Leadership

PSYCH 485 blog

Power and Influence in Scandal

by

Scandal was a primetime television series about politics and influence in the United States capital, Washington DC. The show’s main character, Olivia Pope, was a complex character. She was a behind the scenes player in the complicated political structure of this powerful city. Pope, well-educated and intelligent, began as the White House Communications Director and, through the years, built a great deal of influence inside most layers of the government. After leaving her White House post, Olivia Pope opened a business tailored to resolve the problems of Washington DC’s elite with discretion and sometimes careful diplomacy. Pope’s became an elite fixer and used her power and influence to the benefit of her clients.

In many cases, Olivia Pope used rational persuasion, “logical arguments or factual evidence to persuade others” to achieve the outcome needed for her clients. (Heinen, 2021) She used her Princeton and Georgetown Law fueled powers of persuasion on many other characters to push them into or stop them from taking actions that would result in negative consequences for her clients. Additionally, she used this skill to get her staff back on course when a case took a dramatic turn for the worse.

Furthermore, she wasn’t above inspirational appeals “designed to arouse enthusiasm or emotions” to get her way. (Heinen, 2021) This was used on countless occasions to motivate her on-again, off-again love interest who happened to be the President of the United States. This was, also, a most effective tool to persuade and encourage her staff who occasionally needed motivation to push through emotionally difficult situations and extremely stressful times.

And when all else failed, pressure tactics, “threats or persistent reminders” were used to insist upon a certain outcome. (Heinen, 2021) Best used when she compelled the Vice President, Sally Langston, to resign her position or be exposed for hypocrisy on a matter that would shatter her political base. Langston, a worthy opponent, fought to push the sitting President out of office. When this fact was exposed, Pope used her influence to find personal information about Langston’s family.  After the highly sensitive information was presented to Langston with the options of exposure or retirement, Langston immediately resigned.

To put it briefly, Olivia Pope, in the show Scandal, was an ideal display of a person with power and influence. She used both to the benefit of her clients, her staff, and herself. Although, a complex character with many flaws, Pope, at times, attempted to use her power and influence for the good of others. She was a leader that thrived from power in all forms which took a toll on her in the end. This was a great show, and many were sad to see it go.

References

Heinen, R. (2021). PSYCH 485, 002, SP21ModulesLesson 7: Power and Influence Influence Tactics. Canvas Penn State. Retrieved March 8, 2021, from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2110258/modules/items/30985967

 

Leader or Follower: Who is Really in Control of this Relationship?

by

Reflecting on Northouse’s “Followership” chapter, I feel that I have suddenly been slapped in the face with a revelation: the power and control we thought to be managed by a leader has actually been governed by the follower all along. As I try to make sense of this new realization, I am quickly reminded of Sally Field’s iconic Mrs. Doubtfire dinner scene where she responds to a surprising discovery with the following: “the whole time? The whole time, you were – THE WHOLE TIME?!” (Columbus, 1993). Northouse (2019) noted that we are groomed to believe that leadership requires specific skills and qualities either innately within us or capable of being developed during our childhoods. This type of upbringing rings true, especially in my personal life. I cannot remember a moment from my upbringing where the spotlight was removed away from the characteristics of a leader and placed on the typology of the individuals allowing the leader to guide, direct, and influence them.

Could it be true that followers have always possessed the power to regulate the role a leader plays in their lives? Based on the trait approach, one may surmise that the skills and qualities of a leader not only affect but dictate how followers will respond to a leader’s directive. This concept seems to imply that a leader will ultimately determine and establish the types of relationships, boundaries, and behaviors complied with by their followers (Northouse, 2019). However, Northouse pointed out that even if a leader measures up to their role, checking off every leadership quality considered most prominent based on the trait approach, these leadership qualities’ values diminish if weak interactions exist with their followers. As a result, this has now created a shift in the role of leadership.

A leader’s role is not primarily dependent on the personalities, characteristics, or qualities of the individual occupying the leader role; it is contingent on whether the followers permit them even to lead. This approach of “reversing the lens” has now empowered followers to effect change in their leadership (Northouse, 2019). The shaping of a leader not only rests on those personality traits they were born with but on the traits and qualities followers expect them to develop and exhibit. Surprisingly, it seems there is now a swapping of roles; leaders find themselves responding to their followers by adapting to their followers’ expectations. Furthermore, this role exchange indicates that the power of influence is shared between the leader and the follower.

There is no question that leadership requires influence, which is the ability to persuade others to achieve a unified and desired outcome (Northouse, 2019). Although influence is ordinarily linked to a leader’s ability to persuade followers, extending that influential power to followers produces what Northouse referred to as “the leadership co-created process.” This process creates an environment where negotiations occur between the leader and the follower. The follower now has a voice at the table that forces both the leader and follower to recognize and accept their positions, which allows the follower to reject an individual’s position as a leader (Northouse, 2019). Unfortunately, this is not always the case, as followers tend to conform to various roles exuding behaviors that suppress the power of influence they potentially could have on their leaders.

Passive or ineffective followers can cause leadership to go unchecked and create a path for leaders to become toxic and pernicious. Without a proper challenge to their authority, leaders with bad intentions can become powerful, leading to coercion or intimidation tactics by leaders to exert their control. According to Northouse (2019), coercive leaders like Adolph Hitler, the Taliban, Jim Jones, and Rodrigo Duterte used threats and punishment to force followers to participate in harmful activities. The key to these types of leaders is how the power they exerted over their followers was tolerated. Northouse (2019) observed the different roles a follower can take on that might not feel the need to protest a leader’s decisions including, passive, conformist, resource, and bystander. These types of followers are usually withdrawn, apathetic, indifferent yes men, and ineffectual in maintaining a balanced relationship with their leaders. In order for a leader to be productive, they need the participation and engagement of their followers to guide them.

Effective leaders only exist when effective followers are present; therefore, it is imperative that followers uphold the types of roles that challenge their leaders (Northouse, 2019). As leaders have expectations of their followers, so should followers of their leaders. That means that followers need to exercise voicing their opinions and confronting any unethical practices performed by their leaders (Northouse, 2019). Leaders must be held accountable for their actions, and followers must understand that their active engagement with leaders will help govern and ensure this is maintained. Of course, this is easier said than done, but the reality is that followers have more influential power than they may think to urge leaders to live up to their own leadership roles. Therefore, control is no longer managed solely by leaders but is now a shared responsibility with followers.

Considering the contributions researchers have made to the study of the type of leader-follower relationship shared in the preceding paragraphs, this knowledge resonates with me on a personal level. As mentioned before, my upbringing was tailored around the office of leadership. The role of being an effective follower was never a priority. It was always about honing the skills and qualities, which aligned to Stogdill’s eight traits: (a) intelligence, (b) alertness, (c) insight, (d) responsibility, (e) initiative, (f) persistence, (g) self-confidence, and (h) sociability (Northouse, 2019). Additionally, I was taught to respect the office of leadership regardless of who held that role. This instruction meant that I was to do as I was told without question and be what leaders like to repeatedly refer to as a “team player.” This ingrained ideology is why I blindly followed managers without much dispute early in my career.

Unfortunately, there came a time in my career where this ideology shifted out of necessity. I found myself challenging a leader who was performing unethical practices with the company’s reporting. I was constantly questioning the type of retaliation I would face by exposing this act. It is in moments like these where morals are tested, and as Jean Lipman-Blumen claimed, there is a natural desire for security over the possibility of being outcasted (Northouse, 2019). Regardless, I knew that I had an obligation to do what was right, and I reported the issue, accepting any backlash coming my way. To my surprise, what I did was the start of an investigation that came with support from other followers. My willingness to come forward encouraged these followers to do the same. In the end, this leader was terminated. It seemed that I, as a follower, had more power than I initially thought.

As Northouse (2019) wrote, the type of relational-based interaction between leaders and followers described above still requires more research. However, it serves as an insight into how followers heavily influence the process of leadership. For too long, followers have mostly been dismissed and pushed off to the side. Now, leadership is no longer leader-centric but focused on the exchange that occurs with followers. It seems followers may perhaps retain more control of their relationships with their leaders than previously thought.

 

References:

Columbus, C. (1993). Mrs. Doubtfire. Twentieth Century Fox.

Northouse, P.G. (2019). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Power and Influence in Baseball

by

When I think about power and influence, I think about the people who I have been exposed to the most who have a lot of power and influence on me, obviously besides my parents. Power and influence make me think of my high school baseball coach the most because he had a lot of influence on me. Influence is changing a person’s behaviors, beliefs, or values (PSU WC, L7, 2019). My baseball coach was someone who definitely had the power, or capacity, to produce a change in me, since he was my coach and also a teacher of a class that I took.

Starting with influence tactics, which is a person’s behaviors that are intended to initiate change in another (PSU WC, L7, 2019). Influence is important because if a person can’t influence then they cannot lead (Northouse, 2016, p. 6).

My coach had a very good influence tactic that involved his clothing. Unlike other baseball coaches, who wore a team uniform to game, our coach would wear a suit to every single game. According to a study done by Bickman (1974), clothing can affect a person’s capacity to produce change (PSU WC, L7, 2019), and it definitely did. When we first met our coach, he appeared to have a lot of power and we were kind of intimidated by him. When he continued wearing a suit at each game, it made us feel like he had more power than all of us and even made us feel more important than if he just worse the same uniform as us.

When we look at the taxonomy of social power, which are different way a person can influence others (PSU WC, L7, 2019), our coach checks off all the powers. Expert power is the power of knowledge (PSU WC, L7, 2019). Our coach had expert power because he was well known as being an elite coach. Also, we knew that he had played professional baseball in his younger years so we knew he definitely had a lot of knowledge that he could share with us. Referent power has to do with the relationship between the leader and the follower (PSU WC, L7, 2019). Our coach, while intimidating, was one of the friendliest persons I had ever met. He was always very kind and understanding and would often joke around with us, so we all liked him. Legitimate power is the power someone has because of their formal position (PSU WC, L7, 2019). Since he was our coach, and most of our teachers for one class, he definitely had a lot of legitimate power over us. My coach also had reward and coercive power. Reward power is the power over someone due to the leader’s control over the followers desired resources (PSU WC, L7, 2019). Our coach had reward power over us because he could determine how often we would get to play or what order the batting line up went in. We also wanted to perform well in games and practices so he could reward us with more playing time. Also, since he was a well know coach, he could give good recommendations to colleges about us for both school and baseball. He also had coercive power which is the opposite of reward power and had to do with him having power because he could punish us or take away our desired outcomes. During practice, we always wanted to impress him because if we didn’t, he could take away our playing time. Also, we were always afraid that if we did something wrong, he would grade us more harshly.

Clearly our coach had a lot of power and he used that to his advantage in a number of ways using different influence tactics. There are three types of influence tactics from the Influence Behavior Questionnaire (IBQ; Yukl et al., 1992) (PSU WC, L7, 2019) that my coach used. The first was rational persuasion which is using logical arguments or facts to influence followers (PSU WC, L7, 2019). Whenever my team wasn’t playing well he would use the logical argument that if we worked harder in practice or practiced more at home we would get better. This is obvious but he would often reassure this with his story. When he was younger he wasn’t the best baseball player and was even playing baseball in a league that wasn’t as good as ours. He would tell us how after his practices or games, he would go to a local field and practice pitching and hitting balls with his dad. He said that he would do this for a minimum of 3 hours. This tactic worked on us because he played professional baseball and started off not as good as us so we thought if we just practiced more, we too could play professional baseball (2 of my teammates actually do now). Another influence tactic my coach used was inspirational appeals which is when a person makes a request or proposal to influence the targets arousal or emotion (PSU WC, L7, 2019). My coach did this by often telling us that if we won a certain game, he would take us out and pay for dinner, or not make us run laps. We would definitely persuade by this because we loved team dinners and hated running laps. The third influence tactic that my coach used was exchange. My coaches’ exchanges were similar to the appeals except they specifically applied to one person at a time. For example, if a person was up to bat, my coach would say something along the lines of “if you hit a double, you can wear sweatpants instead of your baseball pants at next practice” or the usual “you won’t have to run laps if you hit a double.” This also influenced us and got us focused because we wanted badly for these favors to happen.

 

References:

 

Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2019). Lesson 7: Power and Influence. Retrieved from  https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/canvas/fa19/21981–15196/content/07_lesson/printlesson.html.

 

Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2019). PSYCH 485 Lesson 7: Power and Influence.

 

Are leaders born, made or poorly chosen?

by

            I have been in the military for nearly two decades and have followed many leaders throughout my career.  To this day, I contemplate about memorable supervisors in an effort to gain a fundamental understanding of why they did some of the things they did.  I remember them for different reasons and even try to emulate the qualities I most admired from each one.  Amongst the great ones, I also remember the bad, the indifferent, and those who often times made me wonder how they even got to influential leadership positions in the first place.  I have worked for the anecdotal natural born leaders, others who appeared well trained and some who were simply the by-product their superior’s power and influence.

            Leadership traits were of high interest throughout the 20th century, and their studies resulted in “great man” theories that focused on identifying characteristics and qualities possessed by great leaders (Northouse, 2016).  Scholars suggested that social, political and military leaders all had similar innate traits that only “great” people were born with.  Throughout the years, characteristics such as intelligence, confidence, motivation and sociability have been linked to leadership effectiveness.  Indeed, I have come across the charismatic supervisor who effortlessly outshines others, and excels at most things as if it all simply comes “naturally” to them.  They certainly appear to be born, natural leaders who people gravitate to as if they had no other choice.

            On the other hand, I have also had supervisors whose leadership skills were sharpened by experience, education and coaching from mentors who deliberately focused on their development as military leaders.  Albeit effective, leadership did not seem to come natural to them; instead, they had a polished approach that often times seemed scripted but was effective nonetheless.  In contrast to the “great man” theories that suggest leaders are born, the skills approach to leadership focuses on capabilities that can be learned and developed.  More recently, Mumford and colleagues developed a skill-based model of leadership using the results of a study founded by the U.S. Army and the Department of Defense.  They concluded that capabilities can be developed through education and experience, and that problem-solving skills, social judgement skills, and knowledge can account for effective leadership performance (Northouse, 2016).  Leadership is therefore, or perhaps, something that many people can do and not an opportunity only reserved for the gifted few.

            Often times, my most memorable supervisors integrated traits such as intelligence and confidence with acquired skills such as knowledge and problem-solving.  However, I also worked for ineffective “leaders” who had neither traits nor skill but held a key position assigned by someone with greater influence and power to make it happen.  I once heard the term “legacy child”, which referred to someone whose father was a high-ranking officer in the military.  As such, he had been vectored or “chosen” for jobs that would likely catapult him up the military chain of command even if he lacked the skills or abilities to lead high-performing teams.  I now realize that instead of skills, some people can learn and exhibit the right behaviors to come across as an effective leader in front of others.

            The behavioral approach to leadership focuses on the actions of the leader, on what they do and how they act (Northouse, 2016).  There are five basic styles: 1) country-club management, 2) team management, 3) middle-of-the-road management, 4) impoverished management, and 5) authority-compliance management.  Furthermore, there is another concept under this theory that encompasses all five styles.  Opportunism, according to Northouse (2016), refers to someone “who uses a combination of the five basic styles for the purpose of personal advancement (pg 77).”  It is likely that some legacy children and others in the military may see, learn and exhibit behaviors to gain personal advancement.  Consequently, they are chosen for jobs they do not deserve and placed into positions for which they are ill prepared.

            Decades of experience have taught me that we must learn as much from the bad leaders as we do from the good.  Through the study of leadership, I have fortunately gained a better understanding of how and why my most memorable supervisors acted the way they did to effectively lead and manage their teams.  Like other things, leadership is something people may be naturally good at, but that doesn’t negate the fact that we must also be intentional in honing the skills and abilities we need to become better, more effective leaders.           

References

Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th ed). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

How to be Effective as the New Secretary of Education

by

Betsy DeVos has recently been selected to serve as the next United States Secretary of Education. With this public governmental position, Ms. DeVos has the power to influence many people and much educational policy. However, Ms. DeVos’s selection and her first few weeks in this leadership position have come with a considerable amount of public dissatisfaction (Perez-Pena, 2017). Some of this public disapproval stems from comments she made during her Senate confirmation hearing that did not demonstrate an adequate knowledge of the policies and laws that govern the education department with which she is to lead (Perez-Pena, 2017). Her experience within the government and with public schools are both lacking and this only adds to the negative public opinion that is currently reflected in the national news (Perez-Pena, 2017). Although Ms. DeVos has demonstrated a few behaviors that have not been well received, she does have the resources available to be a good leader. But, to be effective leader, she needs to understand the different types of power available to her and how to effectively use these different types of power to influence others.

According to Hughes et al. (1993), “leaders with relatively high amounts of power can cause fairly substantial changes in subordinates’ attitudes and behaviors” (p. 108). Given the high level of power available and the potential to apply a considerable amount of influence, Ms. DeVos must be aware of her capabilities as a leader. In addition to the different levels of power, there are also five bases of power that should be considered when determining the appropriate approach to influencing others. Each of the five sources of power come with their own advantages and disadvantages (Hughes et al., 1993). But, an effective leader will understand these differences and select the appropriate source of power that will complement the given situation, providing the appropriate form of influence (Hughes et al., 1993). It is important to note that these different sources of power can be used by followers to influence leaders, just as leaders utilize them to influence their followers (Hughes et al., 1993, p. 107).

The five bases of power include; expert power, referent power, legitimate power, reward power and coercive power (Hughes et al., p.114). Expert power relates to the amount of knowledge and experience an individual has in relation to other individuals within a particular team, group, or organization (Hughes et al., p. 114). Ms. DeVos has publically demonstrated that her knowledge in the area of public education policy and law has not reached the expert level. This source of power would not be a useful resource for her to use to influence others. Nevertheless, expert power is something that can change over time. To develop the capability to use this source of power, Ms. DeVos would need to expand her knowledge and experience in the area of education policy and law.

The next source of power is the referent power, which is impacted by the degree of relationship between the leader and follower (Hughes et al., 1993, p. 114). A leader who is well liked, admired, or is respected can have a positive influence on others (Hughes et al., 1993, p.115). Quite often the level of influence is determined by the strength of relationship between the leader and their followers (Hughes et al., 1993, p. 115). In Ms. DeVos situation, her relationship with the common citizen of the United States can be considered weak. The common citizen cannot relate to Ms. DeVos, who is extremely wealthy and comes from a wealthy family (Perez-Pena, 2017). Individuals working in the public school system have taken offensive to some of the public comments she has made with regards to their performance (Perez-Pena, 2017).Her ideas and views on the public education system have separated many followers and their support of her as an education leader (Perez-Pena, 2017). To use referent power as a source of influence, Ms. DeVos would need to generate more support from the general public and build a better relationship with those in the public school system.

Legitimate power is another source of power used to influence the attitudes and behaviors of others (Hughes et al., 1993, p. 115). This source of power is determined by the person’s position within the organization (Hughes et al., 1993, p. 115). With legitimate power, the authority given to an individual in a particular position allows them the ability to influence through the use of requests and demands (Hughes et al., 1993, p. 115). However, having legitimate authority will not be enough to make a person a good leader (Hughes et al., 1993, p. 116). To be an effective leader, the use of requests and demands will have to be appropriately applied to the situation. Constant demands will not be an effective means to influence everyone in every situation. Ms. DeVos’ position as Secretary of Education gives her a high level of legitimate power. She has the ability to provide requests to policy makers, but the government system will require more than just a request to influence their actions.

According to Hughes et al. (1993), reward power is based on the concept that resources, when controlled appropriately, can influence others (p. 116). These influential rewards can come in many forms, such as bonuses, promotions, or something as simple as praise and recognition (Hughes et al., 1993, p.116). Quite often the effectiveness of the reward to influence others will be determined by the follower and the situation (Hughes et al., 1993, p. 117). With the public forum readily available to Ms. DeVos, she can use public praise to garner the support of a particular audience and influence their actions towards a specific goal. Her ability to reward through support of specific education policy and influence agenda by her legitimate authority can also be a means to influence the behaviors and attitudes of others. Reward power is something that Ms. DeVos can use to offset her deficiencies in other sources of power. However, the use of her substantial fortune to reward political parties, as she has done in past positions, may not be an appropriate use of reward power in her current position (Perez-Pena, 2017).

The final source of power that has the potential to influence others is the use of coercive power. With the use of coercive power, an individual can influence through the possibility of negative repercussions, punishments, or denial of rewards (Hughes et al., 1993, p. 119). Similar to reward power, the extent to which coercive power can be used is dictated by the followers and the situation (Hughes et al.,1993, p. 119). In her previous position as Michigan Republican Party chairwoman and major Republican donor, Ms. DeVos relied heavily on her reward and coercive power to influence other politicians (Perez-Pena, 2017). As noted by Perez-Pena (2017) of the New York Times, Ms. DeVos was well know for the fear she instilled within Michigan politicians because of her ability to influence legislation and persuade the removal of foes that did not support her ideals. Her personal financial support will not be as influential in her current position. However, there are other forms of coercive power that can be utilized by her. She can deny her support of education policies or remove resources available to those in the education system if her ideas and views are not supported. Albeit coercive power should be used cautiously, as too much reliance of this as a form of influence may demonstrate a desire for control that is not supported by our social standards (Hughes et al., 1993, p.119).

Each of the five sources of power provides a capacity to influence others in a different manner. Understanding the use of each power source will enable leaders to be effective in the application of influence. Ms.DeVos has struggled to effectively influence support in her first few weeks in her new position as Secretary of Education. However, if she can appropriately incorporate all the different sources of power available, as the situation and follower dictates, she can improve her effectiveness as a leader.

References:

Hughes, R., et al. (1993). Power and Influence. Leadership: Enhancing the Lessons of Experience. (pp. 107-131). Homewood, IL. Irwin.

Perez-Pena, R. (2017, February 23). Betsy DeVos is Publicly Polite, but a Political Fighter. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/23/us/politics/education-secretary-betsy-devos-donald-trump.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

 

Skip to toolbar