Assignment W3

LEADERSHIP • POV/ER

Soft Power Mix it with hard power.

by Joseph S. Nye, Jr.

EADBiSHU' K CHANONG.

iThe information re- volution is transform-

ing organiza tioi'LS. Hierarchies are becoming flatter, and knowledge work- ers respond to different incentives and political appeals. People today are less deferential to authority. Soft power— the ability to get what you want by attraction rather than coercion or pay- ment—is more important.

The CEO of Google says he has to "coddle" his employees. Even the mil- itary is changing. The Pentagon reports that American army drillmasters do "less shouting at everyone/' because today's generation responds better to instructors who play a more "counsel- ing role." Military success against ter- rorists and counterinsurgents requires soldiers to win hearts and minds, not just break bodies. We see an increase in the use of more participative man- agement processes and "shared" or "distributed" leadership. They sug- gest images of leaders in the center of a circle rather than atop a hierarchy.

Not everyone agrees. Stanford psy- chologist Roderick Kramer warns: "In our enchantment with sodal intelli- gence and soft power, we've overlooked 3ie skills leaders need to bring about transformation in cases of tremendous resistance or inertia." Kramer describes bullies who have a vision and disdain stKial constraints as "great intimida- tors". Yet they often succeed.

Hard and soft power are related. They are both approaches to achieving one's purpose by affecting the behavior of others. Sometimes people are attract- ed to others with command power by myths of inviiidbility. As Osama bin Laden put it, "When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, by nature, they will like the strong horse."

Some intimidators have a vision, belief in their cause, and reputation for success that attracts others despite their bullying behavior—witness the examples of Steve Jobs, Martha Stewart and Hyman Rickover, the father of the nuclear navy. Rickover was a small man, far from the top of his class at

Annapolis, who did not look the part of a warrior or sea captain. His success as a Navy leader came from his skills in cultivating Congressional support and resources, and from a discipline that tolerated no failures among his officers. The result was the creation of an efficient, accident-free nuclear sub- marine force with a mystique of suc- cess that attracted bright officers. Able people wanted to join him because Rickover was renowned for his strate- gic vision, not for being a nice boss.

Hard and soft power sometimes reinforce and sometimes interfere with each other. Although Jim Jones used soft power to persuade his follow ers to commit mass suicide, ho had an inner core of eight henchmen who used a degree of coercion on followers who threatened to defect. Crowing awareness of this use of hard power threatened to "pop the bubble" of the cult's illusion.^ and accelerated its sad end.

In response to Al QaedaS terrorist attacks. Vice President Dick Cheney argued that a strong military force would deter further attacks. Yes, the hard power of military and police force was needed to counter Al Qaeda, but indiscriminate use of hard power— the Iraq invasion, Abu Ghraib prison pictures, and Cuantanamo detentions without trial—served to increase ter- rorist recruits. The lack of effective soft power component undercut the strate- gy to respond to terrorism.

Every leader needs some soft power. Those who rely on coercion aren't leaders but power wielders. Not all power behavior is leadership, but even tyrants and despots need a degree of soft power, at least within an inner cir- cle. A dictator must attract or induce an inner circle of henchmen to impose his coercive tecliniques on others.

Except for some religious leaders, such as the Dalai Lama who combines personal and positional power, soft power is rarely sufficient. And a leader who only courts popularity may be reluctant to exercise hard power when he or she should. Alternatively, leaders who throw their weight around with- out regard to the effects on their soft power may find others placing obsta- cles in the way of their hard power. Too much assertiveness by a leader worsens relationships, just as too little limits achievement. As CEO Jeff Imnielt says, "When you run General Electric, there are 12 times a year when you have to say, 'you're doing it my way.' If you do it 18 times, the good

people will leave. If you do it three times, the company falls apart."

Machiavelli said it is more impor- tant for a prince to be feared than to be loved. Perhaps, but we forget that the opposite of love is not fear, but hatred. When the exercise of hard power undercuts soft power, it makes leader- ship more difficult. Combining hard and soft power into an effective strate- gy is "smart power."

Soft power is not good per se, and it is not always better than hard power. Nobody likes to feel manipulated, even by soft power. Soft power can be used for competitive purposes, and we often

talk about wtirs ofwonis— one person's attraction pit- u.\\ against another's. A I'irsident may campaign against legislators in their home districts or run ads pushing his agenda and attacking theirs. He is using his attraction to combat theirs, thus putting pressure on them. In that sense, soft

power can feel "coercive," but ifs a different sense of coercion than what the victim experiences with physical (though not economic) hard power. In a competition with soft power, it mat- ters much what you and others think. If I shoot you to achieve my objective, it doesn't matter much what you think.

Like any form of power, soft power can be wielded for gcxid or bad purpos- es, and these often vary according to the eye of the beholder. Bin Laden possess- es a great deal of soft power in the eyes of his followers, but that does not make his actions good. It is not necessarily better to twist minds than to twist arms. If I want to steal your money, I can threaten you with a gun, lure you into a fraudulent get-rich-quick scheme, or persuade you with a false claim. I can then abscond with your money. The first two approaches rest on the hard power of coercion and inducement while the third depends solely upon attraction or soft power. Yet, the inten- tions and result remain theft.

The views and choices of followers matter more in the case of soft power. And in an age of flatter hierarchies and empowered knowledge workers, soft power is increasing in importance. We need to place more emphasis on the contextual intelligence that enables leaders to combine hard and soft power resources into a smart power strategy.LE

¡Qseph S, Nyf, Ir. is former dean of Ihe Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University and aullior of The Power if l^ad. Email josi'ph_nyc(V>Han'ard.eäii.

ACTION: Cultivate and exercise your soft power.