Power, Influence, and Decision-Making in Organizations

Power vs. Influence

Power (pushes, imposed by authority) vs. Influence (persuades, does not require authority)

Bases of Power

  • Personal
    • Source of expertise/ability
    • Admiration and desire to please
  • Positional/Formal
    • Fear of negative (punishment)
    • Hope for positive (reward)
    • Legitimate
  • Relational
    • Source of resources
    • Positions in network

Types of Influence

  • Interpersonal
    • Influencing individuals and group members
  • Procedural
    • Managing the rules or procedures used to exchange information and aggregate individual preferences

Cialdini’s 6 Principles of Interpersonal Influence

  • Liking: People like those who like them.
    • People like to comply with friends. Influence through similarity or praise.
  • Reciprocity: People repay.
    • People feel obligated to give back the form of behavior they receive.
  • Social Proof: People follow similar people.
    • People will follow if their peers are following.
  • Consistency:
    • People align with their commitments.
  • Authority: People listen to experts.
    • Establish your own expertise, have a degree, or wear a uniform.
  • Scarcity: People want whatever there is less of.

Additional Tactics of Interpersonal Influence

  • Establish your credibility
  • Frame on common ground
  • Provide evidence
  • Connect emotionally
  • Build coalitions

Procedural Influence Tactics

Influencing the rules to affect the decision-making of the whole group:

  • Controlling the agenda
  • Influencing group norms
  • Who speaks when
  • Shaping how decisions are made (majority vs. unanimity)
  • Who sits where

Decision-Making Models

  • Rational Model: Rational approach to decision-making.
    • Transparent reasoning, high-quality decisions.
  • Normative Model/Bounded Reality: People have less information, search less, and settle for less optimal solutions.
    • Bounded rationality: There are constraints in research for making the decision.
    • Satisficing decision is “good enough”.
  • Garbage Can Model: Rolling the dice with sloppiness.

Decision-Making Biases

  • Biases: Inclination towards or against something.
  • Biases about Self
    • Self-serving bias
    • Egocentric bias: See self as contributing more
    • Self-uniqueness
    • Illusion of control
    • Overconfidence
  • Biases about Others
    • Halo effect/Fork-tailed effect
    • Primacy effect: The first thing we learn affects us
    • Negativity effect: Put a lot of weight on negative information about others
    • Fundamental attribution error: Attribute behavior to personality
    • Confirmation bias
  • Heuristics: Shortcuts that can lead to errors.
    • Availability bias
    • Hindsight bias: Believe something is inevitable
    • Base rate fallacy: Choose to rely on a single data point
    • Insensitivity to sample size: Assume small samples, not representatives
    • Representativeness: Make judgments from stereotypes
    • Anchoring: Influenced by the first information received

Decisional Balance Sheet

Create a pro/con list with the following categories:

  • Utilitarian gain/loss for self
  • Utilitarian gain/loss for others
  • Approval/disapproval of self
  • Approval/disapproval from others

Case Study: Best of Intentions

This case is about whether employees who are qualified but may not be received well by employees due to their gender or race.

Programmed vs. Nonprogrammed Decision-Making

  • Programmed
    • Past problems with clear past solutions
  • Nonprogrammed
    • A new problem never resolved before

Group Decision-Making Advantages

  • Resources: Combined skills and knowledge
  • Motivational: Working as a group motivates people.

Group Decision-Making Disadvantages

  • Inefficient: Process loss from wasted discussion
  • Communication Problems: Emotional conflicts can bog down decisions
  • Information Underutilization: Group discussions are not always good at eliciting information.
    • Struggle to pool all knowledge together

Approaches to Decision-Making

  • Leader Oriented
    • Very efficient
    • Only uses some of the team resources
  • Group Technique – Majority Rules
    • A quick way to include all members’ opinions and produce high-quality decisions
    • Voting can prematurely close discussion and lead to a lack of commitment from losers
  • Consensus
    • Best way to fully utilize team resources
    • Super time-consuming

Group Decision-Making Techniques

  • Brainstorming
  • Nominal group technique: Generating and evaluating alternative solutions
  • Delphi technique: Strictly email

Pitfalls

  • Groupthink
  • Group polarization
  • Abilene: Everyone agreeing for the sake of reaching a consensus

Case Study: Cardiotronics

An older employee who is good at his job is too slow. What do you do?

Conflict Types

  • Task Conflict: Disagreement about tasks/ideas.
    • Helpful conflict
  • Relationship Conflict
    • Harmful conflict

Conditions of Conflict

  • Communication
    • Barriers can be personal, physical, or language-based
  • Structure
    • Different/unclear goals
    • Limited resources (conflict between groups or within groups)
  • Personal Variables

Conflict Stages

  • Potential opposition
  • Cognition and personalization
  • Intentions, conflict management styles
    • Solved with assertiveness or cooperativeness
    • Situational factors
  • Behavior
    • Intentions differ from behavior
  • Outcomes
    • Functional is good; dysfunctional isn’t

Conflict Styles

  • Competing
    • Individuals trying to satisfy their own interests
  • Accommodating
    • Appeasement, giving up
  • Collaborating
    • Searching for mutually beneficial solutions
  • Avoiding
  • Compromising

Case Study: Karen Leary

Ted wants a private office for Taiwanese clients, but Karen sees it as entitled and not embracing team culture.

Distributive Bargaining

Seeks to divide a strict amount of resources, always win/lose, parties fundamentally oppose, competitive and short-term.

  • Primary Tactics: Strategies to claim the most value for self.
    • Extreme first offers, tiny concessions, persuasion

Integrative Bargaining

Seeks a win-win, parties not fundamentally opposed, cooperative and long-term focused.

  • Primary Tactics: Problem-solving for creating joint value or maximizing joint outcomes/utilities.

BATNA

Best Alternative To Negotiated Agreement

Bargaining Zone (ZOPA)

Zone of Possible Agreement: Range between reservation prices

Case Study: Movie Deal

Producer vs. director