Seminar 8

Chapter 15: Influence, Empowerment & Politics

Seminar 8* Mutuality of Interest: Balancing individual and organization interests through win-win cooperation.- We are all born with the inherent instinct towards self-preservation; but in an organizational setting, it is important that employees do what is best for the organization to ensure its livelihood. Tug of War between self-interest and mutuality of interest.

* Influence Tactics (13 years research by David Kipnis, 1980)- Tactics shown are by decreasing order of use- Soft Influence Tactics: Friendlier, not as coercive and cater to intrinsic needs1) Rational persuasion: Using logical arguments and facts to persuade another that a desired result will occur.2) Inspirational Appeal: Arousing enthusiasm by appealing to one’s values and beliefs or emotions3) Consultation: Asking for participation in decision making or planning a change4) Ingratiation: Getting someone to do what you want by putting that person in a good mood or getting him or her to like you5) Personal appeal: Appealing to feelings of loyalty and friendship before making a request- Hard Influence Tactics: Involve more overt pressure; cater to extrinsic needs6) Exchange: Promising some benefits in exchange for complying with a request. (Explicit or implicit)7) Coalition Building: Persuading by seeking the assistance of others or by noting the support of others.8) Legitimating: Pointing out one’s authority to make a request or verifying that it is consistent with prevailing organizational policies and practices.9) Pressure: Seeking compliance by using demands, threats, or intimidation.

of 6


-Outcome of Influence Tactics1) Commitment - a strong positive response (Best)The person will agree and carry out the request because they truly believes it is the right or best thing to do2) Compliance – completion of requestThe person will agree only because there is something positive in it for him/her or something negative will happen if they don’t3) Resistance - a strong negative response (Worst)Request will be disregarded or even counter, influence attempt is unsuccessful

- Practical Research Findingsa) Commitment is more likely when people rely on consultation, strong rational persuasion and inspirational appeals (upward influence) and do not rely on pressure and coalition tactics. (G Yukl, Journal of Applied Psychology, 1996)b) Ingratiation can slightly improve your performance appraisal and also make the boss like you significantly more (69 studies meta-analysis R A Gordon, 1996)c) Commitment more likely when influence attempt involves something important and enjoyable and is based on a friendly relationship (G Yukl, Journal of Applied Psychology, 1996)d) Inspirational appeal and exchange tactics will reduce helping behavior when relationship is not good due to lack of credibility whilst exchange tactics increased helping behavior when relationship was good. On the other hand, consultation increased helping behavior regardless of relationship endorsement for participation (field study of US sales manager, 2006)e) Soft tactics are perceived as fair while hard tactics are perceived as unfair. Unfair tactics also associated with greater resistance. (survey of 214 MBA students, 1998)f) Task behavior (demonstrating ability and task competence) was associated with perceived competence and effective influence while dominating behavior (rely of threats) are found to be ineffective (H Aguinis, 1996)g) Interpersonal influence is culture bound. What applies in one culture might not be applicable to another (P P Fu et al, 2004)

* Power Concept- Types of Power (L H Chusmir, 1986)+ McClelland researched people’s needs and categorized them into a need for achievement, need for affiliation, and need for power. + Socialized Power: ability to get things done with human, informational and material resources

Directed at helping others self-sacrificing Power is not power over others but rather the ability to get things done

+ Personalized Power: Directed at helping oneself for personal gains Focus more on satisfying their own needs Focus less on needs of their underlings Act like ‘rules’ do not apply to them

+ Organizational commitment higher for socialized (uplifting) power compared to personalized (dominating) power. (P A Wilson, 1995)

of 6


- 5 Bases of Power (John French and Bertram Raven, 1959)+ Position – derived from one’s position and status within the organization1) Reward: If you do it I’ll give you something obtain compliance by promising or granting rewards useful for on the job behavior shaping2) Coercive: If you don’t do it something bad will happen threats and actual punishment including withholding rewards or negative actions.3) Legitimate: Do it because the boss asks you to due to decision authority.> Can be positive when focused on constructive on-job performance or negative when used threateningly or in a demeaning manner> Main aim is to build power holder ego but overextension of legitimate power might lead to ethical concerns+Personal – derived from one’s personal characteristics, relationship with others, and behavior towards others4) Expert: Do it because I know a lot about this subject knowledge is power in today’s high tech world (Performed key role in effectiveness of team leaders in study of 3 physician medical diagnosis team, 1996)> Can be enhanced by attending meeting, trade shows or willingness to learn> Drawback is that specializing can sometimes pigeonhole you into a certain roles and preclude you from more general management opportunities. 5) Referent: Do it because you like me compliance through one’s charisma or personal attraction+ Expert and referent power had generally positive impact on job performance, satisfaction and turnover; reward and legitimate power slightly positive; coercive power slightly negative (Reanalysis done by P M Podsakoff, 1985)+ Reward, coercive and negative legitimate power tend to produce compliance while positive legitimate power, expert power and referent power tend to foster commitment as driven by intrinsic motivation. + Link bases of power to influence tactics (P A Wilson, 1995) ***

* Empowerment- Defined as sharing varying degrees of power with lower-level employees to tap their full potential recognizing and releasing into organization the power that people already have in their wealth of knowledge, experience and internal motivation (W Alan Randolph, 2002)-Involves considering power as not a zero-sum game but instead something that is unlimited and can be shared by all (matter of degree) win-win propositions- Involves pushing decision-making authority to progressively lower level

of 6


- Participative Management+ Process whereby employees play a direct role in: a) Setting goals b) Making decisions c) Solving problemsd) Making changes in the organization+ Go beyond simply asking employees for their ideas or opinions (consultation)+ Predicted to increase motivation because it helps employees fulfil three basic needs: autonomy, meaningfulness of work, and interpersonal contact. Satisfaction of these needs enhances feelings of acceptance, commitment, security, challenge, and satisfaction. In turn, these positive feelings can lead to increased innovation and performance. (M Sashkin, 1984)+ However, there are several factors that influence the effectiveness of participative management viz. design of the work (dependence of employees up, effectiveness down) , the level of trust between management and employees (trust down, success down) , and the employees' readiness to participate. (E.g. Bonnie Hammer, president of NBC Universal Cable Entertainment prevent groupthink by pushing her staff to forefront)- Delegation+ Granting decision-making authority to people at lower levels where a competent decision can be made.+ Lighten mangers load and also develop employee’s abilities (E.g. Ritz Carlton allow each worker to spend up to $2k to fix any problem guest encounters)+ Barriers to delegations includes: (P Kreitner, 2009)a) Belief in the fallacy “if you want something done right, do it yourself”b) Lack of confidence/trust in lower levelsc) Low self-confidence d) Fear of being called lazye) Vague job definition f) Fear of competition from those belowg) Reluctance to take risks involved in depending on othersh) Lack of controls that provide early warning of problems with delegated duties i) Poor example set by bosses who do not delegate + Research has shown that greater delegation was associated with the following factors: a) When the employee is competent, b) the employee shares the manager’s task objectives, c) the manager has a long-standing and positive relationship with the employee, and d) when the lower-level person was also a supervisor. (G Yukl, 1999)+ Conclusion: Manager prefer to delegate task to people they trust. However, trust needs to be built over time, hence this is where the empowerment evolution comes into play By starting small thru delegating small tasks and decisions and then scaling up as competence, confidence and trust grows, will manager be able to achieve delegation.

*Personal Initiative: The other side of delegation + Defined as going beyond formal job requirements and being an active self-starter who is persistent in face of barriers and set back+ Can be enhanced by: a) go beyond the job. b) Follow through on new ideas. c) Openness to criticism d) Look ahead and around for opportunities.+ Personal Initiative Model

Apathy Noncompliance telling someone about a problem asking for approval to act taking actions

of 6


- W A Randolph (1997) Empowerment Model

* Organizational Politics- Intentional act of influence to enhance or protect self-interest- Occurs when org interest overridden by self interest- Uncertainty: Trigger of Political Behaviour (DR Beeman, 1987)1) Unclear objectives 2) Vague performance measures3) Ill-defined decision processes 4) Strong individual or group competition 5) Any type of change (when vested interest at stake and power redistributed)- Level of Political Actions in Organization

- Political Tactics (Reactive versus Proactive)1) Attacking or blaming others(scapegoat or reduce resource competition)2) Using information as a political tool (withhold or distort info)3) Creating a favorable image (impression management) (kill steal)4) Develop base of support (building other’s commitment thru participation)5) Praising others (ingratiation) (Bootlicking)6) Forming political coalitions with strong allies7) Associating with influential people (building support network)8) Creating obligations (reciprocity) (Creating social debts)

of 6


- Effects of Organizational Politics: Associated with lower organizational commitment, lower job satisfaction, poorer job performance and lower unit effectiveness (Survey of 172 team members in large company, 2006) - Types of politics player: a) Naïve (frank) b) Sensible (networking) c) Shark (manipulate) - How to keep organizational politics within reasonable bounds?

Screen out overly political individuals at hiring time Create and open-book management system Make sure every employee knows how the business works and has a

personal line of sight to key results Have nonfinancial people interpret periodic financial and accounting

statements for all employees Establish formal conflict resolution and grievance processes As an ethics filter, do only what you would feel comfortable doing on

national television Publicly recognize and reward people who get real results without

political games

of 6

Seminar 8

Documents

Transcript of Seminar 8