Organizational Theory and Behavior

WHAT IS IT LIKE TO HAVE POWER?

Researchers have long asked the question, “What is it like to have power?”1 The research evidence shows that having power has strong effects on a person’s thoughts (cognitions), affect (emotions and moods), and behavior. A review of research summarized the findings on the effects of power on the person who holds it. Table 7.1 shows some of the results of this review. For example, a person’s thoughts are changed, resulting in more optimism, risk-taking, and confidence. However, those with a lot of power do not always consider the perspectives of other people. With respect to affect, they may have greater emotional displays (such as enthusiasm and pride). However, those in power may be less compassionate and unable to take the perspective of others. They may lack empathy and not be able to feel the suffering of others. On the flip side, people who feel powerless express more discomfort and fear when asked to discuss controversial subject matter.2 Organizational behavior (OB) researchers are particularly interested in the effects of power on behavior, and research has shown that power affects behaviors also. Powerful individuals are more likely to act, pursue rewards, and initiate negotiations. However, they may also be corrupt and less likely to conform to norms. One study reported that powerful individuals have been found to experience less guilt, even when they know that they are violating social norms,3 and they are more likely to be good liars.4 Another study found that having powerful individuals on a team harms team performance. When working together in groups, high-power groups performed worse than did other groups; individuals who were randomly assigned power in an initial task were less creative.5 Power affects us in our personal lives as well. An interesting study of consumer spending found that powerful individuals may be more selfish than others and spend more money on themselves.6 In sum, this line of research clearly demonstrates that having power changes people. As you move up in the organization in your career, will power change you?

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN POWER AND INFLUENCE

Learning Objective 7.1: Define power and influence and provide an example of each.

The word power comes from the Latin word potere and means to be able. Ana Guinote, author of a large-scale review of how power affects people, notes, “Power is admired and fought over by those who desire it and often feared by those who lack it. It is ubiquitous and affects the fate of many.”7 Decades ago, Bertrand Russell observed that “the fundamental concept in social science is power, in the same sense in which energy is the fundamental concept in physics.”8,9 It can be said that power is the other side of the leadership coin. Without power, leadership cannot be effective. If you think about it, leadership requires some form of deference to a leader: “If leadership involves actively influencing others, then followership involves allowing oneself to be influenced.”10 Yet leaders are reluctant to admit that they want power, and power and politics have been called the “last dirty words.”11 Power is defined as “having the discretion and the means to asymmetrically enforce one’s will over others.”12 Nearly all definitions of leadership include the idea of influencing others, and power is the source of influence. A useful distinction between power and influence follows.13

Power is the potential of one person (or group) to influence another person or group. Some people have a lot of power, but they don’t need to exercise it. For example, a police officer sitting in a patrol car on the side of the interstate affects your behavior (and those ahead of you!). You remove your foot from the accelerator and slow down. It is the officer’s potential power to write you a ticket and not the actual behavior of writing it that changes your behavior. This is important to keep in mind. You don’t always have to demonstrate your power—if you attain a managerial position and have others who report to you, it is unspoken. Often, power is best executed when it is done in a subtle manner. Influence, in turn, is the exercise of power to change the behavior, attitudes, or values of an individual or group. Influence can, therefore, be thought of as power in use.

Learning Objective 7.2: Provide examples of each of the five bases of power.

Five bases of power in organizations have been described in the literature (coercive, reward, legitimate, expert, and referent).14 Some forms of power come with a person’s position in the hierarchy. This is known as position power. Position power includes the following:

Coercive power—the ability to punish, and this can include threats. For example, a supervisor threatens to write a memorandum to an employee’s file for being late all the time.

Reward power—the ability to provide incentives or other things valued, such as pay raises, bonuses, and promotions.15 For example, an employee receives a merit pay increase.

Legitimate power—the ability to make a request and get a response due to the nature of the roles between two people (e.g., boss and direct report, a favor-doer and a favor-recipient); it is based upon structural level in the organization or a feeling of obligation. For example, an employee completes a sales report for his boss.

While coercive power is on the list of bases of power, most leaders in organizations say that they rarely, if ever, use it. Scholars warn that the use of coercion may result in dysfunctional behavior on the part of the follower, and managers who use it are viewed negatively.16 Another example of dysfunctional behavior is when followers talk badly about the boss behind their back.

Other power may come from the personal characteristics of the person and may have no relationship to their position in the organization. This is called personal power. The personal sources of power are not tied to position but can be generated by anyone in the organization. They help explain why many people in organizations have a lot of power, even if they don’t have important-sounding titles and are not at the upper levels in the organizational hierarchy. These personal power sources are as follows:

Expert power—the ability to influence others due to knowledge or a special skill set or expertise. For example, the information technology department has special skills to troubleshoot computer problems for a manager.

Referent power—the ability to influence based upon others’ identification with the individual and followers’ desire to emulate them; it is based on liking, respect, and admiration. For example, volunteers work hard for a political candidate that they admire.

A study of college coaches found that expert power was most related to athletes’ satisfaction with the coach, coaches’ general influence, training effort, and the team’s belief in their abilities (collective efficacy). Coaches’ use of other bases of power had mixed results, however.17 A study of Malaysian employees found that expert, referent, and reward power were positively related to satisfaction with the supervisor, but legitimate and coercive power were not.18 A review19 found that legitimate power exerts little influence on either job satisfaction or performance. Similarly, reward power does not significantly affect satisfaction, but it does have a positive influence on performance. In contrast, coercive power seems unrelated to performance but does negatively affect job satisfaction. With regard to the personal power bases, referent power most strongly influences satisfaction, and expert power positively influences both satisfaction and performance.

As noted previously with respect to coercion, these power bases may result in different reactions from followers. Three possible outcomes of an influence attempt can be distinguished:20

Commitment—also known as internalization; a strong effort made and enthusiastically carries out the request. Both attitudes and behaviors change.

Compliance—willing to complete the request but does so in an apathetic manner giving minimal effort; only behavior changes.

Resistance—opposed to the request and refuses to do it. They may explain why they can’t complete it, try to change it, get superiors to change it, delay it, or even sabotage the task by doing it wrong; no change in attitude or behavior toward the request.

Figure 7.1:summarizes the bases of power and shows the likely responses from followers. Coercive power may be met with resistance, but referent power, in contrast, may result in commitment to the leader’s vision. Compliance can be expected from legitimate power and the ability of the leader to reward followers for their work. Expertise may also result in compliance, but it is higher than legitimate power since some may admire expertise and it may have some impact on commitment. The figure also depicts another important concept with respect to power: the zone of indifference:21

There exists a “zone of indifference” in each individual within which orders are acceptable without conscious questioning of their authority. . . . The zone of indifference will be wider or narrower depending upon the degree to which the inducements exceed the burdens and sacrifices, which determine the individual’s adhesion to the organization. It follows that the range of orders that will be accepted will be very limited among those who are barely induced to contribute to the system.

As shown in Figure 7.1, the zone of indifference falls between reward power and expert power and is centered on legitimate power. In most cases, followers will comply with directions from leaders because they fall within the zone in which they are indifferent. Followers become dissatisfied and resist when coercive tactics are employed. However, working within the zone does not produce high levels of commitment or engagement, which are now needed for organizations to function most effectively. To gain high levels of engagement and commitment, the leader should develop and use expert power at a minimum and try to develop referent power through being a positive role model and getting followers to respond in an emotionally positive way to their influence. For example, a new graduate negotiates his salary when offered employment by a consulting company. At the outset, the graduate focuses on long-term financial benefits. But after the graduate is hired, he begins to become more committed to the mission of the consulting firm and admires his mentors. Over time, pay becomes less important, and he makes sacrifices by working long hours for the company.

Organizational Sources of Power

Power is based on how much people depend upon others for necessary resources.22 A leader’s control over resources has been linked with follower perceptions of their power and outcomes of more hope and lower turnover.23 Rosabeth Moss Kanter described power as a property of organizational systems rather than individuals.24 She presented the following three “lines” of power for leaders in organizations to tap into to gain productive power:

Lines of supply—Leaders bring in the things that their group needs, such as materials, money, and resources like rewards and even prestige.

Lines of information—Leaders need to know what is happening in the organization that may affect their group’s goals. Having access to information from all areas of the organization is an important source of power. Also, knowing whom to share information with (and not share it with) is an essential skill that leaders need to develop.

Lines of support—A leader needs to be able to innovate to have an impact on the organization. They need support that allows for risk-taking beyond typical organizational routines. Leaders also often need the backing of other influential managers in the organization to get things done.

Structural power comes from a person’s position and the communication networks they are in. This view of power suggests that sometimes power arises from “being in the right place at the right time.” Organizational sources of power result in part from being in a position of authority within an organizational hierarchy.25 For example, a leader may be in a place to resolve uncertainty for the organization or bargain across departments, which may result in being powerful. For example, purchasing agents may have a great deal of power because they operate between engineering, production scheduling, and marketing within the organization and outside vendors. They can use their position to influence other departments and gain preferential treatment in exchange for expedited purchasing orders.26 Also, a person’s position in an organization determines with whom they communicate and to what information they have access. Research has shown that managers who are central in the advice network are socially powerful and are viewed as leaders by others.27

These sources of power exist in organizations regardless of one’s individual personality or leadership style.28 That said, some people are more adept at using influence strategies to attain their goals than others. A clever person might even be able to generate sources of power, including supply, information, and support. Next, we turn to more research evidence on how power is used in organizations and the specific strategies (tactics) that have been shown to work (and those that don’t).

INFLUENCE STRATEGIES

Learning Objective 7.3: Identify the most effective influence strategies.

Social influence is one of the oldest experimental topics in the behavioral sciences, dating back to Triplett’s29 investigation of how cyclists become more competitive in the presence of other cyclists—their behavior changed compared to when they rode alone.30 Much more recently, Gary Yukl presented a typology of proactive influence tactics based upon his decades of research. While other typologies exist,31 Yukl’s typology is comprehensive and resulted from research using a wide variety of methods including “critical incidents, diaries, questionnaires, experiments, and scenarios.”32 These tactics may be used alone or in combinations, and some are more effective than others.33 There are cross-cultural differences in perceptions of the effectiveness of influence tactics.34 For example, U.S. managers prefer rational persuasion, whereas Chinese managers prefer coalitions.35 In all cases, a careful diagnosis of the person you are trying to influence and the situation is necessary. These tactics are shown in Table 7.2.

Which Influence Strategies Are the Most Effective?

So, what does research show with respect to which tactics work and with whom? As noted earlier, followers may respond to an influence attempt with commitment, compliance, or resistance. OB research has demonstrated that the different influence strategies used elicit different reactions from followers and other targets of influence.36,37,38

Rational persuasion is a tactic commonly employed by leaders, and it is very effective—particularly if the leader is viewed as an expert. Apprising involves persuading the target of influence that complying will advance their career. It is more likely to be used with peers or followers than with the boss. Inspirational appeals try to arouse followers’ emotions and can work with all targets of influence. It may be particularly useful during times of organizational change. Consultation invites the person to be involved with a proposed idea and may be used in any direction as well. It may be particularly effective with peers in cross-functional teams, for example.

Exchange is based on the quid pro quo in organizational life. It may be direct or indirect, but it will involve the idea that the exchange of favors will occur between the parties. This tactic has been shown to be more effective with peers than with bosses. Collaboration is an offer to provide assistance or resources to the person being asked to do something. It is used least with superiors in the organization but can be very effective with peers and followers.

Ingratiation is compliment-giving or acting deferential. This tactic must be used with caution because if it is overdone or comes across as insincere, it can fail entirely. Personal appeals are based on friendship or loyalty and may be more appropriate with a peer or someone outside the organization than with bosses or subordinates. Asking someone to do something based on a personal friendship may be a risky strategy. Legitimating tactics remind the target of their role in the organization in relation to the person making the request—for example, “I am asking you to do this because it is your job.” This works with followers better than other targets. Pressure tactics are threats and relate to coercion. For this reason, pressure tactics should be used sparingly—even with followers, where they are most commonly found. Research has shown that when pressure tactics are used by managers, followers are more likely to quit.39 Finally, coalition tactics involve gaining the support of others. They are more likely to be used with peers or bosses. Coalition strategies are used more when subordinates have poor relationships with their bosses.40 However, the idea is that there is “strength in numbers” and should be used carefully, especially with supervisors or those higher in the organization.

A review of 8,987 respondents41 examined the impact of influence tactics and task (e.g., performance) and relationship outcomes (e.g., trust). Rational persuasion, inspirational appeal, apprising, collaboration, ingratiation, and consultation were positively related to both task and relationship effectiveness. Pressure was negatively related to both outcomes. Rational persuasion is the only tactic that had stable positive relationships with both task and relationship outcomes. One study found that leaders should engage in the core influence tactics (rational persuasion, consultation, inspirational appeals, and collaboration) to be viewed as transformational leaders by their followers.42 These same tactics were also found to be effective for 264 followers in a video game and animation company—using these core tactics resulted in their supervisors providing more support for their creative ideas.43

Remember that power is simply a stored-up ability to get others to do what you want them to do, and that some power will come from the position you have in the organizational hierarchy. However, what happens if you don’t have formal authority over another person and you need them to commit to your goals? Research on influence without authority addresses this important question.

Influence Without Authority

Power is based upon the general dependence postulate: The greater someone depends upon another person, the more power they have over them. Based upon this idea, to influence someone over whom you have no formal authority, you need to assess whether and how much they may depend upon you.44 A model of influence without authority can be used in a wide variety of situations.45 The model is based upon the law of reciprocity first articulated by Gouldner: the nearly universal belief that if someone does something for you, they should be paid back.46 The influence without authority process is depicted in Figure 7.2. It begins with assuming the other person is your ally and wants to exchange with you. You need to be clear about what your goals are and then understand the other person’s situation (showing empathy). Then you identify what you have to exchange (i.e., the currencies) and what you need from them. Dependence is created when you control resources that are important, scarce, and cannot be substituted by others.47 Examples of such resources are support, loyalty, and extra effort on the job. In the model, these resources are the “currencies of exchange.” Other currencies include supporting the vision, gaining additional resources, providing visibility, giving personal support, and showing gratitude. It is important to assess the quality of the relationship. Finally, influence the person and emphasize the give-and-take as shown in the figure.

IMPRESSION MANAGEMENT

Learning Objective 7.4: Compare and contrast “minimizing bad” and “maximizing good” impression management strategies.

People in organizations care about what others think about them. Social psychologists have researched self-presentation and the motivations that people have to present themselves in a positive way to others.48 Impression management is a set of behaviors that people use to protect their self-image or change the way they are seen by others (or both).49,50,51 People are motivated to manage impressions for three reasons: the relevance of the goal of the impressions, the value of these goals, and the difference between their desired and current image. For example, a person is motivated to manage impressions when they see their image as important for achieving a goal, such as a promotion or pay raise. This may vary based on culture. For example, a review of 67 studies (18,906 employees) revealed that the relationship between impression management tactics and task-related outcomes (i.e., job performance and competence) and relational outcomes (i.e., likability and leader–member exchange) are stronger in Asia compared to North America.52

When people feel there is a discrepancy between the way they hope to be seen and how they are currently seen, they are more motivated to manage impressions. For example, if an employee thinks they are not liked by their coworkers, they may begin to compliment them (ingratiation).53 It is important to keep in mind that impression management may be an inauthentic representation of the self, so it’s important not to be seen as insincere when engaging in these behaviors.54 Research has found that when presenters engaged in internal self-enhancement (for example, intentionally failing to recall turning away from a person collecting from a charity to enhance their image among peers), they were viewed as immoral, unintelligent, and unfriendly.55 Research has shown that there is a clear difference between honest impression management (for example, making sure an interviewer knows your credentials) and deceptive impression management (for example, exaggerating your credentials).56

Impression management has been shown to affect interviews, performance appraisals, and career success.57 A wide range of impression management tactics have been studied, and there are two different goals for using them. One goal is to use them defensively to avoid blame for poor performance or ask for forgiveness (“minimizing bad”), and the other goal is to generate respect and liking from other people (“maximizing good”).58 The maximizing good tactics are self-promotion, whereby individuals point out their abilities or accomplishments in order to be seen as competent by observers; ingratiation, whereby individuals do favors or use flattery to elicit an attribution of likability from observers; and exemplification, whereby people self-sacrifice or go above and beyond the call of duty in order to gain the attribution of dedication from observers. The minimizing bad tactics include intimidation, where people signal their power or potential to punish in order to be seen as dangerous by observers, and supplication, where individuals advertise their weaknesses or shortcomings in order to elicit an attribution of being needy from observers.59 For example, supplication would be telling your team members that you didn’t do well in statistics courses to elicit their help on a team project. This is an example of trying to influence teammates to see you as needing help. An example of “maximizing good” is exemplification in which a person stays late at work so that others know they are a hardworking employee.

Table 7.3 shows examples of impression management strategies in which some additional “minimizing bad” tactics were added, such as apologies, excuses, and justifications.60 Impression management strategies have been found to be job-focused (e.g., exemplification), supervisor-focused (e.g., ingratiation), or self-focused (e.g., self-promotion).61 Despite the large number of impression management tactics discovered, the strategies most relevant for leaders are the ones that maximize good intentions: exemplification, ingratiation, and self-promotion.62

PERCEPTIONS OF ORGANIZATIONAL POLITICS

Learning Objective 7.5: Define perceptions of organizational politics (POP) and evaluate the negative outcomes for employees having this perception.

Organizational politics has been defined as unsanctioned influence attempts that seek to promote self-interest at the expense of organizational goals.65,66 Behaving politically is not prescribed in an employee’s job description or formal role, but people engage in these behaviors to gain advantage over others.67 Research has shown that employees vary in the degree to which they perceive behaviors of others as constituting organizational politics as being self-serving and at the expense of others. Negative political behaviors are a pressing problem for organizations and can create “corrosive political climates.”68 Perceptions of organizational politics (POP) is defined as an individual’s subjective appraisal of the extent to which the work environment is characterized as self-serving of various individuals and groups to the detriment or at the cost of other individuals or groups.69 This is an employee’s perceptual evaluation of a behavior as being political, and this may or may not reflect reality. POP consists of general political behavior, which includes the behaviors of individuals who act in a self-serving manner to obtain valued outcomes; going along to get ahead, which consists of a lack of action by individuals (e.g., remaining silent) in order to secure valued outcomes; and pay and promotion policies, which involves the organization behaving politically through the policies it enacts.70 Sometimes it can be difficult to determine whether or not a given behavior is political—Toolkit Activity 7.1 will allow you to assess how you might react to a political situation in an organization.

How would you address the following?

People in this organization attempt to build themselves up by tearing others down.

There has always been an influential group in this department that no one ever crosses.

Agreeing with powerful others is the best alternative in this organization.

Telling others what they want to hear is sometimes better than telling the truth.

Favoritism, rather than merit, determines who gets good raises and promotions around here.

Inconsistent with organizational policies, promotions in this organization generally do not go to top performers.71

These statements are taken from the measure used to assess POP. If you found yourself agreeing or strongly agreeing with them, you view your organization as having a great deal of organizational politics. The first two statements express general political behavior, the next two describe going along to get ahead, and the last two are about pay and promotion policies. Research over the past 30 years has found that POP is associated with decreased job satisfaction, increased anxiety and stress, increased turnover, and reduced performance.72 A review involving a large sample of 44,560 participants found that POP is positively related to stress, burnout, turnover intentions, and counterproductive work behavior and negatively related to job satisfaction, citizenship behavior, and job performance.73 POP creates anxiety for employees, and they are more likely to quit their jobs because of this.74

Research has identified some potential causes of POP including job ambiguity, scarcity of resources, and a poor trust climate.75 Other causes include highly centralized decision-making, a lack of formality in procedures, and unfairness. In addition, career-related events such as lack of advancement opportunities may trigger POP. Mistrust in management also influences POP. Out-group members are more likely to view the work environment as being political. Personality factors such as having a high Mach personality (see Chapter 2) and negative affect (see Chapter 3) influence POP.76,77,78,79 A summary of these factors and the outcomes of POP is shown in Figure 7.3. Research has shown that job/work context factors have the most influence on POP (i.e., things like the lack of career opportunities and development, mistrust, and poor leader–member relations).80 As the figure shows, POP is related to job anxiety (stress), lower job satisfaction, increased turnover, and lower job performance. However, having some control over one’s work and understanding of what is happening in the organization reduces the effects of POP on stress and job satisfaction.81 It is important for a leader to build effective working relationships with all of the members of their work group and to exercise fairness in order to avoid the emergence of POP.

Organizational politics can bring out the “dark side” of power. You have probably heard of Bernard Madoff, who almost always tops the list of leaders who have abused their power. Madoff ran an investment securities firm that delivered high-percentage returns over a long time. But a lot of people were suspicious of Madoff’s ability to deliver such high returns compared to the markets. It turns out that he ran a $50 billion Ponzi scheme that, when discovered, wiped out the life savings of many people. It’s still not clear how many people at Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities knew of the scam, but it’s clear that Madoff was the mastermind.82 His “dark triad” personality (psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellianism) contributed to his unethical use of power. Research has shown that POP explains the effects of the dark triad on unethical behavior when a leader’s abuse of power becomes political and unethical.83

Political skill reduces the negative effects of POP on the how much employees help one another and how promotable followers are seen by supervisors.84 Political acumen may mitigate the perceptions that behaviors are politically self-serving. Next, we turn to research on political skill.

Figure 7.3 Influences on Perceptions of Organizational Politics

Sources: Adapted from Atinc, G., Darrat, M., Fuller, B., & Parker, B. W. (2010). Perceptions of organizational politics: A meta-analysis of theoretical antecedents. Journal of Managerial Issues, 494-513; Ferris, G. R., Perrewé, P. L., Daniels, S. R., Lawong, D., & Holmes, J. J. (2016). Social influence and politics in organizational research what we know and what we need to know. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, doi: 1548051816656003

POLITICAL SKILL

Learning Objective 7.6: Explain why political skill is important for a leader to be effective.

The power bases and influence tactics described in this chapter may be viewed by others in an organization as political. Political skill has been defined as follows:

The ability to effectively understand others at work, and to use such knowledge to influence others to act in ways that enhance one’s personal and/or organizational objectives.85

Political skills are composed of four sets of behaviors. First, networking ability is the ability to create a diverse constellation of contacts both inside and outside of the organization. Second, social astuteness is being able to accurately interpret the behavior of others through attentive observation. Third, interpersonal influence is having the ability to adapt influence strategies to different situations. Fourth, apparent sincerity is appearing to others as genuine and honest.86

A review of 120 unique samples87 found that political skill is positively related to self-efficacy, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, work productivity, organizational citizenship behavior, career success, and personal reputation. Political skill was also negatively related to stress due to physiological strain. Employees who are higher in political skill benefit when leaders have in-groups and out-groups. Politically skilled employees have higher LMX relative to their peers. Those with political skills are also rated higher by their supervisors with respect to job performance and organizational citizenship.88 Research has shown that political skill increases the effectiveness of impression management. Individuals who are high in political skill create better supervisor impressions when they use impression management. However, individuals who engage in high levels of impression management are viewed less favorably when they are low in political skill. If lacking political skill, a person should avoid using impression management tactics.89

Having Both the Will and the Skill for Politics

Research shows that individuals need to have the “will” as well as the “skill” for political acumen. Being proactive combined with political skill was most related to career satisfaction in a recent study.90 Research has demonstrated how “will” and “skill” combine: Having a strong power motive is related to being viewed as a formal leader in a group, but political skill is related to higher perceptions of leadership performance.91 The relationship between will and skill is now considered to be more complex and can best be described as an inverted U-shaped relationship between will and job performance. In other words, having the will to use political skills will improve job performance—to a point. However, the will can go too far because if a person engages in too much political activity, it may harm their job performance.92 This relationship is shown in Figure 7.4. For example, if a leader constantly displays apparent sincerity, people may begin to question whether they are genuine. In another example, the leader may switch their influence style so often that they appear inconsistent to others. So, scholars in the area of political skill offer a word of caution: It is important not to take your will and political skill behaviors to extremes.

To mitigate the negative outcomes associated with perceptions of political behavior, there are two main approaches. The first is to develop political skill, and the second is to consider the ethical implications of organizational politics. Political skill is the first tool essential for making all the tactics described in this chapter work. The second approach to mitigating the negative impact of perceptions of politics is to ask whether the use of power, influence, or political skill in an organization to obtain outcomes that you prefer is ethical. It may depend, in part, on the goals and objectives being pursued. However, the ends shouldn’t justify the means. It is also important to treat others ethically and fairly

Figure 7.4 The Relationship of Political Will and Political Skill to Job Performance

Sources: Adapted from Harris, J. N., Maher, L. P., & Ferris, G. R. (2016). The roles of political skill and political will in job performance prediction: A moderated nonlinear perspective. In E. Vigoda-Gadot & A. Drory (Eds.), Handbook of organizational politics: Looking back and to the future (pp. 15–39). Northampton, MA: Edward-Elgar. (p. 27.)

Critical Thinking Questions: In addition to the goals and objectives of an influence attempt, what are other ethical concerns regarding the use of political skills in organizations? Develop an example of a leader taking political skills too far and being dishonest or not genuine.

LEADERSHIP IMPLICATIONS: MANAGING WITH POWER

An effective leader needs to understand the difference between power and influence. Based on the research evidence presented in this chapter, it is important to recognize that there are structural as well as personal sources of power. Every leadership position will have some positional sources of power due to location in the organizational hierarchy. By virtue of position, a leader will also have access to information through communication networks. Generating power and storing it for future use is important. The skillful leader understands how to use this stored power to get things done and solve problems in the organization. Jeffrey Pfeffer of Stanford University, an expert on power in organizations and author of the best-selling book Managing With Power, offers the following guidelines for using power93 (with the current author’s notes on how the guidelines relate to the updated research covered in this chapter):

Recognize that every organization has varying interests, and the leader needs to first diagnose the political landscape. Understand these interests and to whom they belong. Perceptions are not necessarily reality, but they do influence thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. Understand that perceptions of politics matter and affect employees’ satisfaction, performance, and stress levels. Develop political acumen by understanding that political skill can be learned and may reduce the perceptions of politics in the organization.

Figure out what point of view various individuals and units have on issues of concern to the leader. The secret to success is to get those who hold different views from your own onboard with what you need and want them to do. In general, the personal sources of power (expert and referent) get the most positive responses from people in organizations. However, reward power can also be used effectively.

Understand that to get things done, you need power—so you need to understand where power comes from and how the sources of power can be developed. Be willing to do things that build your sources of power. Know that power comes from position as well as individual personality and leadership style. Develop strategies for “maximizing good” impression management, as well as an effective use of body language to convey that you have power. Assess whether you have the “will” to demonstrate political “skill,” but be careful not to take political skills to an extreme or you may be viewed as a fake.

Understand the strategies and influence tactics through which power is developed and used in organizations. These include not only influence strategies discussed in this chapter but also the timing, the use of structure, and the social psychology of commitment. This requires an understanding that the target of your influence strategies may respond with commitment, compliance, or resistance. As shown in this chapter, there is a zone of indifference, where compliance may be gained by making legitimate requests. However, the most effective response is commitment, where the target of your influence attempt internalizes your goals and responds by changing both their attitude and behavior.

Effective leaders use power, influence, and politics to get things done. It is part of every manager’s job to generate and use power. This chapter opens with a discussion of how power changes people, so as you advance to higher levels in an organization, be mindful of the impact that being more powerful is having on your thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. Having political skills can have positive outcomes for a leader personally as well as benefitting their organization. Political skills may reduce negative perceptions of politics. The relationships of political skills to career satisfaction, job satisfaction, and performance have been established, but be careful not to take them to an extreme. Remember that it is important to influence others ethically. A nine-step checklist was provided in the What’s #Trending in OB Box for a leader to check all influence attempts to ensure they follow ethical guidelines. This chapter highlights the importance of using power, influence, and politics in an ethical way.