Leadership Action Plan

leadership_-_chapter_8.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Management homework help >Leadership Action Plan

Chapter 8 Power and Influence Tactics Learning Objectives After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

• Understand the process by which power is acquired or lost in organizations. • Understand the consequences of power for leadership effectiveness. • Understand ways to use power effectively. • Understand the different types of influence tactics used in organizations. • Understand how the tactics are used to influence subordinates, peers, and superiors. • Understand effective ways to use the tactics.

Influence is the essence of leadership. To be effective as a leader, it is necessary to influence people to carry out requests, support proposals, and implement decisions. In large organizations, the effectiveness of managers depends on influence over superiors and peers as well as influence over subordinates. Influence in one direction tends to enhance influence in other directions.

In the first part of this chapter, several constructs used in the power and influence literature are defined, different sources and types of power are described, how power is gained or lost is discussed, and the implications of power for leadership effectiveness are explained. The second part of the chapter describes different influence tactics that can be used by leaders and how leaders can be more effective in influencing subordinates, peers, and bosses.

PRINTED BY: Joshua Lafriniere <[email protected]>. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Power and Influence Concepts Terms such as power, authority, and influence have been used in different ways by different writers, and the differences can create confusion. Thus, it is worthwhile to begin by clarifying how key terms will be used in this chapter, including power, authority, influence processes, influence tactics, and influence outcomes.

Power The concept of power is useful for understanding how people are able to influence each other in organizations (Mintzberg, 1983; Pfeffer, 1981, 1992). Power involves the capacity of one party (the “agent”) to influence another party (the “target”), but this influence has been described and measured in several different ways. The term may refer to the agent’s influence over a single target person, or over multiple target persons. Sometimes the term refers to potential influence over things or events as well as attitudes and behavior. Sometimes the agent is a group or organization rather than an individual. Sometimes power is defined in relative rather than absolute terms, in which case it means the extent to which the agent has more influence over the target than the target has over the agent.

It is difficult to describe the power of an agent without specifying the target person(s), the influence objectives, and the time period. An agent will have more power over some people than over others and more influence for some types of issues than for others. Furthermore, power is a dynamic variable that changes as conditions change. How power is used and the outcomes of influence attempts can increase or reduce an agent’s subsequent power. In this book, the term power is usually used to describe the absolute capacity of an individual agent to influence the behavior or attitudes of one or more designated target persons at a given point in time.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Authority Authority involves the rights, prerogatives, obligations, and duties associated with particular positions in an organization or social system. A leader’s authority usually includes the right to make particular types of decisions for the organization. A leader with direct authority over a target person has the right to make requests consistent with this authority, and the target person has the duty to obey. For example, a manager usually has the legitimate right to establish work rules and give work assignments to subordinates. Authority also involves the right of the agent to exercise control over things, such as money, resources, equipment, and materials, and this control is another source of power.

The scope of authority for the occupant of a managerial position is the range of requests that can properly be made and the range of actions that can properly be taken. Scope of authority is much greater for some managers than for others, and it depends in large part on the influence needed to accomplish role requirements and organizational objectives (Barnard, 1952).

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Influence Processes The psychological explanation for interpersonal influence involves the motives and perceptions of the target person in relation to the actions of the agent and the context in which the interaction occurs. Kelman (1958) proposed three different types of influence processes, called instrumental compliance, internalization, and personal identification. The influence processes are qualitatively different from each other, but more than one process can occur at the same time. For example, a target person may become committed to implement a new program proposed by the agent because the target person identifies with the agent, believes in the ideals of the program, and expects to gain tangible benefits from supporting it.

Instrumental Compliance. The target person carries out a requested action for the purpose of obtaining a tangible reward or avoiding a punishment controlled by the agent. The motivation for the behavior is purely instrumental; the only reason for compliance is to gain some tangible benefit from the agent. The level of effort is likely to be the minimum amount necessary to gain the rewards or avoid the punishment.

Internalization. The target person becomes committed to support and implement proposals espoused by the agent because they appear to be intrinsically desirable and correct in relation to the target’s values, beliefs, and self-image. In effect, the agent’s proposal (e.g., an objective, plan, strategy, policy, procedure) becomes linked to the target person’s underlying values and beliefs. Commitment occurs regardless of whether any tangible benefit is expected, and the target’s loyalty is to the ideas themselves, not to the agent who communicates them.

Personal Identification. The target person imitates the agent’s behavior or adopts the same attitudes to please the agent and to be like the agent. The motivation for the target probably involves the target person’s needs for acceptance and esteem. By doing things to gain approval from the agent, the target is able to maintain a relationship that satisfies a need for acceptance. Maintaining a close relationship with an attractive agent may help to satisfy the target person’s need for esteem from other people, and becoming more like an attractive agent helps the target person maintain a more favorable self-image.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

General Types of Influence Tactics The type of behavior used intentionally to influence the attitudes and behavior of another person is usually called an influence tactic. Three general types of influence tactics can be differentiated according to their primary purpose. Some specific influence tactics can be used for more than one purpose, but they may not be equally effective for the different purposes.

Impression Management Tactics. These tactics are intended to influence people to like the agent (e.g., ingratiation) or to have a favorable evaluation of the agent (e.g., self-promotion). Impression management tactics can be used by leaders to influence followers, or by followers to influence a leader (see Chapter 9 ).

Political Tactics. These tactics are used to influence organizational decisions or otherwise gain benefits for an individual or group. One type of political tactic involves an attempt to influence how important decisions are made and who makes them. Examples include influencing the agenda for meetings to include your issues, influencing decision makers to use criteria that will bias decisions in your favor, and selecting decision makers who will promote and defend your interests. Political tactics are also used to defend against opponents and silence critics. Some political tactics involve deception, manipulation, and abuse of power, and ethical aspects of power and influence are discussed in Chapter 13 .

Proactive Tactics. These tactics have an immediate task objective, such as getting the target person to carry out a new task, change the procedures used for a current task, provide assistance on a project, or support a proposed change. The tactics can be used also to resist or modify a request made by someone who is attempting to influence you. Different types of proactive tactics are described later in the chapter.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Influence Outcomes One useful basis for evaluating the success of an influence attempt is to examine the outcome. The agent may achieve the intended effects on the target, or the outcome may be less than was intended. For an influence attempt that involves a single target person, it is useful to differentiate among three distinct outcomes called commitment, compliance, and resistance.

Commitment. The outcome is called commitment when the target person makes a great effort to carry out the request or implement the decision effectively. This outcome is usually the most successful one for a complex, difficult task that requires enthusiasm, initiative, and persistence by the target person in overcoming obstacles.

Compliance. The outcome is called compliance when the target person is willing to carry out a request but is apathetic rather than enthusiastic about it and will make only a minimal effort. With compliance the target person is not convinced that the decision or action is the best thing to do or even that it will be effective for accomplishing its purpose. However, for a simple, routine request, compliance may be all that is necessary to accomplish the agent’s task objectives.

Resistance. The outcome is called resistance when the target person is opposed to the proposal or request, rather than merely indifferent about it. Resistance can take several different forms: (1) refuse to carry out the request, (2) explain why it is impossible to carry out the request, (3) try to persuade the agent to withdraw or change the request, (4) ask higher authorities to overrule the agent’s request, (5) delay acting in the hope that the agent will forget about the request, and (6) make a pretense of complying but try to sabotage the task. Resistance is usually regarded as an unsuccessful outcome, but it can be beneficial if it helps the agent avoid a serious mistake. For example, you develop a detailed plan for a new project, but people find some serious flaws that need to be fixed before they will implement the plan.

The target person’s reaction to the agent’s request is not the only basis for evaluating success. Influence attempts can also affect interpersonal relationships and the way other people perceive the agent (e.g., ethical, supportive, likable, competent, trustworthy, strong). An influence attempt may improve the relationship or make it less friendly and cooperative.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Power Sources Efforts to classify types of power usually involve differences in the source or basis for potential influence over another person or event. The early taxonomy proposed by French and Raven (1959) continues to influence current theory and research on power. The five types of power in their taxonomy included expert power, referent power, legitimate power, reward power, and coercive power. That taxonomy was later extended to include some other types of power. The most useful ways for classifying power sources are described in this section.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Legitimate Power Power stemming from formal authority over work activities is sometimes called legitimate power (French & Raven, 1959). The influence processes associated with legitimate power are complex. Some theorists emphasize the downward flow of authority from owners and top management, but the potential influence derived from authority depends as much on the consent of the governed as on the ownership and control of property (Jacobs, 1970). Members of an organization usually agree to comply with rules and directions from leaders in return for the benefits of membership. However, this agreement is usually an implicit mutual understanding rather than an explicit formal contract.

Compliance with legitimate rules and requests is more likely for members who identify with the organization and are loyal to it. Compliance is also more likely for members who have an internalized value that it is proper to obey authority figures, show respect for the law, and follow tradition. Acceptance of authority also depends on whether the agent is perceived to be a legitimate occupant of his or her leadership position. The specific procedures for selecting a leader are usually based on tradition and the provisions of a legal charter or constitution. Any deviation from the selection process considered legitimate by members will weaken a new leader’s authority.

The amount of legitimate power is also related to one’s scope of authority. Higher-level managers usually have more authority than lower-level managers, and a manager’s authority is usually much stronger in relation to subordinates than in relation to peers, superiors, or outsiders. However, even for a target person outside of the chain of command (e.g., a peer or outsider), the agent may have the legitimate right to make requests necessary to carry out job responsibilities, such as requests for information, supplies, support services, technical advice, and assistance in carrying out interrelated tasks.

A manager’s scope of authority is usually delineated by documents such as an organization charter, a written job description, or an employment contract, but considerable ambiguity about it often remains (Davis, 1968; Reitz, 1977). People evaluate not only whether a request or order falls within a leader’s scope of authority, but also whether it is consistent with the basic values, principles, and traditions of the organization or social system. The legitimacy of a request may be questioned if it contradicts basic values of the organization or the larger society to which members of the organization belong. For

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

example, soldiers may disobey an order to shoot everyone in a village that has aided insurgents, because the soldiers perceive this use of excessive force to be contrary to basic human rights.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Reward Power Reward power is the perception by the target person that an agent controls important resources and rewards desired by the target person. Reward power stems in part from formal authority to allocate resources and rewards. This authority varies greatly across organizations and from one type of management position to another within the same organization. More control over scarce resources is usually authorized for high-level executives than for lower-level managers. Executives have authority to make decisions about the allocation of resources to various subunits and activities, and they have the right to review and modify resource allocation decisions made at lower levels.

Reward power depends not only on a manager’s actual control over resources and rewards, but also on the target person’s perception that the agent has the capacity and willingness to follow through on promises. The target person’s perception of agent reward power is more important than the agent’s actual control over rewards. In a classic movie theme, a shabbily dressed millionaire offers a stranger a lot of money to do something, and believing that the agent is poor the stranger refuses. In contrast, well- dressed con artists with little money are sometimes able to borrow valuable items or defer paying for them in the (unfulfilled) hope that they will eventually be important customers.

Sometimes reward power can influence people even when the agent makes no overt influence attempt. People are likely to act more deferential toward somebody who has high reward power, because they are aware of the possibility that the person can affect their job performance and career advancement. For example, people may cooperate more with an agent who has substantial reward power in the hopes of getting some rewards in the future.

The authority relationship is an important determinant of reward power.

Managers usually have much more reward power over subordinates than over peers or superiors. One form of reward power over subordinates is the authority to give pay increases, bonuses, or other economic incentives to deserving subordinates. Reward power is derived also from control over tangible benefits such as a promotion, a better job, a better work schedule, a larger operating budget, a larger expense account, and status symbols such as a larger office or a reserved parking space. Possible

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

constraints on a manager’s reward power include any formal policies or agreements that specify how rewards must be allocated.

A source of reward power in lateral relations is dependence of a peer on the agent for resources, information, assistance, or support needed to carry out the peer’s work. Trading of favors needed to accomplish task objectives is a common form of influence among peers in organizations, and research indicates that it is important for the success of middle-level managers (Cohen & Bradford, 1989; Kaplan, 1984; Kotter, 1982; Strauss, 1962).

Upward reward power of subordinates over their boss is limited in most organizations. Few organizations provide a formal mechanism for subordinates to evaluate leaders. Nevertheless, subordinates usually have some indirect influence over the leader’s reputation and prospects for a pay increase or promotion. If subordinates perform well, the reputation of their manager will usually be enhanced. Some subordinates may also have upward reward power based on their ability to acquire resources outside of the formal authority system of the organization. For example, a department chairperson in a university was able to obtain discretionary funds from grants and contracts, and these funds were used to influence the decisions made by the college dean, whose own discretionary funds were limited.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Coercive Power A leader’s coercive power over subordinates is based on authority over punishments, which varies greatly across different types of organizations. The coercive power of military and political leaders is usually greater than that of corporate managers. Over the last two centuries, there has been a general decline in use of legitimate coercion by all types of leaders. For example, most managers once had the right to dismiss employees for any reason they thought was justified. The captain of a ship could flog sailors who were disobedient or who failed to perform their duties diligently. Military officers could execute a soldier for desertion or failure to obey an order during combat. Nowadays, these forms of coercive power are prohibited or sharply restricted in many nations.

Lateral relations provide few opportunities for using coercion. If the peer is dependent on the manager for assistance in performing important tasks, the manager may threaten to withhold cooperation if the peer fails to carry out a request. However, because mutual dependencies usually exist between managers of different subunits, coercion is likely to elicit retaliation and escalate into a conflict that benefits neither party.

The coercive power that subordinates have over superiors varies greatly from one kind of organization to another. In many organizations, subordinates have the capacity to indirectly influence the performance evaluation of their boss. Subordinates can damage the reputation of the boss if they restrict production, sabotage operations, initiate grievances, hold demonstrations, or make complaints to higher management. In organizations with elected leaders, subordinates may have sufficient counter-power to remove a leader from office or to prevent the leader’s reelection. In the case of political leaders, the ultimate form of coercive power for subordinates is a violent revolution that results in the imprisonment, death, or exile of the leader.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Referent Power Referent power is derived from the desire of others to please an agent toward whom they have strong feelings of affection, admiration, and loyalty. People are usually willing to do special favors for a friend, and they are more likely to carry out requests made by someone they greatly admire. The strongest form of referent power involves the influence process called personal identification. To gain the agent’s approval and acceptance, the target person is likely to comply with agent requests, imitate the agent’s behavior, and have similar attitudes.

Strong referent power will tend to increase the agent’s influence over the target person even without any explicit effort by the agent to invoke this power. People are more likely to carry out requests made by an agent with strong referent power. When the relationship is characterized by a strong bond of love or friendship, the target person may do things the agent is perceived to want, even without being asked.

Referent power is an important source of influence over subordinates, peers, and superiors, but it has limitations. A request based solely on referent power should be commensurate with the extent of the target person’s loyalty and friendship toward the leader. Some things are simply too much to ask, given the nature of the relationship. When requests are extreme or made too frequently, the target person may feel exploited. The result of such behavior may be to undermine the relationship and reduce the agent’s referent power.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Expert Power Task-relevant knowledge and skill are a major source of personal power in organizations. Unique knowledge about the best way to perform a task or solve an important problem provides potential influence over subordinates, peers, and superiors. However, expertise is a source of power only if others are dependent on the agent for advice. The more important a problem is to the target person, the greater the power derived by the agent from possessing the necessary expertise to solve it. Dependency is increased when the target person cannot easily find another source of advice besides the agent (Hickson et al., 1971; Patchen, 1974).

It is not enough for the agent to possess expertise; the target person must recognize this expertise and perceive the leader to be a reliable source of information and advice. In the short run, perceived expertise is more important than real expertise, and an agent may be able to fake it for a time by acting confident and pretending to be an expert. However, over time, as the agent’s knowledge is put to the test, target perceptions of the agent’s expertise are likely to become more accurate. Thus, it is essential for leaders to develop and maintain a reputation for technical expertise and strong credibility.

Actual expertise is gained through a continual process of education and practical experience. For example, in many professions it is important to keep informed about new developments by reading technical publications and attending workshops and seminars. Evidence of expertise can be displayed in the forms of diplomas, licenses, and awards. However, the most convincing way to demonstrate expertise is by solving important problems, making good decisions, providing sound advice, and successfully completing challenging but highly visible projects. An extreme tactic is to intentionally but covertly precipitate crises just to demonstrate the ability to deal with them (Goldner, 1970; Pfeffer, 1977a).

Specialized knowledge and technical skill will remain a source of power only as long as dependence on the person who possesses them continues. If a problem is permanently solved or others learn how to solve it by themselves, the agent’s expertise is no longer valuable. Thus, people sometimes try to protect their expert power by keeping procedures and techniques shrouded in secrecy, by using technical jargon to make the task seem more complex and mysterious, and by destroying alternate sources of information

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

about task procedures such as written manuals, diagrams, blueprints, and computer programs (Hickson et al., 1971).

When the agent has a lot of expert power and is trusted as a reliable source of information and advice, the target person may carry out a request without receiving any explanation for it. One example is a patient who takes medicine prescribed by a doctor without knowing much about the medicine. Another example is an investor who purchases stocks recommended by a financial consultant without knowing much about the companies that issued the stocks. However, it is rare for leaders to possess this much expert power. A leader’s expertise can be used to present logical arguments and evidence that appears credible. Successful influence depends on the leader’s credibility and persuasive communication skills in addition to technical knowledge and analytical ability.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Information Power Another important source of power is control over information (Raven, 1965). This type of power involves both the access to vital information and control over its distribution to others. Managerial positions often provide opportunities to obtain information that is not directly available to subordinates or peers. Boundary role positions (e.g., marketing, purchasing, public relations) provide easier access to important information about events in the external environment of an organization. However, regardless of the type of position, useful information does not appear as if by magic, and one must actively cultivate a network of sources to provide it (Kotter, 1982).

A leader who controls the flow of vital information about outside events has an opportunity to interpret these events for subordinates and influence their perception and attitudes. Some managers distort information to persuade people that a particular course of action is desirable. Examples of information distortion include selective editing of reports and documents, biased interpretation of data, and presentation of false information. Some managers use their control over the distribution of information as a way to enhance their expert power and increase subordinate dependence. If the leader is the only one who “knows what is going on,” subordinates will lack evidence to dispute the leader’s claim that an unpopular decision is justified by circumstances. Control of information also makes it easier for a leader to cover up failures and mistakes that would otherwise undermine a carefully cultivated image of expertise (Pfeffer, 1977a).

Control over information is a source of upward influence as well as downward and lateral influence. When subordinates have exclusive access to information needed by superiors to make decisions, this advantage can be used to influence the superior’s decisions. Some subordinates actively seek this type of influence by gradually assuming more responsibility for collecting, storing, analyzing, and reporting operating information. If a leader is completely dependent on a subordinate to interpret complex analyses of operating information, the subordinate may be invited to participate directly in making decisions based on these analyses (Korda, 1975). Even when not actively participating in the decision process, a subordinate who provides most of the information for a decision has substantial influence over it (Pettigrew, 1972). Control over operating information also enables subordinates to magnify accomplishments, cover up mistakes, and exaggerate the amount of expertise and resources needed to do their work.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Ecological Power Control over the physical environment, technology, and organization of the work provides an opportunity for indirect influence over other people. Because behavior is determined in part by perception of opportunities and constraints, it can be altered in subtle ways by rearranging the situation. This form of influence is sometimes called situational engineering or ecological control (Cartwright, 1965).

One form of situational engineering is to modify the design of subordinate jobs to increase subordinate motivation. Research on job enrichment suggests that significant improvements in work quality and job satisfaction are sometimes possible. The organization of work activities and

Table 8-1 Different Types of Power Position Power Personal Power

Legitimate Power Referent Power

Reward Power Expert Power

Coercive Power

Information Power

Ecological Power

design of formal structure is another form of situational engineering. The grouping of activities into subunits, determination of reporting relationships, and design of information systems are all sources of influence over employee behavior.

Another form of situational engineering is control over the physical work environment. For example, lights or auditory signals on equipment can be used to inform the operator that it is time for necessary maintenance, or to warn the operator to discontinue doing something that will cause an accident or breakdown. The workflow design and layout of physical facilities determine which employees interact with each other and who initiates action for whom. Machine-paced assembly lines set the speed at which employees work.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Position and Personal Power The most general way to classify power sources is the distinction between position power and personal power (Bass, 1960; Etzioni, 1961; Rahim, 1988; Yukl & Falbe, 1991). Specific types of power can be grouped into these two general categories depending on whether they are derived primarily from the opportunities inherent in a person’s position in the organization, or from attributes of the agent and the agent–target relationship. The various types of position and personal power are listed in Table 8-1 . Position power includes potential influence derived from legitimate authority, control over resources and rewards, control over punishments, control over information, and control over the physical work environment. Personal power includes potential influence derived from task expertise, and potential influence based on friendship and loyalty. Position and personal determinants of power interact in complex ways, and sometimes it is difficult to distinguish between them.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

How Power Is Gained or Lost Power is not a static condition; it changes over time due to changing conditions and the actions of individuals and coalitions. How power is gained or lost in organizations is described in social exchange theory, strategic contingencies theory, and theories about institutionalization of power.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Social Exchange Theory In a group, the amount of status and power accorded to an elected or emergent leader by other members depends on the person’s loyalty, demonstrated competence, and contribution to the attainment of shared objectives (Hollander, 1958, 1980; Jacobs, 1970). The contribution may involve control over scarce resources, access to vital information, or skill in dealing with critical task problems. In addition to increased status and influence, a person who has demonstrated good judgment accumulates “idiosyncrasy credits” and is allowed more latitude to deviate from nonessential group norms. The authority and position power for appointed leaders make them less dependent on subordinate evaluation of their competence, but they will also gain influence from repeated demonstration of expertise and loyalty to subordinates.

Innovation by a leader can be a double-edged sword. Success resulting from innovation leads to greater credit, but failure leads to greater blame. When a member makes an innovative proposal that proves to be successful, the group’s trust in the person’s expertise is confirmed, and even more status and influence may be accorded to the person. When an innovative proposal results in failure, the person is likely to lose status and influence. More power is lost if failure appears to be due to poor judgment or incompetence rather than to circumstances beyond the leader’s control, or if the leader is perceived to have pursued selfish motives rather than loyally serving the group. Selfish motives and irresponsibility are more likely to be attributed to a leader who willingly deviates from group norms and traditions. The extent of a leader’s loss of status and influence following failure depends in part on how serious the failure is to the group. A major disaster results in greater loss of esteem than a minor setback. Loss of status also depends on amount of status the leader had prior to the failure. More is expected of a leader with high status, and such a leader will lose more status if perceived to be responsible for failure. Innovation is not only accepted but expected of leaders when necessary to deal with serious problems and obstacles. A leader who fails to show initiative and deal decisively with serious problems will lose esteem and influence, just as a leader who proposes actions that are unsuccessful.

Social exchange theory emphasizes expert power and authority, and other forms of power do not receive much attention. For example, the theory does not explain how reciprocal influence processes affect a leader’s reward and referent power. Most of the evidence for the theory is from research with small groups in a laboratory setting, and the results are not consistent across studies (Hollander, 1960, 1961,

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

1980; Stone & Cooper, 2009). Longitudinal field research in organizations would be useful to test the theory and determine if it applies to other types of power.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Strategic Contingencies Theory Strategic contingencies theory explains how some organizational subunits gain or lose power to influence important decisions such as determination of the organization’s competitive strategy and the allocation of resources to subunits and activities (Hickson et al., 1971). The theory postulates that the power of a subunit depends on three factors: (1) expertise in coping with important problems, (2) centrality of the subunit within the workflow, and (3) the extent to which the subunit’s expertise is unique rather than substitutable.

All organizations must cope with critical contingencies, especially problems in the technological processes used to carry out operations and problems in adapting to unpredictable events in the environment. Success in solving important problems is a source of expert power for subunits, just as it is for individuals. The opportunity to demonstrate expertise and gain power from it is much greater for a subunit that has responsibility for dealing with critical problems. A problem is critical if it is clearly essential for the survival and prosperity of the organization. The importance of a particular type of problem is greater as the degree of interdependence among subunits increases; other subunits cannot perform their own functions unless this type of problem is handled effectively. An individual or subunit will gain more power over important decisions if the critical functions cannot be performed by someone else or made easier by development of standard procedures. In other words, the more unique and irreplaceable the expertise required to solve critical problems, the more power is gained from possessing this expertise.

Increased expert power can result in increased legitimate power. People with valuable expertise are more likely to be appointed or elected to positions of authority in the organization. Subunits with critical expertise are likely to have more representation on boards or committees that make important decisions for the organization.

Some support for the theory was found in several studies (Brass, 1984, 1985; Hambrick, 1981a; Hills & Mahoney, 1978; Hinings, Hickson, Pennings, & Schneck, 1974; Pfeffer & Moore, 1980; Pfeffer & Salancik, 1974). However, the theory fails to take into account the possibility that a powerful subunit or coalition can use its power to protect its dominant position in the organization by enhancing its perceived expertise and by denying potential rivals an opportunity to demonstrate their greater expertise.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Institutionalization of Power The process for using political tactics to increase influence or protect existing power sources is called “institutionalization.” Having power makes it easier to use political tactics for influencing important decisions in the organization. A powerful subunit can get its members appointed to key leadership positions where they will promote the subunit’s objectives. When it is not possible to control key decisions directly, it may be possible to influence them indirectly by determining the procedures and criteria that will be used in making the decisions.

A powerful subunit or coalition is often able to use its power to maintain a dominant position even after their expertise is no longer critical to the organization (Pfeffer, 1981; Salancik & Pfeffer, 1977). Ambiguity about the nature of the environment and how it is changing provides an opportunity for top executives to interpret events in a biased manner, to magnify the importance of their expertise, and to justify their policies. Control over distribution of information about how well the organization is performing allows top executives to exaggerate the success of past decisions and cover up mistakes. The power of top management can also be used to deny others the resources and opportunity needed to demonstrate their superior expertise. Critics and potential rivals can be silenced, co-opted, or expelled from the organization (Pfeffer, 1981).

The evolutionary shift in power described by strategic contingencies theory can be delayed by the use of these political tactics, but if top management lacks the expertise to develop an appropriate strategy for responding to changes in the environment, the performance of the organization will decline. This process will occur much faster when the organization has strong competition for its products and services, and competitors are able to adapt more rapidly to changes in the environment. Unless the organization replaces top management, it will eventually go bankrupt or be taken over by outsiders who desire its assets.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Consequences of Power The amount of overall power that is necessary for effective leadership and the mix of different types of power are questions that research has only begun to answer. Studies on the consequences of leader power are inconclusive, but findings indicate that effective leaders have more expert and referent power than less effective leaders, and they rely on their personal power more than on their position power (Hinkin & Schriesheim, 1989; Podsakoff & Schriesheim, 1985; Rahim, 1989; Yukl & Falbe, 1991). However, several of the power studies also indicate that it is beneficial for leaders to have at least a moderate amount of position power (e.g., Dunne, Stahl, & Melhart, 1978; Rahim & Afza, 1993; Thambain & Gemmill, 1974; Warren, 1968; Yukl & Falbe, 1991).

The amount of necessary power for a leader will depend on what needs to be accomplished and on the leader’s skill in using the available power. Some leadership situations require more power than others for the leader to be effective. More influence is necessary in an organization where major changes are required, but there is strong initial opposition to the leader’s proposals for change. It is especially difficult for a leader who recognizes that the organization will face a major crisis in coming years, a crisis that can be overcome only if preparations are begun immediately, but the evidence of the coming crisis is not yet sufficiently strong to persuade members to act now. A similar situation is the case where a leader desires to make changes that will require short-term sacrifices and a long period of implementation before the benefits are realized, but there is opposition by factions with a short-term perspective. In such situations, a leader will need sufficient expert and referent power to persuade people that change is necessary and desirable, or sufficient position and political power to overcome the opposition and buy time to show that the proposed changes are necessary and effective. A combination of personal and position power increases the likelihood of success, but forcing change is always risky. Maurer (1996, p. 177) describes one successful example:

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

When Leonard Bernstein became conductor of the Vienna Philharmonic, he reintroduced the symphonies of Gustav Mahler. The orchestra hated Mahler; they felt his music was overblown and pompous . . . Although Bernstein certainly had the power to program whatever he wished, it was a risky move. Orchestras notoriously show their disdain for conductors they disrespect by engaging in malicious compliance. All the notes are correct—so no one can be reprimanded—but they play without spirit . . . Although [they did not agree with Bernstein’s] decision . . . he was highly respected by the members of the orchestra . . . He was a world class musician. So, for Leonard Bernstein they played Mahler beautifully. Eventually, it seems, most of the orchestra grew to enjoy playing the music of their hometown boy.

Questions about the optimal mix of power for leaders are complicated by the interdependence among different sources of power. The distinction between position and personal power is sometimes convenient, but it should not be overdrawn. Position power is important, not only as a source of influence but also because it can be used to enhance a leader’s personal power. Control over information complements expert power based on technical skill by giving the leader an advantage in solving important problems and by enabling a leader to cover up mistakes and exaggerate accomplishments. Reward power facilitates development of a deeper exchange relationship with subordinates, and when used skillfully, it enhances a leader’s referent power. The authority to make decisions and the upward influence to get them approved enables a leader to demonstrate expertise in problem solving, and it also facilitates development of stronger exchange relationships with subordinates. Some coercive power is necessary to buttress legitimate and expert power when a leader needs to influence compliance with rules and procedures that are unpopular but necessary to do the work and avoid serious accidents. Likewise, coercive power is needed by a leader to restrain or banish rebels and criminals who would otherwise disrupt operations, steal resources, harm other members, and cause the leader to appear weak and incompetent.

However, too much position power may be as detrimental as too little. Leaders with a great deal of position power may be tempted to rely on it instead of developing personal power and using other approaches (e.g., consultation, persuasion) for influencing people to comply with a request or support a change. The notion that power corrupts is especially relevant for position power (Glad, 2002). Throughout history many political leaders with strong position power have used it to dominate and exploit subordinates. The ethical use of power is discussed in Chapter 13 .

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

How easily power can corrupt leaders is demonstrated in an experiment conducted by Kipnis (1972). He found that leaders with greater reward power perceived subordinates as objects of manipulation, devalued the worth of subordinates, attributed subordinate efforts to their own power use, maintained more social distance from subordinates, and used rewards more often to influence subordinates. Although only a laboratory experiment with students, the research clearly points out the dangers of excessive position power. In general, a leader should have only a moderate amount of position power, although the optimal amount will vary somewhat depending on the situation.

What about personal power? Are there also dangers from having a great deal of expert and referent power? Personal power is less susceptible to misuse, because it erodes quickly when a leader acts contrary to the interests of followers. Nevertheless, the potential for corruption remains. A leader with extensive expert power or charismatic appeal will be tempted to act in ways that will eventually lead to failure. McClelland (1975, p. 266) describes this phenomenon:

How much initiative he should take, how persuasive he should attempt to be, and at what point his clear enthusiasm for certain goals becomes personal authoritarian insistence that those goals are the right ones whatever the members of the group may think, are all questions calculated to frustrate the well-intentioned leader. If he takes no initiative, he is no leader. If he takes too much, he becomes a dictator, particularly if he tries to curtail the process by which members of the group participate in shaping group goals. There is a particular danger for the man who has demonstrated his competence in shaping group goals and in inspiring group members to pursue them. In time both he and they may assume that he knows best, and he may almost imperceptibly change from a democratic to an authoritarian leader.

Studies of the amount of influence exercised by people at different levels in the authority hierarchy of an organization reveal that effective leaders create relationships in which they have strong influence over subordinates but are also receptive to influence from them. Instead of using their power to dictate how things will be done, effective executives empower members of the organization to discover and implement new and better ways of doing things.

One of the best ways to ensure leaders remain responsive to follower needs is to promote reciprocal influence and discourage arbitrary actions by the leader. Rules and policies can be enacted to regulate the exercise of position power, especially reward and coercive power. Grievance and appeals procedures can be enacted, and independent review boards established to protect subordinates against

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

misuse of power by leaders. Bylaws, charter provisions, and official policies can be drafted to require leaders to consult with subordinates and obtain their approval on specified types of decisions. Regular attitude surveys can be conducted to measure subordinate satisfaction with their leaders. When appropriate, periodic elections or votes of confidence can be held to determine whether the leader should continue in office. Recall procedures can be established to remove incompetent leaders in an orderly manner. Finally, leaders themselves can facilitate reciprocal influence by encouraging subordinates to participate in making important decisions, and by fostering and rewarding innovation.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Guidelines for Using Power The research on power is still too limited to provide clear guidelines on the best ways to exercise it. Nevertheless, by drawing on the findings from research in many different social science disciplines, it is possible to develop some tentative guidelines for leaders. The guidelines are usually worded in terms of influencing subordinates, but many apply as well to influencing other people. Some guidelines involve using influence tactics described later in the chapter.

Table 8-2 Guidelines for Using Legitimate Authority • Make polite, clear requests. • Explain the reasons for a request. • Don’t exceed your scope of authority. • Verify authority if necessary. • Follow proper channels. • Follow up to verify compliance. • Insist on compliance if appropriate.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

How to Use Legitimate Power Authority is usually exercised with a request, order, or instruction that is communicated orally or in writing. The way in which legitimate power is exercised affects the outcome (see Table 8-2 ). A polite request is more effective than an arrogant demand, because it does not emphasize a status gap or imply target dependence on the agent. Use of a polite request is especially important for people who are likely to be sensitive about status differentials and authority relationships, such as someone who is older than the agent or who is a peer rather than a subordinate.

Making a polite request does not imply you should plead or appear apologetic about a request. To do so risks the impression that the request is not worthy or legitimate, and it may give the impression that compliance is not really expected. A legitimate request should be made in a firm, confident manner. In an emergency situation, it is more important to be assertive than polite. A direct order by a leader in a command tone of voice is sometimes necessary to shock subordinates into immediate action in an emergency. In this type of situation, subordinates associate confident, firm direction with expertise as well as authority. To express doubts or appear confused risks the loss of influence over subordinates.

The order or request should be stated very clearly using language that the target person can understand. If the request is complex, it is advisable to communicate it in writing as well as orally. Oral requests should be made directly to the target person rather than relying on someone else to relay it to the target person. An intermediary may misinterpret the message, and you also lose the opportunity to assess the target person’s reaction. If there is any question about your right to make a request or assignment, then it is important to verify this authority, which is a type of “legitimating tactic” described later.

Instances of outright refusal by subordinates to carry out a legitimate order or request undermine the leader’s authority and increase the likelihood of future disobedience. Orders that are unlikely to be carried out should not be given. Sometimes a subordinate will delay in complying with an unusual or unpleasant request to test whether the leader is really serious about it. If the leader does not follow up the initial request to check on compliance, the subordinate is likely to conclude that the request may be ignored.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

How to Use Reward Power Reward power can be exercised in several ways (see Table 8-3 ). When the agent offers to give the target person a reward for carrying out a request or performing a task, it is called an exchange tactic, and the use of such tactics is described in more detail later in this chapter. Another common way to use reward power is to create a formal incentive system that provides tangible rewards for good behavior or a monetary bonus for performance that exceeds standards.

Table 8-3 Guidelines for Using Reward Power • Offer the type of rewards that people desire. • Offer rewards that are fair and ethical. • Don’t promise more than you can deliver. • Explain the criteria for giving rewards and keep it simple. • Provide rewards as promised if requirements are met. • Use rewards symbolically (not in a manipulative way).

How reward power is exercised affects the outcome. Compliance is most likely if the reward is something valued by the target person. Thus, it is essential to determine what rewards are valued, and a leader should not assume that it will be the same for everyone. Another essential condition is that the agent must be perceived as a credible source of the reward. Leader should be careful to avoid making unrealistic promises or failing to provide a promised reward to people who deserve it.

Even when the conditions are favorable for using rewards, they are more likely to result in compliance rather than commitment. Most incentives are unlikely to motivate someone to put forth extra effort beyond what is required to complete the task and get the reward. The target person may be tempted to neglect aspects of the task not included in the specification of performance criteria or aspects not easily monitored by the agent. If rewards are used in a manipulative manner, they may result in resistance rather than compliance. The power to give or withhold rewards may cause resentment among people who dislike being dependent on the whims of a powerful authority figure, or who believe that the agent is manipulating them to his or her own advantage. Even an attractive reward may be ineffective if seen as a bribe to get the target person to do something improper or unethical.

When rewards are used frequently as a source of influence, people may come to perceive their relationship to the leader in purely economic terms. They will expect a reward every time they are asked

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

to do something new or unusual. It is more satisfying for both parties to view their relationship in terms of mutual loyalty and friendship. Rather than using rewards as incentives in an impersonal, mechanical way, they should be used in a more symbolic manner to recognize accomplishments and express personal appreciation for special contributions or exceptional effort. Used in this way, reward power can be a source of increased referent power.

How to Use Coercive Power Coercive power is invoked by a threat or warning that the target person will suffer undesirable consequences for noncompliance with a request, rule, or policy. The threat may be explicit, or it may be only a vague comment that the person will be sorry for failing to do what the agent wants. The likelihood of compliance is greatest when the threat is perceived to be credible, and the target person strongly desires to avoid the threatened punishment. Credibility will be undermined by rash threats that are not carried out despite noncompliance by the target person. Sometimes it is necessary to establish credibility by demonstrating the will and ability to cause unpleasant consequences for the target person. However, even a credible threat may be unsuccessful if the target person refuses to be intimidated or believes that a way can be found to avoid compliance without being detected by the agent.

It is best to avoid using coercion except when absolutely necessary, because it is difficult to use and likely to result in undesirable side effects. Coercion often arouses anger or resentment, and it may result in retaliation. In work organizations, the most appropriate use of coercion is to deter behavior detrimental to the organization, such as illegal activities, theft, violation of safety rules, reckless acts that endanger others, and direct disobedience of legitimate requests. Coercion is not likely to result in commitment, but when used skillfully in an appropriate situation, there is a reasonably good chance that it will result in compliance. Table 8-4 has guidelines for using coercion primarily to maintain discipline with subordinates (Arvey & Ivancevich, 1980; Preston & Zimmerer, 1978; Schoen & Durand, 1979).

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

How to Use Expert Power Some guidelines for exercising expert power are shown in Table 8-5 . When an agent clearly has much more relevant expertise than target persons, the effects of the expert power will be automatic. For example, a renowned expert physician recommends a form of treatment, and the patient accepts the recommendation without any doubts. However, in many cases an agent will not have such an obvious advantage in expertise, and it will be necessary to use the expertise to provide information, explanations, and evidence that supports a request or proposal. If there is any question about the agent’s expertise, it is helpful to verify it by providing appropriate documents and evidence, or by describing prior success in dealing with similar problems.

Table 8-4 Guidelines for Using Coercive Power to Maintain Discipline 1. Explain rules and requirements, and ensure that people understand the serious consequences of

violations. 2. Respond to infractions promptly and consistently without showing any favoritism to particular

individuals. 3. Investigate to get the facts before using reprimands or punishment, and avoid jumping to conclusions

or making hasty accusations. 4. Except for the most serious infractions, provide sufficient oral and written warnings before resorting to

punishment. 5. Administer warnings and reprimands in private, and avoid making rash threats. 6. Stay calm and avoid the appearance of hostility or personal rejection. 7. Express a sincere desire to help the person comply with role expectations and thereby avoid

punishment. 8. Invite the person to suggest ways to correct the problem, and seek agreement on a concrete plan. 9. Maintain credibility by administering punishment if noncompliance continues after threats and warnings

have been made. 10. Use punishments that are legitimate, fair, and commensurate with the seriousness of the infraction.

Table 8-5 Ways to Use and Maintain Expert Power • Explain the reasons for a request or proposal and why it is important. • Provide evidence that a proposal will be successful. • Don’t make rash, careless, or inconsistent statements. • Don’t lie, exaggerate, or misrepresent the facts. • Listen seriously to the person’s concerns and suggestions. • Act confident and decisive in a crisis.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Table 8-6 Ways to Gain and Use Referent Power • Show acceptance and positive regard. • Be supportive and helpful. • Use sincere forms of ingratiation. • Keep promises and commitments. • Make self sacrifices to benefit others. • Lead by example (use role modeling). • Explain the personal importance of a request.

Proposals or requests should be made in a clear, confident manner, and the agent should avoid making contradictory statements or vacillating between inconsistent positions. However, it is important to remember that superior expertise can also cause resentment if used in a way that implies the target person is ignorant or helpless. In the process of presenting rational arguments, some people lecture in an arrogant, condescending manner. In their efforts to sell a proposal, they fire a steady stream of arguments, rudely interrupting any attempted replies and dismissing any objections or concerns without serious consideration. Even when the agent is acknowledged to have more expertise, the target person usually has some relevant information, ideas, and concerns that should be considered.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

How to Use Referent Power Some specific ways to gain and use referent power are summarized in Table 8-6 . Referent power is increased by showing concern for the needs and feelings of others, demonstrating trust and respect, and treating people fairly. However, to achieve and maintain strong referent power usually requires more than just flattery, favors, and charm. Referent power ultimately depends on the agent’s character and integrity. Over time, actions speak louder than words, and someone who tries to appear friendly but manipulates and exploits people will lose referent power. Integrity is demonstrated by being truthful, expressing a consistent set of values, acting in a way that is consistent with one’s espoused values, and carrying out promises and agreements (French & Raven, 1959).

One way to exercise referent power is through “role modeling.” A person who is well liked and admired can have considerable influence over others by setting an example of proper and desirable behavior for them to imitate. When identification is strong, imitation is likely to occur even without any conscious intention by the agent. However, because people also imitate undesirable behavior in someone they admire, it is important to be aware of the examples that one sets. For example, some famous entertainers have a very negative influence on young fans who imitate their reckless and self-destructive behavior.

An agent with limited referent power may find it useful to remind the target person of favors done in the past or events when their friendship was very important. Finally, when relying on referent power as a source of influence, it is important to ensure that the target person understands how important a request is for you. Thus, the agent may say something like: “I would really appreciate it if you can do this, because it is really important to me.”

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Proactive Influence Tactics As explained earlier, behavior used intentionally to gain acceptance of a request or support for a proposal is called a proactive influence tactic. Two research programs used inductive and deductive approaches to identify distinct types of proactive tactics.

Kipnis, Schmidt, and Wilkinson (1980) developed a preliminary taxonomy by analyzing critical incidents that described successful and unsuccessful influence attempts. Then, the tactics identified with this inductive approach were used to develop a self-report agent questionnaire called the Profiles of Organizational Influence Strategies (POIS). Schriesheim and Hinkin (1990) later conducted a factor analysis of the POIS using data from samples of agents who rated their own use of the tactics in upward influence attempts with their boss. This study found support for six of the proposed tactics (i.e., rationality, exchange, ingratiation, assertiveness, coalition, and upward appeal), but not for the remaining two tactics (blocking and sanctions). Limited support for the revised version of the questionnaire was also found in a subsequent study of upward influence (Hochwarter et al., 2000). However, there has been no systematic research to validate the questionnaire as a measure of tactics used to influence subordinates and peers. The original and revised versions of the POIS have been used in many studies on proactive tactics (see Ammeter et al., 2002).

Another program of research was carried out by Yukl and his colleagues using several different research methods (i.e., critical incidents, diaries, questionnaires, experiments, and scenarios). A series of studies conducted over a period of more than a decade eventually identified 11 distinct tactics that are used to influence people in organizations (Yukl, Lepsinger, & Lucia, 1992; Yukl, Chavez, & Seifert, 2005; Yukl, Seifert, & Chavez, 2008). These tactics are defined in Table 8-7 . Five of these tactics are similar to ones in the POIS (rational persuasion,

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Table 8-7 Definition of the 11 Proactive Influence Tactics Rational Persuasion: The agent uses logical arguments and factual evidence to show a proposal or request is feasible and relevant for attaining important task objectives.

Apprising: The agent explains how carrying out a request or supporting a proposal will benefit the target personally or help advance the target person’s career.

Inspirational Appeals: The agent makes an appeal to values and ideals or seeks to arouse the target person’s emotions to gain commitment for a request or proposal.

Consultation: The agent encourages the target to suggest improvements in a proposal or to help plan an activity or change for which the target person’s support and assistance are desired.

Collaboration: The agent offers to provide relevant resources and assistance if the target will carry out a request or approve a proposed change.

Ingratiation: The agent uses praise and flattery before or during an influence attempt, or expresses confidence in the target’s ability to carry out a difficult request.

Personal Appeals: The agent asks the target to carry out a request or support a proposal out of friendship, or asks for a personal favor before saying what it is.

Exchange: The agent offers an incentive, suggests an exchange of favors, or indicates willingness to reciprocate at a later time if the target will do what the agent requests.

Coalition Tactics: The agent seeks the aid of others to persuade the target to do something, or uses the support of others as a reason for the target to agree.

Legitimating Tactics: The agent seeks to establish the legitimacy of a request or to verify authority to make it by referring to rules, policies, contracts, or precedent.

Pressure: The agent uses demands, threats, frequent checking, or persistent reminders to influence the target to carry out a request.

ingratiation, exchange, pressure, and coalition) and seven other tactics were identified in the critical incidents or suggested by theories about leadership and power. The Influence Behavior Questionnaire (IBQ) was developed in the survey research to measure target ratings of agent influence behavior. Target ratings are usually more accurate than the type of agent’s self-ratings used in the POIS. The

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

remainder of this section describes each type of tactic and how it is commonly used in organizations to influence a subordinate, peer, or boss.

Rational Persuasion Rational persuasion involves the use of explanations, logical arguments, and factual evidence to explain why a request or proposal will benefit the organization or help to achieve an important task objective. This tactic may also involve presentation of factual evidence that a project or change is likely to be successful. Rational persuasion is a flexible tactic that can be used for most influence attempts and target persons. This tactic is very useful when the target person shares the agent’s objectives but does not initially recognize that the agent’s request or proposal is the best way to attain their shared objectives. The use of a rational appeal that involves evidence and predicted outcomes is more effective if the agent is perceived to have high expertise and credibility. Rational persuasion is unlikely to be effective if the agent and target have incompatible objectives, or the agent lacks expertise and credibility.

Apprising Apprising involves an explanation of how a request or proposal is likely to benefit the target person as an individual. The benefits may involve the person’s career advancement, job satisfaction, or compensation. Apprising may involve the use of facts and logic, but unlike rational persuasion, the benefits described are for the target person, not for the organization or the mission. Unlike exchange tactics, the benefits to be obtained by the target person are not something the agent will provide to the target, but rather something that is likely to happen when the agent’s request is carried out or the proposal is implemented.

This tactic is more likely to be used with subordinate or peers than with bosses. Successful use of apprising requires unique knowledge about the likely personal benefits associated with an activity or change, and a subordinate is much less likely than a superior to be a credible source of such knowledge. An exception is the situation where the subordinate is experienced but the boss is new to the organization.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Inspirational Appeals This tactic involves an emotional or value-based appeal, in contrast to the logical arguments used in rational persuasion and apprising. An inspirational appeal is an attempt to develop enthusiasm and commitment by arousing strong emotions and linking a request or proposal to a person’s needs, values, hopes, and ideals. Some bases for appealing to most people include their desire to be important, to feel useful, to support their values, to accomplish something worthwhile, to perform an exceptional feat, to be a member of the best team, or to participate in an exciting effort to make things better.

This tactic can be used in any direction, but it is especially appropriate for gaining commitment to work on a new project, and this type of request is most likely to be made with subordinates or peers. An inspirational appeal is also an appropriate tactic to gain support for a proposed change that involves values and ideals.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Consultation This tactic involves inviting the target person to participate in planning how to carry out a request, revise a strategy, or implement a proposed change. Consultation can take a variety of forms, but unlike the leadership behavior with the same name, the target person is only invited to help determine how the objective should be attained, not to help decide what the objective should be. As with rational persuasion, consultation is more likely to be effective if the agent and target have shared objectives. Consultation is useful for discovering if the target person has concerns about the feasibility of a proposal or likely adverse consequences. The agent can explore ways to avoid or resolve any issues that are revealed (which involves the tactic called collaboration).

Consultation can be used in any direction, but it is likely to be used more often with subordinates and peers than with bosses. This tactic is especially appropriate when you have the authority to plan a task or make a change, but you need the target person to help carry out the work or implement the change. The authority to assign work and make changes is greatest in a downward direction and least in an upward direction. Consultation can be used in an attempt to gain support or approval from superiors for a proposed change or new project, but superiors already have authority to review such decisions and do not need an invitation from the subordinate to modify the proposal. In a lateral direction, consultation is very useful to elicit concerns and suggestions from peers who may be committed to support an activity or change unless their needs and opinions are taken into account.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Exchange This influence tactic involves the explicit or implicit offer to reward a person for doing what you request. The tactic is especially appropriate for a request that offers no important benefits for the target person and would involve considerable effort and inconvenience. With exchange tactics, you offer something valued enough by the target person to motivate compliance with a request. The promised benefit may involve tangible rewards, scarce resources, information, advice or assistance on another task, career support, or political support. An exchange tactic is unlikely to be effective unless the target person believes the agent is able to provide the promised benefit and can be trusted to actually deliver it.

Exchange tactics are more likely to be used in influence attempts with subordinates and peers than with bosses. Control over rewards is greatest in a downward direction and least in an upward direction. One type of reward that can be offered only to subordinates is a pay increase, bonus, promotion, better assignments, or a better work schedule. It is also more socially acceptable to offer incentives to subordinates than to bosses. Managers have little to offer bosses who are not already expected as part of their job responsibilities, and any incentive offered to a boss may be viewed as a bribe. Managers usually have some control over rewards desired by peers, but the rewards are more likely to be task related (e.g., provide resources, assistance, information, political support) rather than personal benefits.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Collaboration This influence tactic involves an offer to provide necessary resources and/or assistance if the target person agrees to carry out a request or approve a proposal. Collaboration may seem similar to exchange in that both tactics involve an offer to do something for the target person. However, there are important differences in the underlying motivational processes and facilitating conditions. Exchange involves increasing the benefits to be obtained by carrying out a request, and it is especially appropriate when the benefits of compliance would otherwise be low for the target person. Collaboration involves reducing the difficulty or costs of carrying out a request, and it is especially appropriate when compliance would be difficult for the target person. Exchange usually involves an impersonal trade of unrelated benefits, whereas collaboration usually involves a joint effort to accomplish the same task.

Collaboration is used least often in an upward direction. A boss usually has more control over discretionary resources than subordinates and can usually require subordinate assistance on an essential activity. With subordinates and peers, there is more opportunity to propose ways to facilitate the target person’s ability to carry out a request.

Ingratiation Ingratiation is behavior that makes someone feel better about you. Examples include giving compliments, doing unsolicited favors, acting deferential and respectful, and acting especially friendly and helpful before making a request. When ingratiation is perceived to be sincere, it tends to strengthen positive regard and make a target person more willing to consider a request.

This tactic is more likely to be used in influence attempts with subordinates or peers than with bosses. Praise and compliments can be used with anyone, but they are more credible and meaningful when the agent has higher status and expertise than the target person. Thus, ingratiation is likely to be viewed as less sincere when used in an influence attempt with a boss. Ingratiation may be viewed as manipulative if it is used just before asking for something; so in general, it is more useful as part of a long-term strategy for building cooperative relations than as proactive influence tactic.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Personal Appeals A personal appeal involves asking someone to do a favor based on friendship or loyalty to you, or it may also involve an appeal to the person’s kindness and generosity. This influence tactic is not feasible when the target person dislikes the agent or is indifferent about what happens to the agent. A personal appeal is most useful for getting assistance or information or for requesting a personal favor unrelated to the work. The tactic is more socially acceptable with a peer or outsider than with a subordinate or boss. It is awkward to request a personal favor from a subordinate and should not be necessary except in very unusual circumstances. A personal appeal to a boss involves issues of equity and may be perceived as favoritism by other subordinates.

Legitimating Tactics Legitimating tactics involve attempts to establish one’s legitimate authority or right to make a particular type of request. Legitimacy is unlikely to be questioned for a routine request that has been made and complied with many times before. However, legitimacy is more likely to be questioned when you make a request that is unusual, when the request clearly exceeds your authority, or when the target person does not know who you are or what authority you have. There are several different types of legitimating tactics, most of which are mutually compatible.

Legitimating tactics are most often relevant for influence attempts with peers or outsiders, where role relationships are often ambiguous and agent authority less well defined. For downward influence attempts with subordinates, legitimating may be used when implementing major changes or for dealing with an unusual crisis. For upward influence attempts, legitimating may be used for requests involving personnel matters, especially if the superior is new and unfamiliar with relevant policies, contract agreements, and standard practices.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Pressure Pressure tactics include threats, warnings, and assertive behavior such as repeated demands or frequent checking to see if the person has complied with a request. Pressure tactics are sometimes successful in eliciting compliance with a request, particularly if the target person is just lazy or apathetic rather than strongly opposed to it. However, pressure is not likely to result in commitment and may have serious side effects. The harder forms (e.g., threats, warnings, demands) are likely to cause resentment and undermine working relationships. The target person may try to avoid you, discredit you, or restrict your power. The softer forms (e.g., persistent requests, reminders that the person promised to do something) are more likely to gain compliance without undermining your relationship with the person.

Pressure tactics are most likely to be used with subordinates and least likely to be used with bosses. The authority and power needed to make threats or warnings credible is much greater in a downward direction than in a lateral or upward direction, and pressure is often considered more appropriate for influence attempts with subordinates than with peers or bosses.

Coalition Tactics Coalition tactics involve getting help from other people to influence the target person. The coalition partners may be peers, subordinates, superiors, or outsiders. Coalition partners may actively participate in influence attempts with the target person, or the agent may only use their endorsement of a request or proposal. When a coalition partner actively participates in the effort to influence the target person, the influence attempt usually involves other influence tactics as well. For example, the coalition partner may use rational persuasion, exchange, or pressure to influence the target person. When the agent gets help from the immediate superior of the target person, the process is sometimes called an upward appeal, but it is still an example of a coalition tactic rather than an entirely different type of proactive tactic.

Coalition tactics are more likely to be used to influence peers or bosses than subordinates, and it is especially appropriate to gain their support for a proposed change or new initiative. It is seldom necessary to use coalition tactics to influence subordinates. Managers have many ways to influence subordinates, and in western countries they are expected to do so without getting help from other people.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Effectiveness of Proactive Tactics Proactive influence tactics are not always needed in an influence attempt. When a request is clearly legitimate, relevant for the work, and something the target person knows how to do, then it is often possible to get target compliance by using a “simple request” based on legitimate power. However, when a person is likely to resist a simple request, the use of proactive influence tactics can help to make the influence attempt more successful. The influence tactics are especially useful for a request or proposal that is unusual, controversial, or difficult to do, or when the agent has little authority over the target person (e.g., a peer, boss, or client).

The effectiveness of each type of proactive tactics depends on several aspects of the situation in which it is used (e.g., Kipnis et al., 1980; Yukl & Falbe, 1990; Yukl, Falbe, & Youn, 1993; Yukl, Guinan, & Sottolano, 1995; Yukl, Kim, & Chavez, 1999; Yukl, Kim, & Falbe, 1996; Yukl & Tracey, 1992). Relevant aspects of the situation include the type of agent-target relationship, the agent’s power and authority, the agent’s interpersonal skills, the type of influence objective, and the extent to which the request is seen as appropriate and acceptable by the target person. A tactic is more likely to be successful if the target person perceives it to be a socially acceptable form of influence behavior, the agent has sufficient position and personal power, the agent has strong interpersonal skills, and if the tactic is used for a request that is legitimate and consistent with target values and needs.

The outcome of an influence attempt also depends on the extent to which the agent is trusted by the target and perceived to have integrity. Any tactic can be used in a way that is unethical. To preserve a reputation for integrity it is essential to avoid using tactics in a way that is deceptive or manipulative. The proactive tactics should be used in ethical ways to accomplish worthwhile objectives, not to exploit others for personal gain.

Even though the outcome of an influence attempt depends on the situation, research on consequences of influence attempts finds that some tactics tend to be generally more effective than others (e.g., Falbe & Yukl, 1992; Fu & Yukl, 2000; Yukl, Fu, & McDonald, 2003; Yukl & Tracey, 1992). Findings in the research on tactic effectiveness and how the tactics are commonly used in different situations are summarized in Table 8-8 . Research on how the tactics are used

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Table 8-8 Summary of Findings for Proactive Influence Tactics Influence Tactic

Directional Use of Tactic

Sequencing Results Used Alone or in Combination

General Effectiveness

Rational

Persuasion

Widely used in

all directions

Used more for

initial request

Used frequently

both ways

High

Inspirational

Appeal

More down than

up or lateral

No difference Used most with

other tactics

High

Consultation More down and

lateral than up

No difference Used most

with other tactics

High

Collaboration More down and

lateral than up

Not studied Used most

with other tactics

High

Apprising More down than lateral or up

Not studied Used most with other tactics

Moderate

Ingratiation More down and lateral than up

Used more for initial request

Used most with other tactics

Moderate

Exchange More down and lateral than up

Used most for quick follow-up

Used both ways equally often

Moderate

Personal

Appeal

More lateral

than down or up

Used more for

initial request

Used both ways

equally often

Moderate

Coalition

Tactic

More lateral and

up than down

Used most for

delayed follow-up

Used both ways

equally often

Low/moderate

Legitimating

Tactic More down and

lateral than up

Used most for

quick follow-up

Used most

with other tactics

Low

Pressure More down than lateral or up

Used most for delayed follow-up

Used both ways equally often

Low

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

with different targets and how tactics are combined and sequenced is still limited, but those findings are also summarized in the table. This section of the chapter describes the findings about the relative effectiveness of the tactics when used individually and when combined and sequenced in different ways.

Effects of Individual Tactics The four tactics that are generally most effective include rational persuasion, consultation, collaboration, and inspirational appeals. These “core tactics” are often successful for influencing target commitment to carry out a request or support a proposal. A strong form of rational persuasion (e.g., a detailed proposal, elaborate documentation) is much more effective than a weak form of rational persuasion (e.g., a brief explanation, an assertion without supporting evidence).

Ingratiation, exchange, and apprising are moderately effective for influencing subordinates and peers, but these tactics are difficult to use for proactive influence attempts with superiors. Personal appeals can be useful for influencing a target person with whom the agent has a friendly relationship. However, this tactic is only relevant for certain types of requests (e.g., getting assistance, getting a personal favor, changing a scheduled meeting or deadline), and it is likely to result in target compliance rather than commitment.

Pressure and legitimating tactics are not likely to result in target commitment, but these tactics can be useful for eliciting compliance. As noted earlier, compliance is sometimes all that is needed to accomplish the objective of an influence attempt.

A coalition can be effective for influencing a peer or superior to support a change or innovation, especially if the coalition partners use direct tactics such as rational persuasion and inspirational appeals. However, use of a coalition is not likely to be effective if it involves the use of pressure tactics by coalition partners and is viewed as an attempt to “gang up” on the target person. The least effective form of coalition is likely to be an upward appeal to an authority person, and this form of coalition is likely to be saved as a last resort for resolving a conflict with a peer who can cause the failure of an important project.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Combining Tactics It is often feasible for a manager to use more than one direct influence tactic at the same time or in a sequence. An influence attempt is more likely to be successful if two or more different tactics are combined. However, the outcome will depend on the potency of the component tactics and the extent to which they are compatible with each other. Compatible tactics are easy to use together and they enhance each other’s effectiveness. The research on tactic combinations is very limited, but it suggests that some tactics are more easily combined than others.

Rational persuasion is a very flexible tactic, and it is usually compatible with any of the other tactics. The effectiveness of a soft tactic such as consultation, inspirational appeals, and apprising can be enhanced by combining it with rational persuasion. For example, rational persuasion can be used to clarify why a proposed change is important, and consultation can be used to involve the target person in finding an acceptable way to implement the change. An inspirational appeal that involves values and ideals can also involve reasons why the request or proposal is important to the organization or mission. The explanation of why a request is beneficial for the organization can also include reasons why it is beneficial to the person. For example, a proposed change to increase profits may also help the target person get a promotion.

Combinations of “soft” tactics, such as consultation, ingratiation, and inspirational appeals and collaboration are usually more effective than use of one soft tactic alone. For example, it is especially useful to combine consultation and collaboration. Consultation will elicit target person concerns, and collaboration can be used to help alleviate them.

Some tactics are clearly incompatible. For example, a hard form of pressure is incompatible with personal appeals or ingratiation because it undermines the feelings of friendship and loyalty that are the basis for these soft tactics. A hard form of pressure also tends to undermine the trust necessary for tactics such as consultation and collaboration. However, rational persuasion, consultation, and collaboration are unlikely to be effective when the target person does not share the agent’s task objectives. In this situation, some pressure may be necessary to motivate target willingness to find a mutually acceptable agreement. Threats or the use of upward appeals to authority figures may help convince the target person that cooperation is more beneficial than noncooperation. The use of pressure

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

tactics to gain cooperation requires considerable skill, and it should be used only after other tactics have failed.

Sequencing Tactics Influence attempts often involve a series of separate influence episodes that occur over a period of days or weeks. Some tactics are used more in initial influence attempts and other tactics are used more in follow-up influence attempts. The reasons for tactic selection described earlier can be used to explain sequencing differences in the use of different influence tactics. In general, it is reasonable to assume that a manager will initially select tactics that are likely to accomplish an objective with the least effort and cost.

Most initial influence attempts involve either a simple request or a relatively weak form of rational persuasion. These tactics are easy to use and entail little in the way of agent costs. Ingratiation is likely to be used early, because it is more credible to use it as part of the rationale for a request (e.g., say that the person is highly qualified to do a task). If some target resistance is anticipated, then the agent is likely to use a stronger form of rational persuasion, and “soft” tactics, such as personal appeals, consultation, collaboration, apprising, and inspirational appeals. In the face of continued resistance by a target, the agent will either escalate to “harder” tactics or abandon the effort if the request does not justify the risks of escalation. Pressure, exchange, and coalitions are likely to be saved for follow-up influence attempts, because they involve the greatest costs and risks. Legitimating may be used either early or late, depending on how the target is likely to perceive the legitimacy of a request. This tactic should be used early if the agent believes that the target person is likely to have any doubts about legitimacy.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Using the Tactics to Resist Influence Attempts In proactive influence attempts, the agent initiates the interaction, but effective leaders must also be able to handle an undesirable influence attempt initiated by someone else. Most of the tactics used for proactive influence attempts can also be used to resist or modify a request made by someone else such as a boss, peer, subordinate, or client. For example, when used as a resistance tactic, rational persuasion may involve explaining why the agent’s proposed plan is unlikely to be successful. Collaboration may involve an offer to help accomplish the agent’s objective in different way. Apprising may involve explaining why a proposed activity or change is likely to result in unfavorable personal outcomes for the agent (the “beware what you wish for” tactic). Legitimating may involve explaining how the agent’s request is inconsistent with company rules or a formal contract. Pressure may involve a threat to resign or to pursue legal action against the agent if an unethical request or proposal is not withdrawn.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Guidelines for Specific Tactics This section offers specific guidelines for using the four core tactics (rational persuasion, inspirational appeals, consultation, and collaboration), and they are summarized in Table 8-9 . Guidelines for the other seven tactics are summarized in Table 8-10 . The guidelines for how to use the tactics are suggestions rather than prescriptions, because it is always necessary to evaluate the situation and determine whether a tactic is feasible and relevant. Some of the tactics can take many different forms, and it is important to determine the best way to a tactic.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Rational Persuasion Rational appeals involve logical arguments and factual evidence that a proposal or request is desirable because it is important for the organization or team and is feasible to do.

• Explain the reason for a request or proposal. People are more likely to comply with a request if they understand the reason why it is necessary and important. When asked to do something unusual, people may wonder whether it is really necessary or just an impulsive whim. Explain how a proposed activity would solve a problem in your work or help you carry out your job responsibilities more effectively. Explain how a proposal would help to achieve an important objective you share in common with the person, such as improved quality, service, or productivity.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Table 8-9 Ways to Use the Core Tactics Rational Persuasion

◾ Explain in detail why a request or proposal is important. ◾ Use facts and logic to make a clear case in support of a request or proposal. ◾ Provide evidence that a request or proposal is feasible. ◾ Explain why a proposal is better than the alternatives.

Inspirational Appeals

◾ Describe a proposed change as an exciting and worthwhile opportunity. ◾ Link a proposed activity or change to the person’s ideals and values. ◾ Describe a clear, appealing vision of what can be accomplished by a project or change. ◾ Use a dramatic, expressive style of speaking and positive, optimistic language.

Consultation

◾ State your objective, and ask what the person can do to help attain it. ◾ Ask for suggestions on how to improve a tentative proposal. ◾ Involve the person in planning action steps to attain an objective. ◾ Respond in a positive way to any concerns expressed by the person.

Collaboration

◾ Offer to show the person how to perform a requested task. ◾ Offer to provide necessary resources. ◾ Offer to help the person solve problems caused by a request. ◾ Offer to help the person implement a proposed change.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Table 8-10 Ways To Use the Other Tactics

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Apprising

◾ Explain how the person could benefit from carrying out a requested task. ◾ Explain how the task you want the person to do would help his/her career. ◾ Explain why a proposed activity or change would be good for the person. ◾ Explain how a proposed change would solve some of the person’s problems.

Exchange

◾ Offer something the person wants in exchange for providing help on a task or project. ◾ Offer to do a specific task or favor in return for compliance with a request. ◾ Promise to do something for the person in the future in return for his or her help now. ◾ Offer to provide an appropriate reward if the person carries out a difficult request.

Ingratiation

◾ Say that the person has the special skills or knowledge needed to carry out a request. ◾ Praise the person’s past achievements when asking him/her to do another task. ◾ Show respect and appreciation when asking the person to do something for you. ◾ Say that there is nobody more qualified to do a task.

Legitimating

◾ Explain that your request or proposal is consistent with official rules and policies. ◾ Point out that your request or proposal is consistent with a prior agreement or contract. ◾ Use a document to verify that a request is legitimate (e.g., a work order, policy manual, contract,

charter). ◾ Explain that a request or proposal is consistent with prior precedent and established practice.

Personal Appeal

◾ Ask the person to do a favor for you as a friend. ◾ Ask for his /her help as a personal favor. ◾ Say that you are in a difficult situation and would really appreciate the person’s help. ◾ Say you need to ask for a favor before telling the person what it is.

Pressure

◾ Keep asking the person in a persistent way to say yes to a request. ◾ Insist in an assertive way that the person must do what you ask. ◾ Repeatedly check to see if the person has carried out a request. ◾ Warn the person about the penalties for not complying with a request.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Coalition

◾ Mention the names of others who endorse a proposal when asking the person to support it. ◾ Get others to explain to the person why they support a proposed activity or change. ◾ Bring someone along for support when meeting with the person to make a request or proposal. ◾ Ask someone with higher authority to help influence the target person.

• Provide evidence that your proposal is feasible. It is not enough for a request or proposal to be relevant, it must also be seen as practical and realistic to gain the person’s enthusiastic support and cooperation. The target person may exaggerate the difficulties or anticipate obstacles that are unlikely to occur. If the person has doubts about the feasibility of a request or proposal, provide supporting evidence for it. Explain the underlying theoretical rationale for assuming that a proposed plan of action will lead to the desired objective. Describe a specific sequence of action steps that could be used to accomplish the objective. Cite supporting evidence from empirical research (e.g., a pilot study, a survey showing a favorable response to a proposed new product, service, or change). Describe how a similar approach was successful when used in the past by yourself or someone else. If appropriate, provide an actual demonstration for the person to observe (seeing is believing).

• Explain why your proposal is better than competing ones. Sometimes your proposal is competing with other proposals for the person’s support. In this case, it is not only necessary to show that your proposal is feasible, but also to show that it is better than any of the alternatives. Point out the advantages of your proposal in comparison to the alternatives (e.g., more likely to accomplish the objective, less costly, more likely to be approved, easier to implement, less risk of undesirable side effects). Point out the weaknesses and problems with each competing proposal. Your comparison will be more credible if you also acknowledge some advantages of competing proposals rather than ignoring them altogether, especially if the person is already aware of these advantages. If feasible, cite evidence from a test of the competing proposals to show that yours is better.

• Explain how likely problems or concerns would be handled. All proposals and plans have weaknesses and limitations. A proposal is more likely to be accepted if you anticipate any obvious limitations and find ways to deal with them. Explain how you propose to avoid potential problems, overcome likely obstacles, and minimize risks. If the person expresses

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

any unanticipated concerns about your proposal, discuss ways to deal with these concerns rather than ignoring them or dismissing them as unworthy of consideration.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Inspirational Appeals An inspirational appeal is an attempt to develop enthusiasm and commitment by appealing to the target person’s emotions and values.

• Appeal to the person’s ideals and values. Most people aspire to be important, to feel useful, to accomplish something worthwhile, to make an important contribution, to perform an exceptional feat, to be a member of the best team, or to participate in an exciting effort to make things better. These aspirations are a good basis for emotional appeals. For example, the task of developing a new type of software may be likened to the role of a missionary who is going to revolutionize the way computers are used in society. Some values and ideals that may be the basis for an inspirational appeal include patriotism, loyalty, liberty, freedom, justice, fairness, equality, excellence, altruism, and environmentalism.

• Link the request to the person’s self-image. A proposed activity or assignment may be linked to values that are central to the person’s self- image as a professional, a member of an organization, an adherent of a particular religion, or a member of a political party. For example, most scientists have strong values about the discovery of new knowledge and its application to improve humanity; most physicians and nurses have strong values about healing people and keeping them healthy. A proposed change or activity may be described as something that will advance new knowledge, improve health care, enrich the lives of all members of the organization, serve one’s god, or demonstrate loyalty to one’s country.

• Link the request to a clear and appealing vision. Efforts to introduce major changes or innovations are more likely to be successful when they involve an appealing vision of what could be accomplished or how the future could look if the proposed activity or change is implemented successfully. The vision may be an existing one the target person is known to embrace, or one you created to help gain commitment to a new project or activity. The vision should emphasize ideological values rather than tangible economic benefits (used in rational appeals to self-interest). However, it is not necessary to ignore economic benefits; they may be integrated into the overall vision of what can be accomplished as long as it is clear that they are not the primary objective.

• Use a dramatic, expressive style of speaking.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

A dramatic, expressive style of speaking often increases the effectiveness of an emotional appeal. Conviction and intensity of feeling are communicated by one’s voice (e.g., tone, inflection, pause), facial expressions, gestures, and body movement. Use a strong, clear tone of voice, but vary the pace and intensity. Use pauses at appropriate times to emphasize key words, maintain interest, and arouse excitement. Maintain strong eye contact, use strong gestures, and move around to display energy and intensity of feeling.

• Use positive, optimistic language. Confidence and optimism about a project or change can be contagious. It is especially important to foster optimism when the task is very difficult and people lack self-confidence. State your personal belief in the project and your strong commitment to see it through to a successful conclusion. Use positive language to communicate your confidence that a proposed project or change will be successful. For example, talk about the wonderful things that “will” happen when a change is made, rather than what “may” happen.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Consultation With this tactic, the target person is invited to help plan a task or improve a proposed change in order to gain more commitment for it.

• State your objective and ask what the person can do to help. When you do not expect the target person to be enthusiastic about helping you accomplish an objective, it is helpful to explain why it is important (rational persuasion) then ask the person what he or she can do to help you attain it. If you have a good relationship, the target person is likely to suggest some ways to be of assistance. Show appreciation for any suggestions and explore their feasibility. Once the person has agreed to provide some assistance, it is easier to ask for additional things that build on the initial offer.

• Ask for suggestions on how to improve a tentative proposal. More participation is likely if you present a proposal as tentative and encourage people to improve it, rather than asking people to react to an elaborate plan that appears complete. People will be less inhibited about expressing concerns for a proposal that appears to be in the development stage rather than complete. The agent and target person should jointly explore ways to deal with any serious concerns or incorporate promising suggestions. A stronger version of this tactic is to ask the target person to write the initial draft of a proposal that you want him or her to support. Of course, this procedure is only feasible if the person agrees with you about the objective and has the expertise to develop a credible proposal.

• Involve the person in planning how to attain an objective. Present a general strategy, policy, or objective and ask the target person to suggest specific action steps for implementing it. If the action plan will be detailed, it is best to schedule a meeting at a later time to review the plan and reach a mutual agreement about it. This tactic is especially useful for assigning responsibilities to a subordinate or asking a peer to carry out supporting activities on a project. To be feasible, the target person should have at least moderate agreement with the strategy or objective.

• Respond to the person’s concerns and suggestions. Consultation is used mostly as a proactive influence tactic, but opportunities arise to use it also as a reactive tactic. Sometimes when asking the target person to carry out an assignment or provide assistance on a task, the person expresses concerns about it or suggestions for improving it.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Whenever feasible, try to deal with the target person’s concerns, even if it requires some modification of your initial plans. Ask the person for suggestions about how to deal with concerns. Good suggestions for improving an activity should be utilized whenever feasible.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Collaboration Collaboration involves an offer to help the target person carry out a request for you, and it can help reduce the difficulty or cost of carrying out a request.

• Offer to show the person how to perform a requested task. If a request involves a task that has not been performed previously by the target person, and the person is worried about not being able to perform the task successfully, then a good way to increase commitment is to offer to show the person how to do the task. Offer to provide instruction to the person or arrange for someone else who is qualified to provide instruction. It is also useful to offer guidance and advice when a request or assignment does not involve a completely new task but there are special requirements and the person is uncertain about what is expected.

• Offer to provide necessary resources. Sometimes the target person is reluctant to do a requested task because it requires supplies, equipment, information, or other resources that are not readily available. If the task requires additional resources that are essential for task performance but difficult to obtain, offer to provide them or help the person get them.

• Offer to help the person solve problems caused by a request. A request is more likely to be resisted if it will cause new problems that will increase the cost of compliance beyond an acceptable level. Try to anticipate such problems and be prepared to offer ways to avoid them or help the person deal with them. In many cases, the agent will not be aware of the problems caused by a request, but target concerns can be elicited with the skillful use of consultation and active listening by the agent.

• Offer to help the person implement a proposed change. A major source of resistance to change is the extra work that would be involved in implementing it in the target person’s unit or job. To gain the person’s support and approval for a proposed change, offer to help the person implement it. A requirement for the use of this tactic is the capability to actually provide assistance in implementing the proposed change, which is most likely when the target person is a subordinate.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Power and Influence Behavior Power and influence behavior are distinct constructs, but the relationship among specific forms of power, specific influence behaviors, and influence outcomes is complex and not well understood. Different types of effects are possible, and they are not mutually exclusive (see Figure 8-1 ).

Agent power may directly affect the agent’s choice of influence tactics (as depicted by arrow #1). Some tactics require a particular type of power to be effective, and a leader with relevant power is more likely to use these tactics. For example, exchange tactics require reward power, which provides an agent with something of value to exchange with the target person. Strong forms of pressure such as warnings and threats are more likely to be used by an agent who has some coercive power over the target person. Rational persuasion is more likely to be used when the agent has the knowledge to explain why a request is important and feasible.

Some influence tactics may have a direct effect on target attitudes and/or behavior, regardless of the agent’s power. However, in the majority of influence attempts, it is likely that power acts as a moderator variable to enhance or diminish the effectiveness of the tactics used by the agent. This moderator effect of power (depicted by arrow #2) is most likely to occur for types of the power directly relevant to the tactics used in an influence attempt. For example, expert power probably moderates the effect of rational persuasion. A proposal explaining why it is important to change operating procedures is more likely to be successful if made by someone perceived to have relevant expertise. A similar moderating effect probably occurs for reward power and exchange tactics. An agent with high reward power is likely to have more success offering an exchange than an agent with little reward power.

Figure 8-1 Effects of Agent Power and Influence Behavior on Influence Outcomes

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

It is also possible that agent power can enhance the success of an influence tactics for which the power is not directly relevant (also depicted by arrow #2). An agent with strong referent power may be more successful when using rational persuasion to gain support for a proposal. An agent with strong coercive power may be more successful in gaining compliance with a simple request, even though no pressure or exchange tactics are used. Strong expert power may increase the credibility of a request unrelated to the agent’s expertise. For example, a famous scientist influences people to participate in a risky financial venture that does not involve the scientist’s field of expertise.

Another possibility (depicted by arrow #3) is that agent power can influence the target person regardless of whether the agent makes any overt influence attempt. In organizations, people act more deferential toward somebody who has high position power, because they are aware of the possibility that the person can affect their job performance and career advancement. People are less likely to criticize or contradict a powerful agent, because they do not want to risk the agent’s displeasure. People are more likely to cooperate with an agent who has strong referent power, even if the agent does nothing to encourage such cooperation.

Little research has investigated the complex relationships between power and influence. There is only limited evidence for the proposition that power influences the choice of influence tactics, that power moderates the effectiveness of a specific influence tactic, or that power increases compliance or changes target behavior independently of the use of tactics based on this power. Clearly these important research questions deserve more attention.

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Summary Power is the capacity to influence the attitudes and behavior of people in the desired direction. Potential influence derived from a manager’s position in the organization is called position power, and it includes legitimate power, reward power, coercive power, information power, and ecological power. Potential influence derived from the characteristics of the person who occupies a leadership position is called personal power, and it includes expert and referent power.

Power for an individual or group can increase or decrease as conditions change. Social exchange theory explains how power is gained and lost as reciprocal influence processes occur over time between leaders and followers in small groups. Strategic contingencies theory explains the acquisition and loss of power by different subunits of an organization (e.g., functional departments or product divisions) and the implications of this power distribution for the effectiveness of the organization in a changing environment. Theories of power institutionalization explain how political tactics are used to increase power and protect existing power.

The amount of power necessary for leader effectiveness depends on the nature of the organization, task, and subordinates. However, a moderate amount of position power is usually optimal. A leader with extensive reward and coercive power is tempted to rely on them excessively, which can cause resentment and rebellion. On the other hand, a leader lacking sufficient position power to reward competent subordinates, make necessary changes, and punish chronic troublemakers will find it difficult to develop a high-performing group or organization. The success of a manager depends greatly on the manner in which power is exercised. Effective leaders rely more on personal power than on position power and they use power in a subtle, careful fashion that minimizes status differentials and avoids threats to the target person’s self-esteem. In contrast, leaders who exercise power in an arrogant, manipulative, domineering manner are likely to engender resentment and resistance.

The relationship between power and influence behavior is complex. Power can influence the leader’s choice of tactics and it can enhance their effectiveness. Leader power may also influence others even without a direct influence attempt by the leader. Three distinct types of influence tactics found by scholars are impression management tactics, political tactics, and proactive tactics. Eleven distinct proactive tactics have been identified using several types of research methods. Proactive influence

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

tactics are useful when a simple request is not sufficient for eliciting the desired level of compliance or commitment. What tactics are used depends on the situation, and the choice of tactics will vary somewhat depending on whether the target person is a subordinate, peer, or superior.

The outcome of an influence attempt may be target commitment, compliance, or resistance. Some tactics tend to be more effective than others, and the ones most likely to elicit target commitment are rational persuasion, consultation, collaboration, and inspirational appeals. However, these core tactics do not always result in task commitment, because the outcome of any particular influence attempt is affected strongly by other factors in addition to the type of influence tactics used by the agent. It is evident that combining different tactics is beneficial in some cases but not others. Knowing how to successfully combine different forms of influence requires considerable insight and skill on the part of the manager. Any tactic can fail if it is not used in a skillful, ethical way, or it is inappropriate for the influence objective and situation.

Review and Discussion Questions 1. What is the difference between position power and personal power? 2. What types of power are related most strongly to leadership effectiveness? 3. How much position and personal power do leaders need to be effective? 4. What are some guidelines for using position and personal power effectively? 5. Briefly define the four proactive core tactics. 6. Which proactive tactics are most likely to result in target commitment? 7. How can the proactive tactics be used to resist or modify influence attempts by others? 8. How are power and influence behavior related to each other and to influence outcomes?

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Key Terms apprising coercive power collaboration commitment compliance consultation ecological power exchange tactics expert power information power ingratiation inspirational appeals institutionalization of power internalization legitimate power legitimating tactic personal appeal personal identification personal power position power pressure tactics proactive influence tactic rational persuasion referent power resistance reward power scope of authority

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Case Restview Hospital Mary Carter was the accounting manager at Restview Hospital, a large residential health care facility. The facility administrator, Jack Morelli, explained that he wanted to modernize Restview’s system of accounts billing. He asked Mary to investigate available software packages that would be compatible with their computer system. Jack explained that he and the Restview board of directors would like to make a decision about this matter at the board meeting next month.

A week later, Jack asked Mary about her progress, and she reported that she had identified two vendors with appropriate software packages. Jack asked why her list of potential vendors did not include Standard Software Systems, the vendor from which they purchased the software currently used to process Restview’s payroll. Standard had just recently developed a software package for accounts billing as a new addition to their product line, but few hospitals were using it. The preliminary information gathered by Mary suggested that Standard’s software package was less appropriate for Restview than the packages offered by the other vendors. However, Mary knew that the president of Standard Software was a personal friend of Jack, and she agreed to include Standard among the vendors selected for further consideration.

During the next two weeks, sales representatives from each vendor were invited to make a presentation at Restview to demonstrate and explain their product. Mary had planned to invite the board members to these presentations, but Jack said they were too busy to attend. When the presentations were held, Mary and her office staff asked many questions, but Jack looked bored and said very little. Mary also visited some other hospitals that were already using each type of software package to get firsthand opinions about how well they worked and the difficulties experienced in installing them. During the course of her investigation, she learned that Standard’s new software package was less flexible and less user-friendly than the others. All three software packages were about the same price, but the software package from Reliable Computer was clearly the best one for Restview’s needs. She prepared a short report to Jack detailing the advantages and disadvantages of each product and making her recommendation.

The next day Mary met with Jack to give him the written report and summarize her findings in person. She explained the reasons for her recommendation to purchase the software package from Reliable Computers, and she reviewed the evidence supporting it. Mary also offered to present her findings to the

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

board of directors at their next meeting, but Jack said he could handle it himself. The board meeting was held the following week, and afterward Jack informed Mary that they decided to go with the software package from Standard. He explained that the board wanted to reward Standard for excellent customer service last year when installing their payroll software at Restview. Two years later, after thousands of dollars of unnecessary expense, the accounts billing software was still not operating smoothly for Restview.

Questions 1. How would you explain the board’s decision to purchase the software package from Standard? 2. How much power relative to this decision did Mary, Jack, and the president of Standard

Software possess, and what type of power was it? 3. What could Mary have done to gain more influence over the decision?

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

Case Sporting Goods Store Bill Thompson is the new manager of a retail sporting goods store in Vermont that is part of a national chain. Bill, who is 25 years old, has been working for the company for four years. Before his promotion, he was the assistant manager for two years at a company store in Delaware. Last week he was briefly introduced to the employees by his boss, the regional manager.

The profit performance of this store is below average for its location, and Bill is looking forward to the challenge of improving profits. When he was an assistant manager, he was given mostly minor administrative duties and paperwork, so this assignment will be his first opportunity to show he can be an effective manager. The base salaries of the 20 employees who work in Bill’s store are set by the company, but appraisal ratings by the store manager influence the size of an employee’s annual merit raise. These recommendations must be justified to the regional manager, especially if they are not consistent with individual and department sales. Bill can suspend or fire employees with the approval of his boss, but in practice it is difficult to do so unless the recommendation is supported by a strong case.

The store layout and most prices are set by the headquarters office. However, store performance can be affected to a limited extent by the store manager. One way is to keep the cost of employees low is by making sure they are working efficiently and not taking excessive sick days. Another way is to ensure that employees are providing a high level of customer service so that customers will return to make other purchases rather than going to a different store next time. Customer service depends on knowing the products well, being polite, providing prompt service, and making sure that inventories of popular goods are maintained so that customers can find what they want. Pay is low for this type of retail selling job, turnover is high, and it takes a few months for a new employee to learn the merchandise well enough to be helpful to customers. Thus, it is also desirable to keep competent employees satisfied enough to stay with the company.

Although it is only his first week on the job, Bill believes that he has already discovered some of the problems at this store. Among the various departments in the store, the ski department has the highest potential profits during the winter, because skiing and snowboarding are popular winter sports in Vermont. At the current time the department’s sales are about average for company stores in the Northeast region, with potential for considerable improvement. On several occasions Bill noticed a line of customers waited to be served in the ski department, and he overheard some of them grumbling about

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...

how long it takes to get served. One customer said he was leaving to go to another store that didn’t make him “wait all day to have the privilege of spending hundreds of dollars on ski equipment.” Bill observed that Sally Jorgenson, the department manager, spends a lot of time socializing with her salespeople and with customers, including friends who drop in to visit and talk about ski conditions, resorts, fashions, equipment, racing, and so forth. Bill, who doesn’t ski, cannot understand what they find so interesting to talk about. He wonders why anybody in their right mind would want to spend a small fortune and risk permanent injury to hurtle down a mountain in blizzard conditions, and then stand in long lines and ride up a freezing chairlift just to do it all over again!

Questions 1. How much of each type of power does Bill have at this time? 2. What influence tactics could be used in this situation to influence Sally? Explain what you would

actually say to Sally in the process of using each tactic. 3. What should Bill do to improve store performance?

3/14/2016http://e.pub/496fmg3j0mxg3r9ovaid.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP70004785650000000000000000...