View
2.165
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Based in part on the Organizational Behavior text by Krietner & Kinicki (2009).
Citation preview
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Chapter 15 – Influence, Empowerment and Politics
BUSA 220
Spring 2012 - Wallace
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Organizationalcontributors• Individuals
• Groups
Self Interest vs. Mutual Interest
Influence tactics
Self-Interest
Political
tactics
Mutuality ofInterest(organizationaleffectiveness)
Empowerment
Motivation
Team building
Communication
Leadership
Climate of Destructive Competition and
Suspicion
Climate of Openness, Cooperation, and Trust
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Soft Influence Tactics• Rational persuasion: Using logical arguments and
facts to persuade another that a desired result will occur.
• Inspirational Appeal: Arousing enthusiasm by appealing to one’s values and beliefs
• Consultation: Asking for participation in decision making or planning a change
• Ingratiation: Getting someone to do what you want by putting that person in a good mood or getting him or her to like you.
• Personal appeal: Appealing to feelings of loyalty and friendship before making a request
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Hard Influence Tactics• Exchange: Promising some benefits in
exchange for complying with a request.• Coalition Building: Persuading by
seeking the assistance of others or by noting the support of others.
• Legitimating: Pointing out one’s authority to make a request or verifying that it is consistent with prevailing organizational policies and practices.
• Pressure: Seeking compliance by using demands, threats, or intimidation.
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Influence Outcomes
• Commitment - a strong positive response
• Compliance – completion of request
• Resistance - a strong negative response
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
What Do You Think?
Style
1. Consultation
2. Rational Persuasion
3. Inspirational appeals
4. Ingratiation
5. Pressure
6. Coalition
Response
A. Commitment
B. Compliance
C. Resistance
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Principles of InfluenceLiking: The more we like the other person, the more likely we’ll comply with their requests
Reciprocity: The belief that both good and bad deeds should be repaid in kind.
Social Proof: Role models and peer pressure are powerful forces
Source: R. B. Cialdini, "Harnessing the Science of Persuasion," Harvard Business Review, October 2001, pp. 72-79.
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Principles of Influence• Consistency: Once individuals
have stated a commitment they tend to act in accordance with that commitment.
• Authority: People tend to defer to and respect credible experts.
• Scarcity: Requests that emphasize scarcity or the fact that some object, opportunity, or outcome will soon no longer be available, are difficult to resist.
Source: R. B. Cialdini, "Harnessing the Science of Persuasion," Harvard Business Review, October 2001, pp. 72-79.
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Power Concepts
• Social Power: The ability to get things done with human, informational, and material resources
– Power is not power OVER others
– Power is the ability to GET THINGS DONE
– Influence
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
What Do You Think?
• Which source of power would be most applicable when influencing the following targets?1. Your manager
2. Your peers/co-worker
3. Your subordinate
a. Reward
b. Coercive
c. Legitimate
d. Expert
e. Referent
?
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Power Concepts
McClelland - Achievement, Affiliation
and Power.
Personalized Power – used for personal gain
Socialized Power– used to create motivation– used to accomplish
group goals
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
What Do You Think?
Jarrett has a strong need for power. He enjoys the challenge of making difficult decisions that have a major impact on the organization. At times he makes decisions that have negative consequences for himself and his team but are good for the larger organization. Jarrett….
a. Plays politics to get what he wants
b. Has personalized power
c. Demonstrates socialized power and mutuality of interest
d. Is driven to protect his self-interests
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
French & Raven: Power Sources
• Position– Reward: If you do it I’ll
give you something– Coercive: If you don’t do
it something bad will happen
– Legitimate: Do it because the boss asks you to• Can be positive or
negative
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
French & Raven: Power Sources
• Personal– Expert: Do it because
I know a lot about this subject
– Referent: Do it because you like me
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
What Do You Think
• Which strategy would be most effective in each situation?1. Upward influence
2. Peers
3. Downward• What is the best
combination of strategies?
a. Reward
b. Coercive
c. Legitimate
d. Expert
e. Referent
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Empowerment
• Empowerment sharing varying degrees of power with lower-level employees to tap their full potential
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Power Evolution
None
High
Deg
ree
of E
mp
ower
men
t
Domination Consultation Participation Delegation
Influence Sharing
Manager/leader consults
followers when making
decisions
Power Sharing Manager/lea
der and followers
jointly make decisions
Power Distribution Followers are granted authority to
make decisions
Authoritarian Power
Manager/leader impose
decisions
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Personal Initiative
Taking Action
Asking for approval to act
Asking someone else to act
Telling someone about a problem
Noncompliance
Apathy
Levels of Action
Decreasing timeto action to
solve a problem
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Randolph’s Empowerment Model
The Empowerment Plan
Share InformationCreate Autonomy
Through StructureLet Teams Become
the Hierarchy
Remember: Empowerment is not magic; It consists of a few simple steps and a lot of
persistence
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Organizational Politics
• Organizational Politics intentional enhancement of self-interest
• …but the self-interest should be aligned with the organization’s interests
“Politics isn’t about winning at all costs. It’s about maintaining relationships and getting results at the same time.”
--John Eldred, MGMT Professor & Consultant, Kingston U. UK.
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Uncertainty Causes Politics
1. Unclear objectives2. Vague performance
measures3. Ill-defined decision
processes4. Strong individual or
group competition5. Any type of change
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
What Do You Think?
Given what we know about causes of political behavior, who would be most likely to engage in self-interested politics?
a. A new, relatively young employee starting out her career or
b. An older, more established employee.
andc. Employee’s whose pay and promotion are based on
their manager’s rankings of them
d. Employee’s whose pay and promotion are based on an established, known set of standards
1.
2.
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Political Action Levels
Network Level
Coalition Level
Individual Level
Distinguishing Characteristics
Cooperative pursuit of general self-interests
Cooperative pursuit of group interests in specific issues
Individual pursuit of general self-interests
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Political TacticsFor each tactic, estimate the effectiveness of using this tactic to promote organizational objectives
1. Highly unlikely to be effective
2. May or may not be effective
3. Highly likely to be effective
1. Attacking or blaming others2. Using information as a
political tool3. Creating a favorable image
(impression management)4. Developing a base of
support5. Praising others (ingratiation)6. Forming political coalitions
with strong allies7. Associating with influential
people8. Creating obligations
(reciprocity)
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Political Tendencies
Bully; misuse information,
cultivate and use “friends” and other contacts
Manipulate; use fraud and deceit when necessary
Self-serving and predatory
Politics is an opportunity
Sharks
Negotiate, bargain
Network; expand connections; use
system to give and receive
favors
Further departmental
goals
Politics is necessary
Sensible
None—the truth will win
out
Tell it like it is
Avoid it at all costs
Politics is unpleasant
Naïve
Favorite tactics
Techniques
Intent
Underlying attitude
Characteristics
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Reasonable Boundaries• 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
Krietner/Kinicki, 2009
Which Would You Prefer?