Power to the powerless: Locus of control and the use of power.

Abstract

Internally and externally controlled subjects were given a range of powers with which to supervise three fictitious workers, one of whom presented a supervisory problem. It was found that in dealing with the problem worker, externally controlled subjects (high powerless) used significantly more coercive power (e.g., threat of deduction of points, threat of firing) than did internally controlled subjects (low powerless). In addition, internals relied more on personal persuasive powers than did externals. These results were explained in terms of differential expectancy of successful influence by internals and externals. As in previous studies, the type of supervisory problem also affected the type of power used. A problem of ineptness resulted in greater use of expert power, while a poor-attitude problem evoked more coercive powers,

Entrepreneurial locus of control and competitive strategies – The moderating effect of environmental dynamism

“…This implies that external entrepreneurs would be more inclined to pursue low-cost strategies in dynamic environments. Being involved in this personality-environment congruency situation, external entrepreneurs are likely to exert more coercive power over their employees to ensure that all the requirements are met to produce against low costs (Goodstadt & Hjelle, 1973). Consistently, earlier studies revealed that externals conduct more conservative behavior particularly when confronted with high-risk situations (Baron, 1968).…”

“…This can, for instance, be achieved through maintaining strict cost control systems, enforcing cost reductions, and prescribing tight specifications for materials to be used in the production process. As externals are better suited to deal with relatively routine-like and clearly structured tasks (Rotter, 1966;Spector, 1982), and because they tend to conduct a leadership style that relies on coercion (Abdel-Halim, 1981;Goodstadt & Hjelle, 1973;Mitchell, Smyser, & Weed, 1975), the aptitudes of external entrepreneurs tend to align with the tasks needed to pursue a low-cost strategy Govindarajan, 1989;Rotter, 1966;Spector, 1982) -much more so than their internal counterparts (see above).…”

The role, function, and contribution of attribution theory to leadership: A review

“…Importantly, numerous studies document relationships between locus of control, behavior, and performance (Anderson, Hellriegel, & Slocum, 1977;Goodstadt & Hjelle, 1973;Kinicki & Vecchio, 1994;Mitchell, Smyser, & Weed, 1975;Perlow & Latham, 1993;Storms & Spector, 1987). Despite the apparent relationship between locus of causality and locus of control, we are aware of only one study that investigates the relationship between these two variables.…”

The toxic triangle: Destructive leaders, susceptible followers, and conducive environments

“…A leader's vision typically reflects enduring life themes (Zaleznick & Kets de Vries, 1985). Moreover, childhood experiences of powerlessness are associated with using coercive influence techniques (Goodstadt & Hjelle, 1973). Abused children often distance themselves from others and compartmentalize (or disassociate) painful issues (Cramer, 2000;Vaillant, 1977).…”