Freudly+971 508685814hello@freudly.ai
Freudly
leadership

Leader–Member Exchange 7 Questionnaire (LMX-7) Test

Take the online Leader–Member Exchange 7 Questionnaire (LMX-7) Test - AI psychologist FreudlyYou can take Leader–Member Exchange 7 Questionnaire (LMX-7) Test here. Online version of a simple and accurate psychological test with interpretation.en
Designed for a quick look at workplace relationship quality, the Leader-Member Exchange 7 Questionnaire (LMX-7) Test takes about two minutes and includes seven questions. Your result indicates how strongly trust, respect, support, and effectiveness are expressed in a leader-follower relationship, offering a useful starting point for reflection.
Questions: 72 minutes
Leader–Member Exchange 7 Questionnaire: test ticket with numbers
October 2, 2025October 2, 2025Material has been updatedOctober 2, 2025Material has been published
28,360 views
1,998 completions
1,643 likes
Daniel HallPsychologist · Test reviewer
1,643 likes
Scale Explorer

How the Scales are Structured

Relationship QualityRQ
Measures the overall quality of the leader–member relationship in terms of trust, respect, and mutual support.
example score11/35
11/35Low qualityexample score
7 – 19Low quality
20 – 24Moderate quality
25 – 35High quality
A score of 11 falls in the Low quality range, suggesting limited trust, respect, and reciprocal support in the leader–follower relationship at this time.
just completed the test
DATA-BASED USER COHORTS

Who Usually Takes This Test?

People Managers
41%OF USERS
Managers use it to gauge trust, respect, and working chemistry with each direct report and spot relationship gaps early.
HR and People Ops
34%OF USERS
HR teams take it to diagnose team communication bottlenecks and inform leadership development or engagement initiatives.
Team Leads and Consultants
25%OF USERS
Coaches and internal consultants use it as a quick baseline to guide conversations and measure progress in leader–member relationships.
BASED ON AGGREGATED, ANONYMIZED DATA FROM TENS OF THOUSANDS OF FREUDLY USERS.
Benchmarking

See How You Compare

Once you complete the test, your results are compared with real-world data from people in your country.
Below is a preview of how scores are typically distributed across each scale.
Shaded area — where most people score
Dot — the average
You — your score lands on each curve after the test— your score, after the test
Quality of RelationshipsQoR
You?
Average14.8
Typical rangeTypical11.2 – 18.3
Possible7 – 35
Featured On
SAMPLE QUESTIONS

Example Questions From the Test

The questionnaire may be completed by either a leader or a follower. The only point that must be clarified is that leaders complete the questionnaire separately for each of their followers, whereas followers complete it for each of their supervisors. You will be asked to characterize your relationship either with your leader or with one of your followers. Please read each item carefully. To what extent does this description reflect reality? Indicate your response by selecting one of five options.
    • Strongly disagree
    • Disagree
    • Neutral
    • Agree
    • Strongly agree
    • Strongly disagree
    • Disagree
    • Neutral
    • Agree
    • Strongly agree
    • Strongly disagree
    • Disagree
    • Neutral
    • Agree
    • Strongly agree
WHAT THE TEST MEASURES

Leader–Member Exchange 7 Questionnaire (LMX-7) Test - Description and methodology of the test

leadership

People who want to understand how a supervisor and employee experience their working relationship can use this focused self-report. The Leader-Member Exchange 7 Questionnaire (LMX-7) Test offers a structured snapshot of that workplace dyad. It is a practical leader-member exchange test for reflecting on trust, recognition, support, and effectiveness within one workplace dyad. The result offers a structured snapshot of perceived exchange quality rather than a history of every interaction.

What This Assessment Explores

At its core, the LMX relationship assessment examines whether a leader-follower exchange feels informed, respectful, dependable, and effective. The statements cover understanding of satisfaction and needs, recognition of potential, access to help, willingness to assist, trust, and collaboration. It suits employees, managers, and anyone reflecting on a particular workplace relationship.

Results appear as Relationship Quality, scored from 7-35. The displayed bands are Low quality (7-19), Moderate quality (20-24), and High quality (25-35). They describe the level of exchange reflected in the answers, from limited connection to mature partnership with mutual support.

The questions cover four connected aspects:

  • Mutual understanding shows how each person grasps the other’s needs and work experience.
  • Recognition shows whether contribution and potential are valued.
  • Practical support reflects readiness to help with work problems.
  • Trust and effectiveness capture confidence, backing, and collaboration.

Methodology and Evidence Base

Each item is a first-person statement about the respondent’s relationship with a leader or follower. Five ordered choices run from Strongly disagree to Strongly agree, placing each experience on a common agreement scale. The online scoring combines responses into one overall relationship-quality result rather than separate numerical scores for trust, support, or effectiveness.

The questionnaire is conceptually consistent with LMX-7 (Graen, Novak, & Sommerkamp, 1982), which assesses exchange quality in leader-member dyads, but it is not presented as an adaptation of that publication. It also fits the relationship-based leadership view described by Graen and Uhl-Bien (1995), where formal exchanges may develop into trust, support, respect, and mutual influence. Schriesheim, Castro, and Cogliser (1999) show why varied LMX measures require careful interpretation; this online form is a concise leadership relationship questionnaire.

The displayed bands are descriptive categories for this online score, not population norms or clinical thresholds. Because self-reports reflect current events, personal perspective, and candor, interpret the result with the workplace situations that prompted it and with other relevant information.

Author: G. B. Graen, M. Uhl-Bien
Literature:
  • Graen, G. B., Novak, M. A., & Sommerkamp, P. (1982). The effects of leader-member exchange and job design on productivity and satisfaction: Testing a dual attachment model. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 30(1), 109-131. 10.1016/0030-5073(82)90236-7
  • 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. 10.1016/1048-9843(95)90036-5
  • Schriesheim, C. A., Castro, S. L., & Cogliser, C. C. (1999). Leader-member exchange (LMX) research: A comprehensive review of theory, measurement, and data-analytic practices. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(1), 63-113. 10.1016/S1048-9843(99)80009-5

Updated:

Popular tests
Comments
Leave a Comment