveness (13.96%). This indicates that employees seek friendly relationships and aim to develop such relationships in the workplace. The sparsest net­work is the network of verbal aggressiveness in the form of irony (2.14%). This suggests that incidents of verbal aggressiveness despite existing, rarely occur in the workplace. The second densest net­work is that of social power expressed in the form of advice at work (it is power in the form of trust). It seems that employees tend to search for col­leagues’ advice and this is appreciated. Among the three networks of interpersonal attractiveness, the densest one is the network of social attractiveness (13.96%) and the sparsest is the one of physical at­tractiveness (2.84%). Probably, physical appearance is less valued in the workplace among colleagues and the development of friendly relationships may be considered critical. The network of task attrac­tiveness can be characterized of medium density (4.84%) and it may be the case that employees are attracted by a friendly colleague at the first place and then by a colleague who may be willing to help them. Physical attractiveness seems to be of minor importance in the workplace. Also, between the two networks of verbal aggressiveness, both of them are of low density. However, the network of hurting at work (2.84%) is denser than that of irony at work (2.14%), indicating that employees may turn to that form of verbal aggressiveness more usually. The term “centrality” reflects the central role of each individual node by revealing its meaning or in­fluence on the network. Therefore, the latter repre­sents the core of social network analysis as there is possible dissolution of a network if a highly central node leaves (Barnes, 1954; Berkman and Glass, 2000). Top nodes of social and task attractiveness appear at the top of social power hierarchies as well. It could be argued that one gains social power in the workplace if they are considered socially at­tractive and they are opted for the completion of tasks at work. These nodes appear in the middle of physical attractiveness hierarchy, suggesting that physical attractiveness may not play a leading role in the development of social power. Social and task attractiveness appear to be correlated and may be the two main components of social power. Thus, the socially and task attractive colleague shapes a men­tor profile. Another important thing to mention is that the socially attractive mentor who accumulates social power in the workplace is at the top of verbal aggressiveness networks of hurting and seems to accept ironic comments. It seems that the colleague who employees turn to in order to complete a task at work and avail themselves of their help, may be a target of hurting or ironic comments at times. Outdegree centrality calculates the degree to which other nodes consider a particular node as an actor. In social networks of verbal aggressiveness outdegree shows that a particular node acts or not as an aggressor verbally and in networks of inter­personal attractiveness the degree to which nodes have the tendency to be attracted by others. In the networks presented below in figure 7, outdegree centrality indicates that nodes practicing verbal ag­gressiveness, appear as mere aggressors who are not attracted by others interpersonally and do not show respectfulness for advice on academic or per­sonal issues. On the other hand, nodes appearing to be attracted by others scientifically, socially, phys­ically and show respectfulness for others’ advice are at the bottom of verbal aggressiveness outdegree social network, avoiding verbal aggressiveness usage. In table 1, we see the relationship between net­work determinants of argumentativeness, power and attractiveness and non-network determinants. Argumentativeness seems to be a.ected by body characteristics and urbanity. Tall and heavy employ­ees tend to agree with colleagues more easily. It could be the case that heavy employees are consid­ered weak during a discussion. Obviously, living in town a.ects weakness during a discussion, with those living in rural areas being more argumenta­tive. Attractiveness appears to be a.ected by height with tall employees being considered more attrac­tive. It also tends to be a.ected by travelling abroad. One assumption could be that gaining experience abroad can add to one’s profile making them more sympathetic and appealing to other colleagues. In table 2, the relation between the network determinants is presented. Engaging in disagree­ments may turn you into accepting ironic comments (1.000), but does not deter you from being friendly (.678). Having the tendency to agree is correlated to task attractiveness (.642). Being weak during a discussion does not seem to a.ect one’s profile as a mentor at the workplace (1.000) or their task at­tractiveness (1.000). It seems that task attractive mentors at the workplace may show weaknesses during a discussion due to argumentativeness defi­ciency. Being a mentor in the workplace appears to be related to all forms of personal attractiveness, i.e., task attractiveness (1.000), social attractiveness (.627, 1.000) and physical attractiveness (1.000). Being a target of irony may engage one into dis­agreements (1.000). An interesting finding is that those who concentrate power as mentors at work­place may accept hurting comments (1.000), indi­cating that verbal aggressiveness may a.ect mentors up to an extent. We could assume that a person trusted in work issues can be a victim of a certain amount of verbal aggressiveness and that kind of hurting comments’ use may take place under certain circumstances. Another interesting finding is that task attractiveness is related to social power in the form of trusting and seeking advice in the workplace (1.000) but not in the form of trusting for personal issues. It seems that an employee concen­trates power as a mentor at the workplace but this does not necessarily render them into people that peers would trust on personal issues. It appears that the two domains of work and personal life are kept distinguished. Social attractiveness favors agree­ment in the workplace (.678), social power in the form of trust regarding work related issues (.627), sympathy (.626) and task attractiveness (.708, 1.000), but is negatively correlated to verbal aggres­siveness (-1.000). Someone who may be trusted in the workplace due to their mentor profile, they may experience a certain amount of verbal aggressive­ness. Finally, physical attractiveness seems to be only correlated to social attractiveness (1.000). 4DISCUSSION The aim of the research consists in the investi­gation of attractiveness, power and aggressiveness in organizations, examining correlations and struc­tural analysis of social networks, showing that infor­mal hierarchies are worth to consider in terms of power. The first finding of this study is indicated by the density of networks, namely. Attractiveness and power networks prevail over networks of verbal ag­gressiveness. This may show that positive relation­ships are developed within organizations, despite the rare occurrence of verbal aggressiveness inci­dents that come in the form of irony and hurting comments. Social network studies show that formal structures in organizations are strengthened by per­sonal networks and that informal contact between members of the organization reinforce the proce­dure of identification (Gruenfeld and Tiedens 2010). Employee identification with their organization pos­itively a.ects the well-being of individuals and or­ganization performance (van Dick and Kershcreiter 2016; van Dick et al. 2018; Krug et al. 2021). In our study, this kind of identification elicits from net­works of attractiveness (social and task) and power (trust in colleagues). The second conclusion comes from the hierar­chical positions of the network nodes. It seems that socially and task attractive nodes concentrate power within the organization and develop a men­tor profile. Gruenfeld et al. (1996) state that em­ployees feel a certain amount of psychological safety when they are in groups with familiar others, which a.ects belongingness dynamics. Thus, the powerful employees in our study are socially and task attractive. They are the nodes that attract oth­ers socially, that is they have developed intimacy with others and prove a safe option for the comple­tion of tasks due to their previous collaboration fame. Their power is drawn from the safety they achieve to inspire to other members of the group due to the familiarity they have developed with them along with their collaborative skills. This find­ing is in accordance with Hogg’s (1992) definition of social attraction as shared membership of one’s group. Hogg and Terry (2000) have also stated that workplace behaviour is supported by that kind of social attraction, which also agrees with the corre­lation of network determinants of our study, sug­gesting that mentors draw their power from all kinds of attractiveness (task, social and physical at­tractiveness), with task attractiveness being the main determining factor in the development of power in the organization. Likeable workers seem to have positive personal characteristics which makes them personally attractive, as also indicated in the study of Bown and Abrams (2003). As Shahzad et al. (2021) have shown, Big five person­ality traits, like extraversion, agreeableness, consci­entiousness and openness are related to authentic leadership, that is a pattern of leadership that com­bines psychological and moral elements. In our re­search, the socially and task attractive mentor may act as a non-typical authentic leader, able to a.ect development in the organization, since they seem to foster collective learning, supporting the model of learning organization model (Oh and Koo 2021). The socially and task attractive mentor seems to prompt team learning and creativity, acting as a knowledge-oriented leader (Men and Jia 2021) at an informal hierarchy level. This kind of mentor has adopted a proactive attitude which is considered necessary for positive development and successful coping with changes in work (Uusiautti 2016) and si­multaneously, this kind of mentor can contribute to knowledge sharing, an important dimension of or­ganizational culture (Zakaria & Mehairi 2014). Our study indicates that nodes may become targets for verbal aggressiveness when they are friendly (socially attractive), chosen by colleagues to complete a task at work (task attractive) and expose their opinions through arguments (in disagree­ments), i.e., the nodes who develop a mentor pro­file may be targets for verbal aggressiveness. This has also been verified in similar social network anal­ysis studies in the education context (Litsa et al. 2021; Spanou et al. 2021). As Ridgeway and Correl (2006) have stated, status characteristics are those that symbolize the amount of power any member may hold in comparison to other members of the same group. In our study, we can assume that the social and task attractiveness are traits equal to sta­tus in the organization context that triggers verbal aggressiveness. We could assume that the socially and task attractive mentor draws their power from information power (Kalpokas & Radivojevic 2021), that is empowering others by providing information, and probably that is a status targeted verbally at times. 4.1Theoretical and practical implications The current study expands our understanding of organizational culture examining the informal hi­erarchies of attractiveness, power and aggressive­ness developed among employees. Social network analysis facilitates the visualization of informal rela­tionships and the interdependence developed among employees. The results may help Manpower Employment Organization and other public organizations to pay particular attention to informal hierarchies and take advantage of the “mentor employee profile”, that is the socially and task attractive employee who can build trust at di.erent hierarchical levels, thus im­proving organization function and performance. HR professionals could possibly draw from a pool of such employees to build a network of support that can sustain internal organization training aiming at the macro-level structures. Also, knowing that these particular employees may be targeted verbally fa­cilitates the implementation of preventive measures to ensure a safe workplace for all employees. 4.2Limitations and future directions Expanding the sample to other organizations in order to achieve comparisons and adding qualita­tive methodology for the triangularization of meth­ods may be a challenge for future studies. More specifically, interviewing those at the top and at the bottom of hierarchies may shed light on the reasons why relationship hierarchies are depicted in partic­ular ways and why particular nodes appear at spe­cific positions in their hierarchies. Acknowledgement We are grateful to the employees of Manpower Employment Organisation having participated in this research. REFERENCES: Barnes, J. A. (1954). Class and committees in a Norwegian island parish. Human Relations, 7(1), 39-58. Bekiari, A., & Digelidis, N. (2015). Measuring verbal aggres­siveness in sport and education. International Journal of Physical Education, 52(4), 112-121. Bekiari, A., & Hasanagas, N. (2016). Suggesting indicators of superficiality and purity in verbal aggressiveness: An application in adult education class networks of prison inmates. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 4(3), 279-292. Bekiari, A., & Spyropoulou, S. (2016). Exploration of ver­bal aggressiveness and interpersonal attraction through social network analysis: Using university physical education class as an illustration. Open Jour­nal of Social Sciences, 4(6), 145-155. Berkman, L. F., & Glass, T. (2000). Social integration, social networks, social support, and health. In L. F. Berkman & I. Kawachi (Eds.), Social Epidemiology (pp. 137-173). Oxford University Press. Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1978). Interpersonal attrac­tion. Addison-Wesley. Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2004). Personality and transfor­mational and transactional leadership: A meta-analy­sis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 901-910. Bown, N. J., & Abrams, D. (2003). Despicability in the work­place: E.ects of behavioral deviance and unlikeability on the evaluation of in-group and out-group members. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33(1), 2413-2426. Chamberlain, L. J., Crowley, M., Tope, D., et al. (2008). Sexual harassment in organizational context. Work and Occupations, 35(3), 262-295. Cyert, R., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Prentice Hall. Dedahanov, A. T., Miao, S., & Semyonov, A. A. (2021). When does abusive supervision mitigate work e.ort? Moderating roles of cognitive reappraisal and rumi­nation. Leadership & Organization Development Jour­nal, 42(3), 467-479. Eagly, A. H., Ashmore, R. D., Makhijani, M. G., et al. (1991). What is beautiful is good, but…: A meta-ana­lytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin, 110(1), 109-128. Epitropaki, O., Kark, R., Mainemelis, C., & Lord, R. G. (2017). Leadership and followership identity pro­cesses: A multilevel review. The Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), 104-129. Frieze, I. H., Olson, J. E., & Russell, J. (1991). Attractiveness and income for men and women in management. Jour­nal of Applied Social Psychology, 21(13), 1039-1057. Gilmore, D. C., Beehr, T. A., & Love, K. G. (1986). E.ects of applicant sex, applicant physical attractiveness, type of rater and type of job on interview decisions. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 59(2), 103-109. Gorden, W. I., Infante, D. A., & Graham, E. E. (1988). Cor­porate conditions conducive to employee voice: A subordinate perspective. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 1(2), 101-111. Gruenfeld, D. H., Mannix, E. A., Williams, K. Y., et al. (1996). Group composition and decision making: How member familiarity and information distribution af­fect process and performance. Organizational Behav­ior and Human Decision Processes, 67(1), 1-15. Gruenfeld, D. H., & Tiedens, L. Z. (2010). Organizational preferences and their consequences. In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psy­chology (pp. 1252–1287). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Harris, K. J., Harvey, P., & Kacmar, K. M. (2011). Abusive supervisory reactions to coworker relationship con­flict. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(5), 1010-1023. Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D., & Platow, M. J. (2020). The new psychology of leadership: Identity, influence, and power. Routledge. Heisel, A. (2000). Strategic verbal aggression: Attacking the self-concept to enhance motivation in the class­room. (PhD thesis, West Virginia University Li­braries, USA). Hogg, M. A. (1992). The social psychology of group cohe­siveness: From attraction to social identity. Harvester Wheatsheaf. Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. J. (2000). The dynamic, diverse, and variable faces of organizational identity. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 150-152. Ilies, R., Morgeson, F. P., & Nahrgang, J. D. (2005). Authen­tic leadership and eudaemonic well-being: Under­standing leader–follower outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 373-394. Infante, D. A. (1987). Aggressiveness. In Personality and Interpersonal Communication (pp. 157-192). Infante, D. A., & Gorden, W. I. (1991). How employees see the boss: Test of an argumentative and a.rming model of supervisors’ communicative behavior. West­ern Journal of Communication (includes Communica­tion Reports), 55(3), 294-304. Infante, D. A., & Gorden, W. I. (1985). Benefits versus bias: An investigation of argumentativeness, gender, and organizational communication outcomes. Communi­cation Research Reports, 2(1), 196-201. Infante, D. A., & Gorden, W. I. (1987). Superior and sub­ordinate communication profiles: Implications for in­dependent-mindedness and upward e.ectiveness. Communication Studies, 38(2), 73-80. Infante, D. A., Myers, S. A., & Buerkel, R. A. (1994). Argu­ment and verbal aggression in constructive and de­structive family and organizational disagreements. Western Journal of Communication (Includes Commu­nication Reports), 58(2), 73-84. Infante, D. A., & Wigley III, C. J. (1986). Verbal aggressive­ness: An interpersonal model and measure. Commu­nications Monographs, 53(1), 61-69. Jackson, L. A., Hunter, J. E., & Hodge, C. N. (1995). Physical attractiveness and intellectual competence: A meta-analytic review. Social Psychology Quarterly, 108-122. Kalpokas, N., & Radivojevic, I. (2021). Maneuvering with­out o.ending on the road to democracy: The role of leaders’ power in bringing greater freedom to all. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 42(6), 912-925. Kalshoven, K., Den Hartog, D. N., & De Hoogh, A. H. (2011). Ethical leader behavior and big five factors of person­ality. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(2), 349-366. Krug, H., Geibel, H. V., & Otto, K. (2021). Identity leader­ship and well-being: Team identification and trust as underlying mechanisms. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 42(1), 17-31. Lau, D. C., & Murnighan, K. J. (2005). Interactions with groups and subgroups: The e.ects of demographic fault­lines. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 645-659. Litsa, M., Bekiari, A., & Spanou, K. (2021). Social Network Analysis in Physical Education Classes: Attractiveness of Individuals and Targets of Verbal Aggressiveness. The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Educa­tional Studies, 16(1), 151-162. Madlock, P. E., & Kennedy-Lightsey, C. (2010). The e.ects of supervisors’ verbal aggressiveness and mentoring on their subordinates. The Journal of Business Com­munication, 47(1), 42-62. Men, C., & Jia, R. (2021). Knowledge-oriented leadership, team learning, and team creativity: The roles of task interdependence and task complexity. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 42(6), 882-898. McCroskey, J. C., & McCain, T. A. (1974). The measure­ment of interpersonal attraction. Speech Monograph, 41(3), 261-266. McCroskey, L. L., McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (2006). Analysis and improvement of the measure­ment of interpersonal attraction and homophily. Communication Quarterly, 54(1), 1-31. Morrow, P. C., McElroy, J. C., Stamper, B. G., et al. (1990). The e.ects of physical attractiveness and other de­mographic characteristics on promotion decisions. Journal of Management, 16(4), 723-736. Morsch, J., van Dijk, D., & Kodden, B. (2020). The impact of perceived psychological contract breach, abusive supervision, and silence on employee well-being. Journal of Applied Business and Economics, 22(2). Neuman, J. H., & Baron, R. A. (1998). Workplace violence and workplace aggression: Evidence concerning spe­cific forms, potential causes, and preferred targets. Journal of Management, 24(3), 391-419. Oh, S. Y., & Koo, S. (2021). Protean career attitude and or­ganisational commitment in learning organisation cli­mate. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 42(6), 837-855. Parrett, M. (2015). Beauty and the feast: Examining the e.ect of beauty on earnings using restaurant tipping data. Journal of Economic Psychology, 49, 34-46. Pfe.er, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1974). Organisational deci­sion making as a political process: The case of a uni­versity budget. Administrative Science Quarterly, 19, 135-151. Popitz, H. (1992). Phänomene der Macht. Mohr Siebeck. Qureshi, M. Y., & Kay, J. P. (1986). Physical attractiveness, age, and sex as determinants of reactions to resumes. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 14(1), 103-112. Rani, H., Shah, S. M. M., Umrani, W. A., Syed, J., & Afshan, G. (2021). Employee state paranoia: Linking abusive su­pervision with employee voice behavior. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 42(7), 1053-1070. Ridgeway, C. L., & Correll, S. J. (2006). Consensus and the creation of status beliefs. Social Forces, 85(1), 431-453. Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. (2009). Essentials of Organiza­tion Behavior. Prentice Hall. Scott, J. (1987). Social Network Analysis: A Handbook. Sage Publications. Shahzad, K., Raja, U., & Hashmi, S. D. (2020). Impact of Big Five personality traits on authentic leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 42(2), 208-218. Shtudiner, Z., & Klein, G. (2019). The impact of gender and attractiveness on judgment of accountants’ mis­behaviors. Available at SSRN: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3391257 Spanou, K., Bekiari, A., & Litsa, M. (2021). Unveiling neg­ative behaviors in the academic arena. The Interna­tional Journal of Interdisciplinary Educational Studies, 15(2), 29-43. Spencer, B. A., & Taylor, G. S. (1988). E.ects of facial at­tractiveness and gender on causal attributions of managerial performance. Sex Roles, 19(5-6), 273-285. Tabassum, S., Pereira, S. F., Fernandes, S., et al. (2018). Social network analysis: An overview. Wiley Interdis­ciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Dis­covery, 8(5), 1256. Tepper, B. J. (2007). Abusive supervision in work organi­zations: Review, synthesis, and research agenda. Jour­nal of Management, 33(3), 261-289. Uusiautti, S. (2016). How do positive acts influence suc­cess at work? A case study of enterprise leaders’ and employees’ perceptions of success. Organizational Cultures: An International Journal, 16(3), 13-26. doi:10.18848/2327-8013/CGP/v16i03/13-26. Van Dick, R., & Kerschreiter, R. (2016). The social identity approach to e.ective leadership: An overview and some ideas on cross-cultural generalizability. Frontiers of Business Research in China, 10(3), 363. Van Dick, R., Ciampa, V., & Liang, S. (2018). Shared iden­tity in organizational stress and change. Current Opin­ion in Psychology, 23, 20-25. Vogel, R. M., Mitchell, M. S., Tepper, B. J., Restubog, S. L., Hu, C., Hua, W., & Huang, J. C. (2015). A cross-cultural examination of subordinates’ perceptions of and re­actions to abusive supervision. Journal of Organiza­tional Behavior, 36(5), 720-745. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social Network Anal­ysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge University Press. Weber, M. (1978). Economy and Society: An Outline of In­terpretive Sociology (Vol. 1). University of California Press. Wolbring, T., & Riordan, P. (2016). How beauty works: Theoretical mechanisms and two empirical applica­tions on students’ evaluation of teaching. Social Sci­ence Research, 57, 253-272. Zakaria, N., & Al Mehairi, H. A. (2014). Understanding or­ganizational culture for e.ective knowledge sharing behaviors in the workplace. Organizational Cultures: An International Journal, 13(3), 33-52. 1974; Lau and Murnighan 2005). However, in our study we approach organization as a social entity. 1 Their formulas are easily accessible in the web (https://visone.ethz.ch/wiki/images/6/67/VisoneTutor­ ial-archeology.pdf) • (density), [G=graph, m=number of links, n(n-1)=number of possible links] •(indegree), (outdegree) [directed graph: G=(V,E), where V=nodes, E=links, .=weights, number of links , a link connects 2 nodes , .: , , , .(x)] • (Katz status) where • (pagerank) where 0