No abstract

No abstract

The present study investigated whether men and women in positions of equal power differ in the strategies they use to influence subordinates. Males and females were placed into a supervisory role in a simulated organizational setting and were compared on the frequency, range, and types of influence strategies they used to direct the work of three (bogus) subordinates. Although gender differences consistent with general sex role stereotypes were found, most differences were weak and only of marginal significance. Relative to males, females tended to make fewer influence attempts, used a more limited range of influence strategies, used fewer rewarding strategies, particularly promises of pay increases, and used more coercive strategies, especially pay deductions. Females displayed lower levels of self-confidence than did males, and further analyses revealed that sex-linked differences in self-confidence explained much of the gender difference observed in the frequency with which influence attempts were made and the extent to which coercive strategies were employed.Social power and influence processes have enjoyed a long tradition and a prominent position in social science research, particularly in the fields of organizational and social psychology. At the interpersonal level of analysis, the majority of thought and research on these processes has focused on the target, or recipient, of influence attempts rather than on the agent attempting to exert influence. Recently, however, a growing interest in the influence agent, or powerholder, has prompted researchers to study formally appointed organizational leaders and, more specifically, the personality and situational factors affecting their style and mode of social influence

The separation between theory and practice in organization development (OD) has widened over the years. This causes the field of OD to be susceptible to fads rather than having productive conversations with researchers about newideas that can be translated into new methods. This article identifies the following six areas of research with potential to create new practices in OD: virtual teams, conflict resolution, work group effectiveness, social network analysis, trust, and intractable conflict. Each area is described and its ease of application to practice assessed. Then, the process by which new methods have been adopted in the field over the past 15 years is reviewed. The article concludes with a discussion of the need to overcome the gap between the two separate worlds of research and practice in the interest of stimulating innovation.

No abstract