Dr. Robert Cialdini is the president of The Influence at Work consulting organization that has a long list of goliath clients in business and industry.  His organization has worked with, “Google, Microsoft, Coca Cola, Merrill Lynch, Nationwide Insurance, Pfizer, AAA, IBM, The Mayo Clinic, Harvard University-Kennedy School, The Weather Channel, the United States Department of Justice and Nato” (Schings, 2011).   With a client list of that magnitude, it is clear that Dr. Cialdini has identified something very persuasive the 6 principles of social influence; reciprocation, scarcity, authority, consistency, liking and consensus (Pennsylvania World Campus, 2012).  Out of the six principles, one stands out as special shining star and that is the principle of reciprocation. 

 

 

 

          According to Dr. Caildini, reciprocation is a human element that is taught cross culturally (Schings, 2011).  All cultures teach the principle of reciprocation which is, “giving back what one receives from others” and this principle is taught in childhood (Schings, 2011).   I am able to identify with this principle based on prior work experience and current business practices.  I am reminded of a summer job I had between college semesters selling Kirby vacuum cleaners.  Kirby implemented the idea of giving something free to a consumer in order to receive something back in return.  By calling potential customers and offering them a free one room carpet shampoo in return for an opportunity to demonstrate their exceptional product Kirby implemented the principle of reciprocation.   Many potential clients agreed to receive their free gift of a one room carpet shampoo and in return I was provided with an opportunity to demonstrate the product and sell the product.  Over the course of three months I did very well and sold 15 vacuum cleaners all priced over $1,000 dollars.   Many of the potential clients were very appreciative of the cleaning job I performed on their carpet.  The free service, combined with sales skills, an exceptional product (that completely demolished their current vacuum cleaners) made potential clients more likely to reciprocate and purchase the product. In fact, I even had one client purchase the product and they did not have any rugs in their home all hardwood floors!  After learning the value of this method, I later I became a licensed real estate agent and still hold a license currently.  A personal goal of mine was to obtain a large inventory of listings (homes in which I actively marketed, listed and established a client relationship with the sellers) to propel my business to a higher level.  Listings are important because they offer agents opportunities to market themselves and network to meet other sellers and buyers.  Networking is accomplished by conducting open houses and answering responses to listing advertisements.  Knowing the value of listings, I offered a free comparative market analysis to potential listing clients in exchange for the opportunity to meet with them.  Potential clients were eager to meet with me to see what their home was worth and receive the free report.  My reports were very comprehensive, detailed and on par with a professional appraisal.  Once my potential clients had an opportunity to view the report, meet with me and view my sales record they became very eager, excited and willing to establish a client relationship and list with me.  My method began with giving first. The free comparative market analysis report was free, this could cost in the hundreds if a client had to order a limited appraisal of their property.

 

   

 

Dr. Cialdini has identified that companies who implement reciprocation have achieve greater success and many companies are not implementing this strategy (Schings, 2011).  He explains that companies should give first and they will receive better results.   To quote Dr. Cialdini stated. “What this does is to put a lot of control in the hands of the person who acts first ….Whatever a person wants in the workplace, a more positive attitude for example, if you provide first, it flows back to you”(Schings, 2011).  I am reminded of the concept of a simple smile; if you smile first most likely you will receive a smile back.  This concept is called mirroring; a human response condition that can be seen in babies smiling back and responding to a mother’s facial expression.  Another excellent example of a company implementing this concept is Coca-Cola who donated two million dollars to the World Wildlife Federation to conserve the polar bear habitat.  Coca-Cola then produced limited edition cans featuring a mother and baby polar bear to encourage consumers to donate one dollar.  In addition to the two million Coca-Cola already donated they agreed to match each dollar donated.  A total of $1.8 million was raised by Coca-Cola consumers (Worldlife, 2012).  Coca Cola initiated the process by their initial two million dollar donation. 

 

          In conclusion, we can see that social influence and its relationship to human tendencies can be linked to specific principles (Pennsylvania World Campus, 2012).  Organizations and corporations with the desire to influence can implement the concepts of social influence to change behaviors and reach desired outcomes.  This process is alive and well today and being implemented and utilized today by corporation giants. 

 

 

References

 

Bosco , A. (Producer). (2012). http://www.boscoanthony.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/influencer1.jpg. [Print Photo].

Chopra , C. (Producer). (2012). giving. [Print Photo]. Retrieved from http://www.chopra.com/files/images/giving.jpg

Knaak , S. (Producer). (2012). Retrieved from http://www.motherhood-cafe.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/motherbaby.jpg

 

Schings, S. (n.d.). 2011 SIOP conference keynoter: Dr. Robert Cialdini discusses how to ethically use the science of influence. Retrieved from http://www.siop.org/Media/News/first.aspx

Pennsylvania State University. (2012). Lesson 7: Power and Influence. Retrieved from: https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu

Worldlife. (2012). “arctic home” generates over $2 million in donations for polar bear conservation. Retrieved from http://www.naturenplanet.com/articles/2302/20120502/arctic-home-generates-over-2-million-donations.htm

Have you been witness to this event; your leader, your boss just lost his or her cool and went off into orbit yelling, screaming and bullying followers? Shock and amazement will typically consume followers as they witness or fall victim to the leader’s behavior.  How can leaders revert to such negative behaviors, behaviors that you would quickly punish your child for engaging in?  With children, a time out may be appropriate; have you ever said these words, “young lady/young man, you go to your room, think about your behavior, when you are ready to come back out and apologize and behave properly you can come out of your room. You are on a time out!”  Yes, perhaps every parent has uttered those words.  However, what about a leader someone that holds position and power? What do we do when leaders behave poorly, act out, yell and scream, rant and rave and act like a child?  Of course, if it is a person with higher authority, subordinates options are limited and a “boss time out” is certainly not an option.   The topic of bosses behaving badly is a very intriguing.  Is there empirical evidence to understand this phenomenon?  Wouldn’t it be liberating as a subordinate to have insight into this behavior, wouldn’t that be empowering?  Insight into this phenomenon provides individuals (both leaders and followers) an understanding of why it happens and how to prevent it from happening in organizations.

 

 

           Fiedler’s Contingency Model provides insight into this poor leadership behavior.  This behavior can be linked to stress, specifically bosses who are experiencing stress (Pennsylvania State University, 2012). The theory suggest that when leaders are placed in work place roles and situations in which they are not properly matched; they experience stress and their coping skills can cause the dreaded reversion to childlike behaviors (Pennsylvania State University, 2012).  Both in prior and current work experience; the most common response I have heard from other co-workers while witnessing a leader in a full blown tantrum is, “they are in over their head”.  Breaking that statement down further; a leader who is not matched properly to their job, to their role as a leader will experience an onset of stress, this stress builds as the leader experiences more job related pressures.  Like a teapot on the stove some leaders can eventually blow their whistle.  The contingency theory according to (Northouse, 2013), “… advocates that leaders engage in situational engineering, which means, in essence, changing situations to fit the leader” (p.129) In fact, this theory has derived the name Contingency Theory, “because it suggests that a leader’s effectiveness depends on how well the leader’s style fits the context” (Northouse, 2013, p.123)  It critical for organizations to develop harmonious workplace environments for the health of the organization and for the health of its employees. 

 

 

The year 2012 has brought to light a very serious problem in schools with children bullying other children.  Because we are discussing leaders reverting to childlike behaviors it is appropriate to discuss the, “bullying boss”.  This is not just a childhood problem, this occurs among adults and leaders can cause great emotional harm.  A study conducted in Melbourne, Australia called the ACTU study determined that bullying bosses have detrimental effects on the workplace (Robinson, 2000).  The study found according to (Robinson, 2000), “the main cause of workplace stress is overbearing and aggressive behavior towards employees by management” (p. 5).  The study was able to further determine, 42 percent of workplace stress was a direct result of problems relating to difficult management.  One in four of the workers in the past 12 months during the survey even called out sick from work just to get away from the stress (Robinson, 2000).  Furthermore, doctors located at Queensland Division of General Practice mental health stated workplace bullying is now, “widely recognized by doctors as an important health issue.” Not only does this impact workers mental health this can impact the company’s bottom line.  The study further determined, that businesses in the United Kingdom, “lost eleven billion dollars annually through sick pay, reduced productivity and missed deadlines” (Robinson, 2000, p. 5).

 

          How can we reduce leaders reverting to less desirable behaviors?  This must be done by first reducing overall stress levels of leaders.  Fiedler’s Contingency Model suggests this can be done through situational favorability.  That is, from the view point of the leader what makes them feel comfortable? Not surprising, this has to do with a feeling of control on the part of the leader (Pennsylvania State University, 2012).  I have never witnessed a leader blow their lid when they felt everything was under control.  Typically, it is when the organization is struggling with out of control situations; like missed deadlines, poor scheduling, high turnover rates, profit loss and when these areas of concern are directly related to the leader’s job duties to manage.  By balancing Leader-member relations; the interactions between the leader and the follower, the overall environment, and the trust level a leader can improve their situation (Pennsylvania State University, 2012).  The Contingency model further suggests that task structure, organization, having standardized methods of conducting business, providing leaders position power (the ability to reward or punish) can help leaders feel more in control (Pennsylvania State University, 2012).  In conclusion, organizations should take a lesson from Fiedler’s Contingency Model and implement this theory to help their leaders.  Followers look to their leaders for guidance, direction, stability and nothing can be more detrimental to that process then a bullying boss or a screaming, ranting and raving manager.  

 

References

  

Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6^th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

(n.d.). Retrieved from http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_br0lUtRSmBQ/TPvdL1nYTyI/AAAAAAAAAHg/QFYc64axivA/s320/screaming-child-31.jpg

(n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.howdesign.com/wp-content/uploads/9-1_badboss.jpg

(n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.dicklincoln.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Boss-Yelling.jpg

Pennsylvania State University. (2012). Lesson 6: Contingency and Path theories. Retrieved from: https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu

Robinson, P. (2000, October 11). Bullying bosses ‘causing stress’. The Age (Melborn, Vic.). Retrieved from http://www.lexisnexis.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/?verb=sr&csi=314239&sr=HLEAD(Bullying bosses `causing stress) and date is October 11, 2000

  

     I have been fortunate enough to be offered free career coaching services by my employer.  This service includes a personal career coach, one on one career coaching sessions with your coach, resume building assistance and an the opportunity to take the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI).  I would like to share how this service and specifically taking the indicator test has helped me to gain insight into myself.  The assessment has proved to be a valuable tool for me in assessing my strengths.  It has also made me aware of other personality traits and has improved my insight into others.  

 

     The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) assessment objective is to provide an individual with a self-assessment tool into their own personality.   Katherine Briggs and her daughter Isabel Myers were the developers of the (MBTI)  and produced the first version in 1942 (Townsend, 2011).  Carl Jung’s theory of personality types prompted both Katherine and her daughter to develop tool that individuals could utilize that would decipher personality types into and understandable and applicable measure (Townsend, 2011).

 

     The (MBTI)  indicator test has world renowned recognition and is the most relied on indicator test (Townsend, 2011).  This is accomplished through the measures by four pairs called dichotomies (Llorens, 2010). The dichotomy pairs are as follows 1. Extraversion (E) or Introversion (I)   –   2. Sensing (S) or Intuition (N),   3. Thinking (T) or Feeling (F) –  4. Judging (J) or Perceiving (P).  From the letters above based on each dichotomy the measure combines, “an individual’s four preferences from each dichotomy, detonated by its letter to yield one of 16 possible personality types.” (Llorens, 2010 p. 19)  This assessment is accomplished by answering a series of questions.  The questions were not difficult to answer.  I wanted this to be as helpful as possible so I tried to answer every question with the most honest self-reflecting response .  The first series of questions is designed to determine according to (Townsend, 2011), “asses the differences in four major areas; where people prefer to focus their attention, how they prefer to take in information, how they prefer to make decisions, whether they prefer to plan things out or keep their options open” (p.20).

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

       

      Please refer below to the second screen shot.  As demonstrated in this picture the following information is categorized; where you focus your attention, the way you take in information, the way you make decisions and how you deal with the outer world.  In my case I prefer extraversion and relate easily to the outer world.  I take in information through intuition by using my imagination and through seeing new possibilities and insights into the future.  I make decisions on values and people centered concerns. Lastly, I deal with the outer world by perceiving life as spontaneous and flexible.

 

 

     The assessment provides a type description breakdown with bullet points.  This description has identified personality traits of warm, enthusiastic and imaginative, seeing life full of possibilities.  It identifies that I make connections between events and information very quickly and confidently proceed based on the patterns.  Desire affirmation from others and readily give appreciation and support to others.  Lastly, spontaneous and flexible and rely on ability to improvise and verbal fluency.

 

 

 

 

         This assessment in combination with a trained career coach served to really assist me in determining strengths and weakness.   For example, I am currently a Federal Officer but also an assistant trainer.  When discussing the possibility of a Human Resource job with my career coach she advised me to think about the possibility of working in a highly administrative type position.  Human resources may involve a large amount of paperwork, computer entry, file keeping and less interaction with people.  As a ENFP, Extraverted Intuition with Feeling she advised that is most likely why I love being a trainer so much.  I tend to gravitate towards people and have a personality that likes to help.  In fact, when evaluating moments of greatest job satisfaction for myself personally it always involves helping an individual a fellow co-worker or protecting the public.  I tend to generate my leadership decisions on values and building people up never tearing them down.  This test has also helped me gain insight into myself for both strengths and weaknesses.  One possible weakness, identified is seeking affirmation from others.  In a leadership role one cannot always make decisions based on one individual.   A leader has to make decisions based on what is the best for the organization and the group.  Therefore, all decisions are not always going to be popular among everyone and if a leader is in a seeking affirmation mode this could very well be a weakness.  I am cautious to monitor this for myself in my current role.  Thinker-judger preference is high among managers, upper level managers and top executives pointing toward a need for objectivity and analytical ways of thinking (Northouse, 2013).  According to (Northouse, 2013), “in contrast, only 36% of trainers in the same organizations exhibited a preference for thinking and 47% for thinking and judging” (p. 335)  Interestingly enough I love to train people and thinking judging did not show up on my results.   I am now conscious to analyzing leadership decisions and take time to evaluate the objective view point.

 

          In summary, the the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) has been a very helpful guide for me in making decision about possible future career paths but also in helping to identify my personality make up.  I have recognized both strengths and weaknesses and have a better insight into the personalities of others.  I recommend this process in helping to identify your own personality traits and if done in conjunction with a career coach the process can be extremely eye opening.

 

 

References

 

Llorens, J. (2010). Taking inventory for myers-briggs. Busines And Economics – Management Education, Business And Economics–Labor And Industrial Relations, 18-19. Retrieved from http:// search.proquest.com.eza.libraries.psu.edu

 

Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: thoery and practice. (6th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage Publications, Inc. 

Townsend, S. (2011). Myers-Briggs more than assessment tool. Canadian HR Reporter‎, 20. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/docview/887542823/139263162B93B16D2F3/1?accountid=13158