The paradox of agency: Feeling powerful reduces brokerage opportunity recognition yet increases willingness to broker.

Abstract

Research suggests positions of brokerage in organizational networks provide many benefits, but studies tend to assume everyone is equally able to perceive and willing to act on brokerage opportunities. Here we challenge these assumptions in a direct investigation of whether people can perceive brokerage opportunities and are willing to broker. We propose that the psychological experience of power diminishes individuals' ability to perceive opportunities to broker between people who are not directly connected in their networks, yet enhances their willingness to broker. In Study 1, we find that employees in a marketing and media agency who had a high sense of power were likely to see fewer brokerage opportunities in their advice networks. In Study 2, we provide causal evidence for this claim in an experiment where the psychological experience of power is manipulated. Those who felt powerful, relative to those who felt little power, tended to see fewer brokerage opportunities than actually existed, yet were more willing to broker, irrespective of whether there was a brokerage opportunity present. Collectively, these findings present a paradox of agency: Individuals who experience power are likely to underperceive the very brokerage opportunities for which their sense of agency is suited. (PsycINFO Database Record

Brokerage and Brokering: An Integrative Review and Organizing Framework for Third Party Influence

“…Although conceptualizations of brokerage and brokering vary, researchers commonly agree that network structure sets the stage for brokering activity (Landis, Kilduff, Menges, & Kilduff, 2018;Obstfeld, FIGURE 1 An Integrative View of Brokering as Intermediation and/or Modification 2017). Our review of the research on brokerage and brokering identified the need for greater integration between social structure and social process as a key theme.…”

“…The research we reviewed, however, suggests that personality traits, such as self-monitoring, play an important role in shaping brokering processes in organizations (Kilduff & Brass, 2010;Kilduff & Day, 1994;Mehra, Kilduff, & Brass, 2001;Oh & Kilduff, 2008;Sasovova, Mehra, Borgatti, & Schippers, 2010). Related research has considered how individual differences in sense of power (Landis et al, 2018), traits such as openness to experience (Baer, 2010), and the ability and motivation to share information (Reinholt, Pedersen, & Foss, 2011) influence brokering processes and outcomes. Recent research has also considered interactions between different individual characteristics, documenting, for example, that self-reported differences in self-monitoring interact with perceived empathy (as reported by peers) in shaping changes in MBA students' networks (Kleinbaum, Jordan, & Audia, 2015).…”

Network Brokerage: An Integrative Review and Future Research Agenda

“…High-status brokers attract disconnected alters because the brokers are prominent in the overall network and have selection power over whom to associate with (Sauder, Lynn, & Podolny, 2012). Moreover, feeling powerful increases one’s willingness to broker, though it reduces brokerage opportunity recognition at the same time (Landis, Kilduff, Menges, & Kilduff, 2018). However, at the organizational level, Chandler, Haunschild, Rhee, and Beckman (2013) found a negative link between status and brokerage for firms.…”

Teams as boundaries: How intra‐team and inter‐team brokerage influence network changes in knowledge‐seeking networks

“…Hansen, ). Our approach to conceptualizing and measuring KS networks is also in line with prior research (e.g., Landis, Kilduff, Menges, & Kilduff, ; Podolny & Baron, ).…”