CH-9-10 Communicating in Teams and Organizations – Organisational Behaviour: Emerging Knowledge, Global Insights : Book Guide

This Document Contains Chapters 9 to 10 9. Communicating in Teams and Organizations SOLUTIONS TO CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS 1. You have been hired as a consultant to improve communication between engineering and marketing staff in a large high-technology company. Use the communication model and the four ways to improve that process to devise strategies to improve communication effectiveness among employees between these two work units. Answer: The textbook describes four ways to improve communication through coding-decoding. Students can identify various practices to improve communication for each of these general categories: Ensure that both parties have similar “codebooks” – In this scenario, this might occur by having marketing and engineering staff learn basic concepts commonly used by the other profession. Staff in each unit might include people who have double degrees or have spent part of their careers in the other profession, so have acquired the language and meaning of words used by both groups. Ensure the sender has experience encoding (sending) the message topic – This strategy specifically refers to experience with communicating on the topic rather than just experience with the work context. The main recommendation, therefore, is that the sender has practiced communicating the message. This might occur by having one person speak to many others about important matters (e.g. executive “A” communicates new human resource policies whereas executive “B” keep employee informed about financial matters. By specializing the communication role, each communicator becomes an expert at communicating that narrower band of content to employees throughout the organization. In contrast, if Person “A” is responsible for communicating all company matters to one particular employee group, that communicator would have less knowledge and experience about communicating each topic. Ensure that sender and receiver are motivated and able to use the communication channel – This category suggests that both engineers and marketing specialists should be familiar with meetings, email, instant messaging, and other channels through which both parties will be communicating. Training and establishing ground rules can also improve communication effectiveness in this regard. For example, before starting a project involving engineers and marketing staff, both groups might receive training in video conference meetings, and they might form rules on when to use this communication channel and what behaviors are required or discouraged when using this communication channel. The group might also figure out which media people prefer to use more than others. Ensure that both parties have similar mental models about the context of the information – This can be accomplished by having people in both professions gain experience in specific project areas. For example, if one of the company’s work field is laser technology, then both engineering and marketing staff who communicate with each other should have previous experience working on projects in that area. In contrast, communication problems and inefficiencies will increase when either party is new to working on laser technology (either as engineers or marketing specialists). 2. “An organization comes into being when people can communicate with each other.” Discuss the benefits and limitations of communicating with e-mails among team members. Answer: Effective communication is vital to all organizations, no company could exist without it. It helps in organizational coordination, organizational learning and decision making. E-mail communication has benefits because messages can be quickly written, edited and transmitted to teams of any size. However, team members may not capture the emotional tone of the message in absence of being able to read the facial expressions and other non-verbal cues. For ambiguous, complex and novel situations, emails can provide an opportunity to write things people would find difficult to communicate in face-to-face conversations. It may allow time to team members to think over issues and then react. For new teams, email conversation may create misunderstandings but as teams get mature, email conversations may actually help in avoiding conflicts, clarifying situations in and resolving them. 3. Senior management at a consumer goods company wants you to investigate the feasibility of using a virtual reality platform (such as Second Life) for monthly online meetings involving its three dozen sales managers, located in several cities and countries. Use the social acceptance and media richness factors described in this chapter to identify information you need to consider when conducting this evaluation. Answer: To answer this question, students need to address the main issues in the section on choosing the best communication medium. For social influence, students should consider the following: Organization and team norms – students should ask whether this communication medium is consistent with the team or organization’s informal rules of conduct. Maybe it is too informal or sci-fi for their expectations. Or maybe Second Life is too anonymous in an organization that expects plenty of “face time.” Individual preferences – Are employees competent with information technologies such as Second Life, or are they still stumbling through email? Do staff members feel awkward in virtual forms of interaction? Symbolic meaning of a channel – How are virtual reality platforms perceived by others? Is a Second Life meeting viewed as a novelty with mostly entertainment value or as a legitimate form of business communication? Do employees treat these meetings as serious events or peripheral to the “real” communication in the organization? For media richness, students should consider the degree of media richness of virtual reality platforms, and the importance of high or low media richness in communication events involving these sales managers. When evaluating the use of a virtual reality platform for meetings, consider: 1. Social Acceptance: Assess whether sales managers are comfortable with and open to using virtual reality. This includes their tech-savviness and willingness to adapt to new tools. 2. Media Richness: Evaluate if the virtual reality platform can effectively facilitate rich, interactive communication. Ensure it supports features like real-time feedback, visual and auditory cues, and the ability to convey complex information clearly. 4. Wikis are collaborative websites where anyone in the group can post, edit, or delete any information. Where might this communication technology be most useful in organizations? Answer: This is a useful discussion question – the answer is not explicitly in the textbook – which encourages students to think actively about the functions of different communication media (specifically, wikis). Students should mention that wikis refine and add on evolving information, so they work very well to develop repositories of knowledge. in this respect, Wikipedia is well-suited as a wiki, and organizations would have intranet wikipedias where employees add in new knowledge for others to discover. On a smaller scale, wikis may be ideal for teams to prepare project reports. Even where team members are responsible for different sections of the report, they have an opportunity to read over and edit the content of other members. this process potentially improves consistency and integration of the report. This form of electronic communication has yet to be fully exploited, so it is likely students will have a range of answers to this question. The creativity and innovations expressed by students should be encouraged and expanded upon. It should be kept in mind the wikis referred to in the question are limited to members of selected groups. These are not the public domain type wikis in which anyone can participate. Therefore, some internal controls can be applied. Limited internal wikis could be useful when group members are dispersed geographically. If participants reside in different time zones, the asynchronous aspect would be of benefit. Wikis combine the advantages of electronic chat lines with the asynchronous advantage of email. It would also be possible for managers to have parallel yet heterogeneous groups working on the same question or problem using two different wikis. The ideas generate by each could then be synthesized by the manager. Instructors may want to reverse this question at some point in the discussion, by asking where wikis would be ineffective as a communication medium. A wiki is a collaborative communication channel, so it is less relevant or useful where most information originates from one person (although a wiki format would allow others to refine even the work of that person, even if only in terms of grammar or organizing the logical flow of information). Wikis are also difficult where employees hoard information (e.g. competition) or otherwise lack trust in each other. 5. Under what conditions, if any, do you think it is appropriate to use e-mail to notify an employee that he or she has been laid off or fired? Why is e-mail usually considered an inappropriate channel to convey this information? Answer: This is an excellent thinking question because the discussion can go in a variety of directions. With respect to the first part of the question, expect students to connect the communication medium with ethical values and sensitivity to saving face. Students might also mention situations where many people are being laid off, whereby email is more efficient. But of course this raises the concern that the efficiency of e-mail represents its callousness for such personal and sensitive matters. Students should also recall the problems with e-mail described in this chapter. E-mail is subject to flaming – the receiver may reply harshly via e-mail to the lay off notice whereas a face-to-face meeting may be more civil. E-mail lacks emotion, so it is difficult for the sender to convey his or her sadness at having to announce the layoff. E-mail is asynchronous, so the sender does not receive instant feedback from the person being laid off. This can be a problem because the sender cannot change the style of message quickly enough to avoid conflict or confusion. Using email to notify an employee of a layoff or termination is generally considered inappropriate because it lacks the personal touch and empathy needed for such sensitive communication. It can be perceived as impersonal and insensitive. However, email might be used in cases where immediate, written documentation is necessary, and a face-to-face meeting is not feasible due to logistical constraints. Even then, a follow-up conversation should ideally occur to provide support and discuss next steps. 6. Suppose that you are part of a virtual team and must persuade other team members on an important matter (such as switching suppliers or altering the project deadline). Assuming that you cannot visit these people in person, what can you do to maximize your persuasiveness? Answer: The answer to this question relates to the topic of media richness, because persuasion depends on higher media rich communication media. The textbook notes that spoken communication, particularly face-to-face interaction, is more persuasive than e-mails, web sites, and other forms of written communication. If people cannot interact in person, they should attempt face-to-face through video conferencing. Audio conferences have somewhat lower media richness again, but may be persuasive to the extent that voice intonation communication emotionality and more complex information. Students might note that logical explanations assist persuasion, so an online video conference might be followed by written communication. To maximize persuasiveness in a virtual team setting: 1. Use Clear and Concise Communication: Present your arguments clearly and support them with data and evidence. 2. Leverage Visuals: Utilize charts, graphs, and slides to make your case more compelling and easier to understand. 3. Engage in Active Listening: Acknowledge and address the concerns of team members to build trust and rapport. 4. Be Responsive and Available: Ensure you are readily available for questions and discussions to demonstrate commitment and transparency. 5. Use Video Conferencing: If possible, use video calls to add a personal touch and enhance engagement. 7. Explain why men and women are sometimes frustrated with each other’s communication behaviors. Answer: Although women also engage in report talk, they tend to communicate to build or maintain social bonds (Rapport talk). For this reason, they are less likely to give advice, will use indirect questions. Women are more willing than men to apologize. Finally, women are more sensitive than men to nonverbal cues in face-to-face meetings. The result is that women get frustrated with men because they receive impersonal and status-based advice from men when they are trying to form rapport. Men get frustrated because they can’t understand why women don’t appreciate their advice. 8. In your opinion, has the introduction of e-mail and other information technologies increased or decreased the amount of information flowing through the corporate grapevine? Explain your answer. Answer: This is purely a discussion question, but students should be able to bring out logical foundations for their arguments. The textbook points out that e-mail and other information technologies have changed the nature of grapevine communication such that social networks have expanded as employees communicate with each other around the globe, not just around the next cubicle. Public web sites have become virtual water coolers by posting anonymous comments about specific companies for all to view. This technology extends gossip to anyone, not just employees connected to social networks. These changes do not directly mean that the amount of information flowing through the corporate grapevine has increased. However, a couple of arguments suggest that grapevine communication has increased. First, information technologies make it easier to communicate, as well as easier to communicate with more people at a larger distance. Logically, this suggests that there is less of an investment barrier to engage in the grapevine. Second, information technologies such as e-mail tend to be fairly lean media, whereas the grapevine tends to relate to unique and sometime complex events. As such, it requires more ongoing communication to clarify messages and correct misinterpreted messages. Third, by sending grapevine messages to more people, the total volume of communication might increase as more people receive the information and either pass the information onward or contact the sender for more clarity or provide personal opinion. The introduction of email and other information technologies has generally increased the amount of information flowing through the corporate grapevine. These tools facilitate faster and more widespread communication, allowing information to spread quickly across departments and organizations. While this can enhance transparency and speed, it also means that rumors and unofficial information can circulate more readily, sometimes leading to misinformation and confusion. CASE STUDY: COMMUNICATING WITH THE MILLENNIALS Case Synopsis This case describes the apparent differences in how Millennials (people born between 1980 and 1995) communicate compared with others, particularly baby boomers. The case particularly identifies how younger employees communicate more through computer-mediated technology, as well as the problems this can create. The case also describes how corporate leaders at BT (British Telecom) are attempting to communicate more effectively with Millennials. Suggested Answers to Case Questions 1. Take a poll of your class (at least, the Gen-X and Gen-Y members). At school or work, how many regularly (e.g., daily or every few days) send or receive information (not entertainment) using (a) e-mail, (b) instant messages or Twitter tweets, (c) cell phone text messages, (d) reading/ writing blogs, (e) visiting/authoring social media sites (e.g., Facebook, Instagram), (f) watching/creating online videos (e.g., YouTube)? Answer: My experience is that students thoroughly enjoy polls on topical issues, such as the use of emerging technologies. The larger the class, the more interested students want to hear the results. The poll can occur through a show of hands in class, but this question is very well suited to “clicker” technology. If your class has mandatory online activities between classes, consider taking a poll online and posting the results in class. Along with these poll results, consider asking students which communication channels are gaining and losing popularity. For example, most students will likely say that Twitter and YouTube videos are gaining popularity, whereas blogs are losing losing popularity. 2. Even within this generation, there are different preferences for communication media. After conducting the poll above, ask students who don’t regularly use one or more of these methods why they don’t like that particular communication medium. Ask those who very often use these sources to give their point of view. Answer: This question offers an excellent opportunity to develop a list of contingencies of communication, including media richness, social acceptance, and amount of effort required. For example, few students in most classes would have posted YouTube videos because it takes time to develop a good quality video and because there may be few situations where that effort is justified. A important part of this question is how often students receive rather than send information through these channels. For example, only a few people write blogs, yet many people read them. This is an opportunity to ask the “few” who write blogs or post YouTube videos what motivates them to do so. 3. Companies have been slow and reluctant to adopt new forms of communication, such as social network sites, IM, and online videos. If you were a senior manager, how would you introduce these communication technologies in the workplace to share information and knowledge more effectively? Answer: This is a good discussion question on strategic communication, in particular how to introduce and reinforce the use of new forms of communication. One key issue is when, where, and who to use the communication channel. As the chapter describes, many companies have struggled to find the right balance of individual freedom to use a communication medium, such as blogs and social networks. This case also identifies the challenges of text messaging in organizations. As a senior manager, I would introduce new communication technologies by: 1. Assessing Needs: Identify specific communication challenges and how these tools can address them. 2. Pilot Programs: Start with small-scale trials to demonstrate the benefits and gather feedback. 3. Training: Provide comprehensive training to ensure employees are comfortable using the new tools. 4. Integration: Gradually integrate these tools into existing workflows to ensure smooth adoption. 5. Support: Offer ongoing support and address concerns to facilitate a positive transition. TEAM EXERCISE: ACTIVE LISTENING EXERCISE These teaching notes were prepared by the author of this exercise, Mary Gander, Winona State University Purpose This exercise is designed to help students to understand the dynamics of active listening in conversations and to develop active listening skills. Materials None Instructions For each of the four vignettes presented in this exercise, student teams (or students working individually) will compose three statements that demonstrate active listening. Specifically, one statement will show empathy for the situation; the second asks for clarification and detail in a nonjudgmental way; the third statement will provide nonevaluative feedback to the speaker. Here are details about each of these three types of responses: Showing empathy – Acknowledge feelings. Sometimes it sounds like the speaker wants you to agree with him/her but, in reality, they mainly want you to understand how they feel. “Acknowledging feelings” involves taking in their statements, but looking at the “whole message” including body language, tone of voice, and level of arousal, and trying to determine what emotion they are conveying. Then you let them know that you realize they are feeling that emotion by just acknowledging it in a sentence. Asking for clarification and detail while withholding your judgment and own opinions. This conveys that you are making a good effort to understand and not just trying to push your opinions onto them. To formulate a relevant question in asking for more clarification, you will have to listen carefully to what they say. Frame your question as someone trying to understand in more detail, often asking for a specific example is useful. This also helps the speaker to evaluate his/her own opinions and perspective. Providing non-evaluative feedback – feeding back the message you heard. This will allow the speaker to determine if he/she really got the message across to you and help prevent troublesome miscommunication. It will also help the speaker become more aware of how he/she is coming across to another person (self-evaluation). Just think about what the speaker is conveying and paraphrase it in your own words, and say it back to the speaker (without judging the correctness or merit of what they said), asking him/her if that is what they meant. After teams (or individual students) have prepared the three statements for each vignette, the instructor will ask them to present their statements and explain how these statements satisfy the active listening criteria. Comments to Instructors This exercise is beneficial after a lecture/presentation on the purposes and method of Active Listening as an effective communication and conflict management tool in the work place. During debriefing, teams may be asked to volunteer their responses, and the class, as a whole, can discuss the sample responses – if they fit the requirements or not, and why. If the response is not fitting, the class may be asked to suggest what might be a more fitting response, and why One suggestion is to have students earn up to 12 points for completing the exercise in class (one point per response). This motivates them to concentrate on it more and do a more serious job on it. Also, it is a good mechanism for checking attendance in class that day. Less than 12 points may be given to teams who obviously do not put much effort into the exercise, or obviously do not understand some of the principles involved. If many students have difficulty with the exercise, the instructor may consider the possibility they need to review the concepts and principles of Active Listening again. This exercise can be followed with an out-of-class assignment requiring students to try Active Listening skills in an actual situation in their lives and write up a brief description of the interaction with another person (or persons) and what happened. This strategy of (1) teaching the method, (2) practicing the skills, and (3) applying the method in one’s life, tends to be quite effective for most students. Vignettes with Examples of Effective Answers Vignette #1 A colleague stops by your desk and says, “I am tired of the lack of leadership around here. The boss is so wishy washy, he can’t get tough with some of the slackers around here. They just keep milking the company, living off the rest of us. Why doesn’t management do something about these guys? And YOU are always so supportive of the boss; he’s not as good as you make him out to be.” (1) Showing Empathy: ‣ “You sound kind of frustrated.” ‣ “It sounds like you are feeling kind of taken advantage of” (2) Asking for clarification: ‣ “Could you help me understand better what you mean by the term ‘slackers’?” ‣ “Can you give me an example of when I was too supportive of the Boss?” (3) Providing nonevaluative feedback: ‣ “You think there are a lot of employees around here who are not doing their share of the work.” ‣ “You think I am being too supportive of the boss.” Vignette #2 Your co-worker stops by your cubicle, her voice and body language show stress, frustration, and even some fear. You know she has been working hard and has a strong need to get her work done on time and done well. You are trying to concentrate on some work and have had a number of interruptions already. She just abruptly interrupts you and says, “This project is turning out to be a mess, why can’t the other three people on my team quit fighting each other?” (1) Showing Empathy: ‣ “You seem to be under a lot of stress today.” ‣ “The lack of agreement on your team is very frustrating.” (2) Asking for clarification: ‣ “Specifically, what seems to be going wrong with the project?” ‣ “Specifically, what is it your team members disagree about?” (3) Providing nonevaluative feedback: ‣ “You think the project you are working on is going to be a failure.” ‣ “The people on your team are not handling their differences of opinion very productively, is that right?” Vignette #3 One of your subordinates is working on an important project. He is an engineer who has good technical skills and knowledge and was selected for the project team because of that. He stops by your office and appears to be in quite agitated, his voice is loud and strained and his face has a look of bewilderment. He says, “I’m supposed to be working with four other people from four other departments on this new project, but they never listen to my ideas and seem to hardly know I’m at the meeting!” (1) Showing Empathy: ‣ “You feel un-listened to and unappreciated.” ‣ “You seem frustrated with not being able to get your ideas communicated.” (2) Asking for clarification: ‣ “Could you briefly explain a situation in which they wouldn’t listen?” ‣ “How do you usually go about communicating your ideas at a meeting?” (3) Providing nonevaluative feedback: ‣ “The four people from different departments, on your project team, don’t seem to be listening to your ideas.” ‣ “Do you mean to say that cross functional communication is a challenging aspect of your project?” Vignette #4 Your subordinate comes into your office in a state of agitation, and asks if she can talk to you. She is polite and sits down. She seems calm and does not have an angry look on her face. However, she says, “It seems like you consistently make up lousy schedules, you are unfair and unrealistic in the kinds of assignments you give certain people, me included. Everyone else is so intimidated they don’t complain but I think you need to know that this isn’t right and it’s got to change.” (1) Showing Empathy: ‣ “You are concerned about the fairness and appropriateness of assignments given certain people.” ‣ “You feel the need to speak up for other employees who may be frightened to speak up.” (2) Asking for clarification: ‣ “Could you help me understand by giving me a couple of specific examples of assignments that were given unfairly or unrealistically?” ‣ “Help me understand, more specifically, how I might be acting that makes employees feel intimidated.” (3) Providing nonevaluative feedback: ‣ “You believe a lot of employees are intimidated by me.” ‣ “You think the schedules I make up are consistently unfair and unrealistic.” SELF-ASSESSMENT: ARE YOU AN ACTIVE LISTENER? Purpose This self-assessment is designed to help students estimate their strengths and weaknesses on various dimensions of active listening Instructions Students are asked to think back to face-to-face conversations they have had with a co-worker or client in the office, hallway, factory floor, or other setting. Using the scale, they should indicate the extent that each item describes their behavior during those conversations. They are asked to answer each item as truthfully as possible so that they get an accurate estimate of where their active listening skills need improvement. Feedback for the Active Listening Skills Inventory The textbook describes three main dimensions of active listening: sensing, evaluating, and responding. Together, these three dimensions represent the total active listening score. Sensing Sensing is the process of receiving signals from the sender and paying attention to them. Active listeners improve sensing in three ways. They postpone evaluation by not forming an opinion until the speaker has finished, avoid interrupting the speaker’s conversation, and remain motivated to listen to the speaker. Evaluating This dimension of active listening includes understanding the message meaning, evaluating the message, and remembering the message. To improve their evaluation of the conversation, active listeners empathize with the speaker – they try to understand and be sensitive to the speaker’s feelings, thoughts, and situation. Evaluation also improves by organizing the speaker’s ideas during the communication episode. Responding Responding, the third dimension of active listening, is feedback to the sender, which motivates and directs the speaker’s communication. Active listeners show interest through nonverbal cues (eye contact, nodding, symbiotic facial expression) and by sending back channel signals (e.g. “I see”). They also clarify the message, such as by summarizing or rephrasing the speaker’s ideas at appropriate breaks (“So you’re saying that . . . ?”). Scores on the three Active Listening dimensions range from 4 to 20. The overall score ranges from 12 to 60. Norms vary from one group to the next. The following table shows norms from a sample of 100 MBA students in two countries (Australia and Singapore). For example, the top 10 percentile for sensing is 17, indicating that 10 percent of people score 17 or above and 90 percent score below 17 on this dimension. Keep in mind that these scores represent self- perceptions. Evaluations from others (such as through 360-degree feedback) may provide a more accurate estimate of your active listening on one or more dimensions, particularly the responding dimension which is visible to others. Active Listening Norms Percentile (% with scores at or below this number) Sensing Score Evaluating Score Responding Score Total Score Average Score 14.5 14.4 16.7 45.6 Top 10 percentile 17 17 19 53 Top 25th percentile 15 16 18 48 Median (50th percentile) 15 14 17 45 Bottom 25th percentile 13 13 16 43 Bottom 10 percentile 11 12 14 39 4 10. Power and Influence in the Workplace SOLUTIONS TO CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS 1. What role does countervailing power play in the power relationship? Give an example of one of your own encounters with countervailing power at school or work. Answer: Countervailing power is the power that the dependent person or group has over the more powerful party in the relationship. This power is weaker than the other party’s, but it is strong enough to keep the more powerful party in the relationship. For example, although your boss probably has the greater power in the work relationship, you have countervailing power by providing skills and knowledge that the company (and your boss) needs. This countervailing power is sufficient to keep you employed. At school, instructors typically (although not always) have more power over students. Students have countervailing power, however, in several ways. First, students are customers, and without them, instructors wouldn’t have work. Second, teacher ratings that students provide influence the instructor’s self-esteem and often salary. Third, student behavior influences the instructor’s ability to present knowledge in an effective way. If students are disruptive, the instructor cannot accomplish his or her goal. 2. Until recently, a mining company’s data resided in the department that was responsible for that information. Property data were on the computers in land administration, hydrocarbon data were in the well administration group, maps were found in the map department, and so on. The executive team concluded that this arrangement was dysfunctional, so the CEO announced that all information would be placed on a central server system so it is widely accessible. If someone needs a color map, for example, he or she can retrieve it from the central server without going through the map department. Rather than welcome the change, employees in several departments complained, offering several arguments why other groups should not have direct access to their data files. Some departments tried to opt out of the centralized server system. Using the model of sources and contingencies of power, explain why some groups opposed the central server model of data access. Answer: This incident actually occurred in a resources company and was a major challenge for those implementing the change. Students should answer this question by breaking it down into the power sources and contingencies. The main source of power at issue here is legitimate power and, in particular, control over information control. Each group had unilateral control (monopoly) over the distribution of the knowledge within their department (e.g. maps in the map department). Students should also recognize that employees elsewhere have legitimate power to request that information, and the department probably has an obligation to fulfill that request. However, these departments still experience power through the requesting process. Furthermore, if someone asks in an inconsiderate way, the department might fulfill the request more slowly or incompletely. Some students might also suggest that the old system generated more expert power. Because the information was housed in one group, they would likely have more detailed knowledge of that resource. Equally important as the sources of power are the contingencies of power in this incident. One key contingency is nonsubstitutability. Under the old system, each department had a monopoly over the resource and possibly gained special knowledge on how to access that resource. As such, they were almost nonsubstitutable. Under a central server system, on the other hand, information is easily ands quickly accessible by employees elsewhere, so the department staff lack control over the resource and therefore are more substitutable. Students would also point of centrality as a key factor. Under the old system, department staff affected others, whereas they likely have less immediate affect or on fewer employees when those people can retrieve the information without department assistance. Visibility might also play a role here because bypassing a department means they are less connected to the data and therefore less visible. Some students might also argue that discretion is relevant her,e such as that the department staff previously had discretion about whether, how, and when to release information. However, discretion is a relatively minor issue because the department ultimately had an obligation to distribute the knowledge. 3. You have just been hired as a brand manager of toothpaste for a large consumer products company. Your job mainly involves encouraging the advertising and production groups to promote and manufacture your product more effectively. These departments aren’t under your direct authority, though company procedures indicate that they must complete certain tasks requested by brand managers. Describe the sources of power you can use to ensure that the production and advertising departments will help you make and sell toothpaste more effectively. Answer: As brand manager, you might be able to use most sources of power, depending on the circumstances. Here are some possible explanations. Legitimate Power. Although you do not have direct authority, you do have some legitimate power through the rules and procedures saying that the advertising and production groups must work with you to sell soda biscuits more effectively. If they refuse to cooperate, you have the legitimate right to seek redress from higher authorities. Reward Power. You probably don’t have direct control over merit increases or other financial rewards for the advertising and production people, but you do have reward power by using praise. Moreover, you might indirectly have reward power by making favorable comments about certain employees to more senior line managers who make financial reward decisions for advertising and production staff members. Coercive Power. You can make life difficult for advertising and production people by constantly nagging them for the promised work, or by criticizing their work. Indirectly, you can report to senior management about the poor performance of some people, which may affect their employment security. Although these forms of coercive power are available, you should be aware that these actions carry risks such as lack of future cooperation from advertising and production people. Expert Power. You have just been hired, so it is unlikely that the advertising or production people believe that you have much expertise. You might develop this source of power in the long term, however, by learning about effective brand management practices and applying impression management tactics to shape their opinion of your expertise. For example, you might gain expert power more quickly by being seen with someone whose expertise is respected. Referent Power. As a recent hire, it is unlikely that you currently have much, if any, of this power base over advertising and production employees. Moreover, given your different background, it is difficult to develop referent power with these groups. However, you might find common experiences (schools attended, hobbies) with some people in those departments, or you might develop common experiences by frequently interacting and networking with these people. 4. How does social networking increase a person’s power? What social networking strategies could you initiate now to potentially enhance your future career success? Answer: Social networking increases an individual’s power in three ways: Information access. You receive more valued information from others because there is trust among networkers to share information. Networks increase the volume as well as the speed of information received. Visibility. Networks makes you more salient to key decision makers. Your skills come to mind more quickly among network members than if you are not within the network. This visibility increases your potential power because it is a contingency of power. Referent power. Other network members identify more with you or at least have more respect and trust in you, so they are more motivated to agree to your wishes. As a student, you could use networking now to enhance your future career success. Students can cultivate social relationships with others who may be in a position to use their skills in the future. For example, by leading a Marketing club in your faculty that invites Marketing professionals to serve as guest speakers you would be gaining valuable contacts that may be able to hire you in the future. Students may also network with faculty and staff in the effort to ensure their skills and talents are recognized. In this way, students may be better positioned to receive valuable personal references that may assist with future job search efforts. Students may also successfully develop and maintain valuable contacts with other students. This network may benefit the individual by providing a source of potential employers and organizational contacts throughout the individual’s career. 5. List the eight influence tactics described in this chapter in terms of how they are used by students to influence their college instructors. Which influence tactic is applied most often? Which is applied least often, in your opinion? To what extent is each influence tactic considered legitimate behavior or organizational politics? Answer: This question presupposes that students do and can influence instructors. Here are some of the ideas and examples that tend to arise with this question, based on the eight types of influence tactics discussed in the chapter: Silent Authority. This is probably the weakest form of influence. One example, however, would occur where a student waits outside an instructor’s office to meet the instructor. If the instructor is meeting with someone else or is on the telephone, he/she probably feels a degree of recognition of obligation to meet the waiting student as soon as possible. For example, the instructor might speed up to finish an otherwise leisurely telephone conversation. Assertiveness. Although a risky strategy, some students assert their concerns and demands for fair treatment after receiving a poor grade. They might urge the instructor to review the paper more carefully, remind the instructor of certain rules or criteria against which the paper should have been judged, and so forth. Exchange. Students often negotiate with instructors, with varying degrees of success. For example, a student might agree to be the first to give a presentation to class if he/she can submit a paper a few days later than the due date. Coalition formation. This strategy occurs when the instructor is about to do (or has already done) something that opposes the interests of some students. For example, one group of students approached the first author several years ago because they were fourth year students yet had received lower grades on a mid-term than many second year students who happened to be attending the same class. The idea was that if four people feel the same inequity, it must be a serious matter. Upward appeal. Upward appeal isn’t so much about appealing one’s grade in a normal appeal process (although it could fall into this category). Rather, this strategy refers to the threat of approaching higher authority, or implying that higher authority already agrees with the student. One example could occur when a student says he casually mentioned his/her concern to the Associate Dean, who generally agreed that the instructor’s actions were unacceptable. Another example could occur where students remind the instructor of certain philosophical standards at the college which would encourage the instructor to take one action rather than another action. A third example could occur where an upset student suggests that he/she and the instructor take the disagreement to someone higher in the organization to get their opinion. Ingratiation/Impression management. There are so many forms of this strategy that we cannot list them all here. One example of ingratiation is simple brown-nosing – “Gee, professor, it’s such a privilege to take this class with you. I waited until the semester you are teaching!” More subtle impression management occurs when a student makes it quite clear he/she has submitted reports on time, whereas many others are late. Another student might coincidentally carry a copy of the instructor’s latest book or most recent journal article around where the instructor happens to notice that the student has a copy of it. Persuasion. Presumably, this is a common strategy used by students. They might point out logical reasons why they should be assigned to a different project team or should have an assignment handed in late without penalty, for example. Information control. Although this would be a relatively weak or limited strategy for students, it is possible in some circumstances. For example, a student might claim that he/she did most of the work on a project where other team members have not had an opportunity to correct the instructor. 6. Consider a situation in which there is a single female member on a team of six people, and she is generally excluded from informal gatherings of the team. What kind of influence tactics can she use to address this situation? Answer: Social networks generate social capital, the goodwill and resulting resources shared among members in a social network. A female team member in a situation as above is likely to miss opportunities and favors from team members for both expressive and instrumental purposes and it turns out to be a limitation. Perhaps it may e useful for her to understand the cultural situation first because socializing with male colleagues is in itself received very differently across cultures. She needs to approach the leader of the team to update her/him of the situation and to request for a mechanism wherein all work-related information is shared with her. She will need to be very watchful and diplomatic in all the formal meetings. 7. In the mid-1990s, the CEO of Apple Computer invited the late Steve Jobs (who was not associated with the company at the time) to serve as a special adviser and raise morale among Apple employees and customers. While doing so, Jobs spent more time advising the CEO on how to cut costs, redraw the organization chart, and hire new people. Before long, most of the top people at Apple were Jobs’ colleagues, who began to systematically evaluate and weed out teams of Apple employees. While publicly supporting Apple’s CEO, Jobs privately criticized him and, in a show of nonconfidence, sold the 1.5 million shares of Apple stock he had received. This action caught the attention of Apple’s board of directors, who soon after decided to replace the CEO with Steve Jobs. The CEO claimed Jobs was a conniving back-stabber who used political tactics to get his way. Others suggest that Apple would be out of business today if he hadn’t taken over the company. In your opinion, were Steve Jobs’ actions examples of organizational politics? Justify your answer. Answer: This question refers to events in 1997 when Apple CEO Gil Amelio bought Next computers from Steve Jobs and invited Jobs to help build morale among employees. (Jobs co-founded Apple in the 1970s but was ousted in the 1980s). Within a year, Jobs had convinced Apple’s board to oust Amelio and install Jobs as an interim CEO. (Jobs didn’t need the position because he was already CEO of Pixar Animation Studios.) The answer to this question is definitely open for debate. The key point here is that organizational politics is in the eye of the beholder. Therefore, some students will agree with Amelio’s opinion of Jobs while others will disagree. What is important is how students justify their answers based on their knowledge of material they learned in the chapter. Some influence tactics are obviously recognized as political tactics by almost everyone. However, other influence activities may be viewed as political (as Amelio specifically accused Steve Jobs.) On the one hand, Jobs’s tactics were not as above-board as one might want. He did not explicitly tell Amelio that he didn’t trust his leadership to save Apple (which was in trouble at the time due to previous poor leadership). On the other hand, by the time Steve Jobs passed away in 2011, he was regarded as one of the greatest entrepreneurs and leaders in business. He turned Apple around and saved the company from almost certain demise. 8. This book frequently emphasizes that successful companies engage in organizational learning. How do political tactics interfere with organizational learning objectives? Answer: Selectively distributing information is one tactic that directly interferes with knowledge management. This includes such actions as: (a) withholding damaging information or making others look good; (b) avoiding the need to reveal information; (c) burying or obscuring damaging information; and (d) bringing in outside ‘experts’ to tip the scales toward your preference. Another political tactic that harms knowledge management is controlling information channels. This includes discouraging people from directly communicating with each other, as well as altering agendas so that certain information has little opportunity for open discussion. CASE STUDY: RESONUS CORPORATION By Steven L. McShane, based on an earlier case written by John A. Seeger Case Synopsis Frank Choy recently joined Resonus Corporation, a hearing aid designer and manufacturer, as director of engineering. Over the first eight months, he and has experienced several problems of coordination and cooperation with other work units and individuals. In particular, CEO Bill Hunt supports Doc Kalandry’s (the Research Director) request for last minute technology changes to the product in development. These delays cause Choy’s engineering services group to increase their costs and ultimately fail to achieve their time deadline for completing the engineering specifications for this product. Suggested Answers to Case Questions 1. What sources and contingencies of power existed among the executives and departments at Resonus? Answer: Students can analyze this case by examining the power dynamics among the key players, particularly Doc and Choy. The key issue here is why Choy and his team are unable to fulfill their work obligations of completing the engineering specification on time. Clearly, Doc Kalandry wields tremendous power, so his wishes are usually fulfilled, Doc’s power is through expert power and referent power. Hunt (and others) recognize Doc as an authority on the product’s technology. Furthermore, Hunt claims this expertise is a key factor in the company’s success. Doc also seems to have referent power, at least among some staff. His over-the-top enthusiasm and optimism is compelling. Doc also seems to have referent power over Hunt because of Hunt’s apparent identification with Doc’s department, where Hunt held his first job at Resonus. Doc also has all four contingencies of power in his favor. Hunt considers Doc unique and irreplaceable (nonsubstitutable). Doc has considerable discretion because Hunt trusts his actions and allows him to ignore product development deadlines and other rules/procedures. Doc’s visibility is strong, due to his direct informal reporting relationship with the CEO and his quirky style (personal brand). Doc and his team also have considerable centrality. when they make changes and cause delays, Choy and other are directly and immediately affected. Similarly, if their product development efforts are poor, the company suffers in the marketplace. In contrast, Choy and his engineering services team have limited power. He is new to the organization, so has no referent power. He would have expertise to secure his senior position at Resonus, but this expertise isn’t mentioned by Hunt or in the case. the case also refers to perceptions that Choy’s team lack expertise (“We shouldn’t have to prove our ability all the time, but we spend as much time defending ourselves as we do getting the job done.”) The organizational chart indicates that Doc reports to Choy, but this legitimate power does not exist in practice because of the informal reporting relationship from Doc to CEO Hunt. Regarding contingencies of power, Choy and his team have centrality – their work affects production, sales, and others. However, this centrality does not extend to Doc or his team (i.e. they are unaffected by Choy’s work). But Choy seems to have limited discretion. He can’t dictate deadlines to Doc, his team needs to receive and respond to whatever doc’s team provides, and they can’t act without the output from Doc’s team. Students might note that Choy has visibility. However, Choy’s visibility is not about his sources of power. rather, he and his team have been visible for failing to achieve the set deadlines. This is not the “visibility” of one’s power referred to in the power model. Overall, Doc has considerably more power than does Choy, so Doc’s actions take priority and Choy’s team is unable to achieve their work objectives. 2. What influence tactics were evident in this case study? Would you define any of these influence activities as organizational politics? Why or why not? Answer: The information about influence tactics in this case is more limited. Choy does not take any steps to influence others. On the contrary, he holds back, fearing that he might end up in the same boat has the previous two directors. Doc relies on persuasion, silent authority (his expertise), and possibly impression management to influence Hunt. Hunt relies mainly on silent authority, such as urging others to be more cooperative. But he also relied on assertiveness when firing the previous director of engineering. The sales director also seemed to rely on assertiveness, such as when he became furious with Choy. 3. Suppose you are a consultant invited to propose a solution to the problems facing this organization’s product delays. What would you recommend, particularly regarding power dynamics among the executives and departments? Answer: Almost every student first recommends that Doc should report to Choy and not to Hunt. In other words, Hunt should enforce the organizational chart (in which Doc is a direct report to Choy, not to Hunt). This is a valuable suggestion for debate, but it might not solve the underlying power dynamics problems. If Doc was required to report only to Choy, Doc might quit if Choy demanded strict time schedules. More likely, Hunt would side with Doc if the conflict became manifest (Doc might report to Choy, but Hunt would logically be the final arbitrator when the two disagree.) Alternatively, knowing Hunt’s desire for innovation at any cost and for his admiration of Doc (i.e. Doc’s referent power over Hunt), Choy might also give in to Doc’s poor time management of product development. Finally, Choy might have limited capacity to reject Doc’s requests for lastminute changes because Doc’s group seems to have more perceived expertise than does Choy or his engineering services group. Thus, public opinion would quickly shift away from Choy if he used his legitimate authority over Doc. A more likely solution for Choy here is a two stage strategy. First, Choy should use (initially subtle) persuasion tactics on Hunt regarding the value of production deadlines. Choy might show the costs of late product completion schedules, or he might refer to the collapse of other companies because they consistently released products that were late and flawed due to last-minute changes. Choy might be able to have Hunt speak with CEOs of other firms that have discovered the value of production schedule deadlines ands the false benefits (or high risks) of making last-minute changes. Choy might also find subtle ways to let Hunt and others know about Choy’s expertise, which would give him more power and influence, and would improve his persuasiveness. If the first stage (persuasion approach) is unsuccessful, Choy might have to apply the second stage, which is to be more assertive in his influence and less avoidance-oriented in his conflict handling style. Choy needs to assert the importance of product development deadlines while using a problem-solving style to resolve the requirement of these deadlines with Doc’s need to add new technology at the last minute. Quite likely, the interests are perfectly opposing, so Choy would revert to a more forceful style. Compromise might not work because Doc seems to ignore any middle ground options. Additional Case Question on Conflict Resonus Corporation is also an excellent case for discussion of the sources of conflict as well as ineffective conflict handling tactics. Conflict is discussed in the next chapter, so this additional question should be assigned only when the conflict topic has been covered. 4. Analyze this case in terms of the sources of conflict and conflict handling styles. Your answer should also briefly identify incidents of manifest conflict. Answer: There is clear evidence of conflict in this case. Choy is experiencing conflict with Doc Kalandry and with CEO Bill Hunt, even though the conflict is not manifest and Doc and hunt might not be aware of this conflict. Choy perceives that Doc’s actions are interfering with the engineering services’ ability to perform their job, such as completing engineering specification on time. Hunt is also a partner in this conflict because of his support for Doc’s requests. Most structural sources of this conflict are at work here: • Incompatible goals – Doc and Hunt want to push new technology into the product, whereas Choy and his department want to get the engineering specifications ready on time. As Doc adds more technological changes to the product, Choy’s group is less able to achieve their goals. • Differentiation – Doc and Hunt seem to value innovation and have low priority for timeliness or predictable production scheduling. • Interdependence – Choy’s team is dependent on Doc to prepare the final product design work. This seems to be sequential interdependence because the work is passed from Doc’s group to Choy’s group, not back and forth. • Scarce resources – The main scarcity here is time. Doc is using up time that Choy’s team needs to get the specifications completed for production. • Ambiguous rules – Although the company has some clear procedures for handover of work, these structural rules and processes are not followed. Hunt allows Doc to ignore the product development schedule. Hunt also discourages bureaucracy (rules and procedures), preferring informal relationships among the managers (i.e. give and take), which makes the rules and regulations less clear. • Communication – Less central to this case, but some communication problems exist in that managers are not forming a mutual understanding of their differences. for instance, Choy wants to raise his concerns to Hunt (and possibly to others), but does not do so. In addition to these structural sources of conflict, the case illustrates the problem of the avoiding style of conflict. the avoiding style is clearly emphasized by CEO Bill Hunt (“I’m sure we can resolve these differences if we just learn to get along better” and “I spent too much time smoothing out arguments”). The problem with Hunt pushing this style is that the underlying causes of the conflict (see the conflict sources above) are not addressed, which results in frustration, stress, and late deadlines. TEAM EXERCISE: DECIPHERING THE NETWORK Purpose This exercise is designed to help students interpret social network maps, including their implications for organizational effectiveness. Materials The instructor will distribute the three social network diagrams to each student. These student handouts are provided over the three pages following these instructor notes. Ideally, print these diagrams in color. Instructions (Smaller Classes) The instructor will organize students into teams (typically four to seven people, depending on class size). Teams will examine each social network diagram to answer the following questions: 1. What aspects of this diagram suggest that the network is not operating as effectively as possible? Answer: To determine if a network is operating effectively, teams should consider the following aspects in the social network diagrams: 1. Centralization: Check if the network is highly centralized, with most communication flowing through a few key individuals. This can indicate bottlenecks and over-reliance on certain members. 2. Isolated Nodes: Look for individuals who are isolated or have minimal connections. This could suggest poor integration or lack of engagement. 3. Clustering: Identify any clusters or subgroups that may indicate fragmentation within the network. Effective networks should have balanced connections and minimal isolation between groups. 4. Redundancy: Assess if there is sufficient redundancy, where multiple connections exist between nodes. Lack of redundancy can make the network vulnerable to disruptions. 5. Communication Flow: Examine if information flows smoothly and reaches all relevant members. Disruptions or inefficiencies in information flow can hinder effectiveness. 2. Which people in this network seem to be most powerful? Least powerful? What information or features of the diagram lead you to this conclusion? Answer: To determine the most and least powerful individuals in a social network diagram, teams should look for the following features: 1. Centrality: Identify individuals who are central to the network, meaning they have a high number of direct connections or act as hubs between different parts of the network. These individuals are often the most powerful because they have more influence and access to information. 2. In-Degree and Out-Degree: Examine the number of incoming (in-degree) and outgoing (out-degree) connections each person has. Those with high in-degrees are often seen as influential or important, while those with high out-degrees can be seen as powerful in spreading information. 3. Bridges and Gatekeepers: Look for individuals who connect different clusters or subgroups. These people act as bridges or gatekeepers, holding significant power due to their role in facilitating communication across the network. 4. Isolated Nodes: Note individuals with few or no connections. They are likely to be the least powerful because they have limited influence and access to information. By analyzing these aspects, teams can assess who holds the most and least power within the network. 3. If you were responsible for this group of people, how would you change this situation to improve their effectiveness? Answer: To improve the effectiveness of the network, consider the following actions: 1. Enhance Connectivity: Facilitate connections between isolated individuals and different clusters to ensure better integration and communication flow. 2. Empower Key Nodes: Leverage the influence of central or powerful individuals to disseminate information and drive initiatives. Provide them with additional resources and support to maximize their impact. 3. Encourage Collaboration: Foster collaboration and knowledge-sharing across the network. Implement regular team meetings or collaborative platforms to improve engagement and information exchange. 4. Develop Skills: Offer training or development opportunities to less connected or less powerful individuals to enhance their skills and increase their contributions to the network. 5. Balance Network Load: Distribute responsibilities more evenly to avoid over-reliance on a few individuals. This can help reduce bottlenecks and improve overall network efficiency. After teams have diagnosed each social network map, the class will debrief by hearing each team’s assessments and recommendations. Instructions (Larger Classes) This activity is also possible in large classes by projecting each social network diagram on a screen and giving students a minute or two to examine the diagram. The instructor can then ask specific questions to the class, such as pointing to a specific individual in the network and asking whether he or she has high or low power, what level of centrality is apparent, and whether the individual’s connections are mainly strong or weak ties. The instructor might also ask which quadrant on the map indicates the most concern and then allow individual students to provide their explanation why. Comments for Instructors This activity can be very engaging, particularly after students have read this chapter or attended the lecture on the basics of social network analysis. Here are suggested answers for each of the three social network diagrams: Bank Consultants This diagram shows that the three consulting groups have limited informal networking with each other, which implies limited communication, collaboration, or information sharing. A high degree of networking exists within two of the groups (business services and information systems), but relatively low networking within the organizational consulting group (where four distinct clusters are apparent). This diagram identifies a few individuals with considerable centrality, particularly the information systems group person at the bottom left of that group. Most of the organizational consulting group seems to have fairly low power through networking (the most powerful seems to be the person at far right of that group), but the lowest power is apparent among a few employees at the top far left of the information systems group. One person (possibly a newcomer) has no network linkage. This diagram suggests that if any collaboration exists, it is occurring somewhat more between the business services and organizational consulting group. Retail Managers This diagram shows informal networking (communication) among district managers, the four regional directors, and the vice-president. One important observation is that the diagram suggests the organization is quite hierarchical, because many employees interact mainly through the formal reporting ties. In the top right and bottom left groups, for example, two managers in each group network only with their boss. Furthermore, regional directors communicate mainly with their boss (vice-president); only two regional managers have any meaningful networking with other regional managers. Students should notice the lack of networking from district managers to the vice-president, likely another strong indicator of strong hierarchical culture. Interestingly, there is one exception, and that individual also has several connections with peers both within and between regional groups. Another observation is that the degree of networking among district managers is varied and generally low. The bottom right group is particularly well networked within the group (several connecting lines that are also short) but still minimal ties with people in other regions. Coincidentally, this regional director is also the most networked with other directors, suggesting that this director is a savvy networker who encourages the same among staff. In contrast, the top right group has minimal networking, implying that cohesion among district managers within this region is quite low. In fact, one manager in this group has stronger connections to district managers in the adjacent (top left) group, suggesting perhaps that this individual may have recently transferred from that group. This diagram suggests that the regional directors tend to be the most powerful because information flows through them (high betweenness) to people in other regions. The bottom right director seems to be the most powerful among these, both in the number of connections (high degree) and direct connection to two other regional directors (higher betweenness). Those with the least power are the several district managers with only one link, invariably to their regional director. Two Merged Firms This diagram reveals that the integration of the two merged firms is far from successful. Financial professionals continue to interact mainly with their peers from the same previous firm. The diagram shows some ties with people from the other organization, possibly due to work requirements, but these ties are typically limited and weak. The “Company 1” analysts are peripheral in the clusters dominated by “Company 2” analysts, and vice versa. Student should observe a second noteworthy feature of this network structure, namely that the Company 2 analysts seem to be much better networkers than are the Company 1 analysts. This is apparent by the number of ties and short distance in those ties among Company 2 staff. Why this difference? Most likely, Company 2 staff enjoyed a culture of networking and high social cohesion, whereas Company 1 was less so. This diagram shows a few very powerful individuals, particularly the two people near the middle center and bottom center of the exhibit. Not surprisingly (given the observations above), all of the most powerful people through networking were former Company 2 staff. The Company 1 staff universally have little centrality (few ties, long ties, limited betweenness), so they have the least networking power. Social Network Exhibit 1: Bank Consultants This diagram is a fictionalized adaptation of the informal network among internal consultants in a large bank. The image shows three consulting groups. The bank’s leaders want these groups to work closely together to collectively serve the bank’s divisions effectively. Social Network Exhibit 2: Retail Managers This diagram is a fictionalized version of the informal network among all district managers and regional directors of a national retail organization. The regional managers report to the regional directors, who report to the vice-president. The executive team wants district managers to actively network with each other so they share information, learn from each other, and develop a level of cohesion within and across regions so they form a strong identity with their leadership roles and with the organization. Social Network Exhibit 3: Two Merged Firms This diagram is a fictionalized version of the informal network among financial professionals in two small investment fundfirms that merged within the past year. The managing partner’s goal is to develop a “highly networke”, integrated organization, where analysts work andshare information together without any special allegiance to their pre- merger colleagues. SELF-ASSESSMENT: HOW DO YOU INFLUENCE COWORKERS AND OTHER PEERS? Purpose This exercise is designed to help students understand different forms of influence when working with coworkers (i.e., people at the same organizational level), as well as estimate their preference for each influence tactic in this context. Instructions Students are asked to think about the occasions when a coworker disagreed with them, opposed their preference, or was reluctant to actively support their point of view about something at work. These conflicts might have been about company policy, assignment of job duties, distribution of resources, or any other matter. Students are asked what they did over the past six months to try to get the coworker to support your preference? (Note: Students who have not been in the workforce recently can complete this self-assessment exercise thinking about influencing another student instead of a coworker.) Feedback for the Coworker Influence Scale Influence refers to any behavior that attempts to alter someone’s attitudes or behavior. There are several types of influence, including the eight measured by this instrument. This instrument assesses preferences for using each type of influence on coworkers and other people at a similar level as the respondent’s position in the organization. Persuasion: Persuasion refers to using logical and emotional appeals to change others’ attitudes. This is one of the most widely used influence strategies toward others in any position (e.g., co-workers, bosses, subordinates). Silent authority: The silent application of authority occurs when someone complies with a request because the target person is aware of the requester’s legitimate or expert power. This influence tactic is very subtle, such as making the target person aware of the status or expertise of the person making the request. Exchange: Exchange involves the promise of benefits or resources in exchange for the target person’s compliance with your request. This tactic also includes reminding the target of past benefits or favors with the expectation that the target will now make up for that debt. Negotiation is also part of the exchange strategy. Assertiveness: Assertiveness involves actively applying legitimate and coercive power to influence others. This tactic includes demanding that the other person com- ply with your wishes, showing frustration or impatience with the other person, and using threats of sanctions to force compliance. Information control: Information control involves explicitly manipulating others’ access to information for the purpose of changing their attitudes and/or behavior. It includes screening out information that might oppose your preference and embellish- ing or highlighting information that supports your position. According to one survey, more than half of employees believe their co-workers engage in this tactic. Coalition formation: Coalition formation occurs when a group of people with common interests band together to influence others. It also exists as a perception, such as when you convince someone else that several people are on your side and support your position. Upward appeal: Upward appeal occurs when you rely on support from people higher up the organizational hierarchy. This support may be real (senior management shows support) or logically argued (you explain how your position is consistent with company policy). Ingratiation: Ingratiation is a special case of impression management in which you attempt to increase the perception of liking or similarity to another person in the hope that they will become more supportive of your ideas. Flattering the co-worker, becoming friendlier with the co-worker, helping the co-worker (with expectation of reciprocity), showing support for the co-worker’s ideas, and asking for the co-worker’s advice are all examples of ingratiation. Scores on the eight Coworker Influence Scale dimensions range from 3 to 15. Higher scores indicate that the person has a higher preference for and use of that particular tactic. Norms vary from one group to the next. The following table shows norms from a sample of 225 MBA students. Most are from Australia, but some completed courses in Singapore and many of these people originate from other regions (Europe, South America, Asia, North America). The average age is about 31 years old and two-thirds would be male. To read this chart, consider the top 10 percentile for Assertiveness. The score is 9, indicating that 10 percent of people score 9 or above and 90 percent score below 9 on this dimension. Keep in mind that these scores represent self-perceptions. Evaluations from others (such as through 360degree feedback) may provide a more accurate estimate of your preferred influence tactics. Coworker Influence Scale Norms Percentile Persuasion Silent authority Exchange Assertiveness Average Score 12.3 9.7 7.4 5.8 Top 10 percentile 15 12 10 9 Top 25th percentile 14 11 9 7 Median (50th percentile) 12 10 8 5 Bottom 25th percentile 11 8 6 4 Bottom 10 percentile 10 7 4 3 Coworker Influence Scale Norms (con’t) Percentile Information control Coalition formation Upward appeal Ingratiation Average Score 7.3 8.0 7.9 8.8 Top 10 percentile 10 11 11 12 Top 25th percentile 9 10 9 11 Median (50th percentile) 7 8 8 9 Bottom 25th percentile 6 6 6 6 Bottom 10 percentile 5 4 5 5 Solution Manual for Organisational Behaviour: Emerging Knowledge, Global Insights Steven McShane, Mara Olekalns, Alex Newman, Angela Martin 9781760421649, 9780071016261