Intraorganizational influence tactics: Explorations in getting one's way.

Abstract

The tactics used by people at work to influence their superiors, co-workers, and subordinates were investigated in two studies. In the first study, 165 lower-level managers wrote essays describing an incident in which they influenced either their bosses, co-workers, or subordinates. Through content analysis, a total of 370 influence tactics grouped into 14 categories were identified. The tactics ranged from the use of rational discussion through the use of exchange tactics to the use of clandestine tactics. In a second study, the 370 influence tactics were rewritten into a 58-item questionnaire. New respondents described the extent to which they used each item to influence their bosses (n = 225), co-workers (n = 285), or subordinates (n = 244). Based on afactor analysis of the questionnaire, eight dimensions of influence were found: assertiveness, ingratiation, rationality, sanctions, exchange, upward appeals, blocking, and coalitions. It was found that the frequency with which each influence dimension was used related to the relative power of the respondents and their targets of influence, the reasons for exercising influence, the resistance of the target person, the organizational status of the respondents, organizational size, and whether the organization was unionized. Sex of the respondents and sex of the respondents' bosses, however, were not related to the choice of influence tactics in the present study. classified into preexisting categories. Sev-

Hard, soft or ambidextrous? Which influence style promotes managers’ task performance and the role of political skill

“…We measured the frequency of use of hard and soft influence tactics by managers using items from the Schriesheim and Hinkin (1990) 18-item refinement of the Kipnis, Schmidt, and Wilkinson (1980) measure. To assess hard tactics we used 4 items from the assertiveness and upward appeals subscales.…”

Ethical preferences for influencing superiors: A 41-society study

“…Initially, the upward influence literature focused on specific tactics of influence (e.g., reason, friendliness, bargaining). While exclusively US-based, the work of Kipnis, Schmidt, and Wilkinson (1980) provided the first step in the identification of influence tactics. Subsequent US studies by Schreisheim and Hinkin (1990) and Yukl and Falbe (1990) also contributed to the influence tactics literature.…”

Power and Influence: CEO Power and the Use of Tactical Influence

“…The particular influence tactic to be implemented depends on the direction in which influence is intended to have an impact. A study carried out by Kipnis, Schmidt and Wilkinson (1980) indicates that rationality is the most common tactic in upward influence attempts; assertiveness and sanctions are used most often in downward attempts; and upward appeal, exchange of benefits and ingratiation are used in lateral attempts. Obviously, the success of a tactic depends on the receptiveness of the target groups (Yukl, Falbe & Youn, 1993;Yukl & Tracey, 1992;Case, Dosier, Murkinson, & Keys, 1988;Erez & Rim, 1982;Kipnis, Schmidt & Wilkinson, 1980).…”