BEM 211 Final Flashcards
Power
capacity of a person, team, or org to influence others
- only potential
- based on target’s perception that powerholder controls valuable resource
- involves unequal dependence of one party on another
Countervailing Power: less powerful party has some power over powerful
- humans tend to follow charismatic people and do not evaluate what they say
Influence
any behaviour that attempts to alter someone’s attitudes or behaviours
- power in motion
Sources of Power
Legitimate Power: agreement that certain roles can request set of behaviours from others, but limited
Coercive Power: ability to penalize those who do not do as you wish
Reward Power: ability to provide positive incentives or eliminate negative consequences
Expert Power: power from special skills or expertise in an area
Referent Power: power based on link with others, persuade, attract, and build loyalty
Norm of Reciprocity
felt + social obligation of helping someone who has already helped her
9 Influence Tactics
Soft
- Rational Persuasion: reason, logic, facts
- Inspirational Appeal: appeal to other’s emotions, ideas, values
- Consultation: get others to participate in planning, decisions, changes
- Ingratiation: get someone in a good mood, praise
- Personal Appeal: refer to friendship and loyalty
Hard
- Exchange: make explicit or implicit promises and trade favours
- Coalitions: get others to support persuade
- Pressure: demand compliance or make threats
- Legitimacy: based request on ones authority, rules, policies, or support from superiors
Outcomes of Influence
Commitment: substantial agreement followed by initiative and persistence in common goals
Compliance: reluctant agreement requiring prodding to meet minimum requirements
Resistance: stalling, unproductive arguing, or rejection
Cialdini’s 6 Principles of Influence and Persuasion
Liking - people like people who like them, offer praise
Reciprocity - repay, give what you want to receive
Consistency - people align with clear commitments,
Social Proof - people follow lead of similar others, use peer power
Authority - people defer to experts,
Scarcity - people want more of what’s less, highlight uniqueness and rare opportunity
Persuasion Tactics
Foot-in-the-door : small favour then real favour
Door-in-the-face: big favour then real favour
Four Walls: wall them in with targeted questions
That’s not all: mention benefits
- these are more helpful in one-shot encounters,
Reactions to Persuasion
- Targets with external locus of control are more influenced with strong persuasion tactics
- Targets with internal locus of control react negatively to strong persuasion, resisting only increases certainty and conviction in attitudes
Self-Persuasion: ask questions for person to change their own opinions
- not seen as persuasion and appeals to desire to maintain control
- bypass traditional defense/resistance
Organizational Politics and Types
Organizational politics is way to gets done informally
Types
- Managing Impressions
- Attacking and Blaming
- Manipulate Classified Info
- Increase Indispensability
- Divide and Rule
- Forming Coalitions
- Alliance with powerful people
- Creating obligations
Negotiation
work together to reach consensus
core leadership and management competency
vital and unavoidable
Best Negotiators
- Build their knowledge
- Practice negotiations
- Reflect on previous negotiations
Why not to negotiate?
Bad reasons
- don’t know if it is an option
- uncomfortable
Good reasons
- approve of status quo
- issues too trivial or important
- power differential too great
- no opportunity to plan
ABC’s of Negotiating
Best Alternative to Negotiated Agreement (BATNA)
- more alternatives, greater power
Reservation Price( Resistance Point): worst deal are willing to accept
Zone of Possible Agreement (ZOPA): range between each party’s resistance point
Target/Aspiration Point: price/terms you hope to achieve
- use common information
- take advantage of anchoring, but carefully with information
- make concessions carefully, big then small
- can expand possible alternatives with focusing on interests, not positions, be creative
build trust
Role-based: clarify credentials, experience, expertise
Goal-based: common interests, shared values
History-based: develop relationship with frequent interaction
Types of Negotiating Issues
Distributive - competitive
- Zero-Sum: parties’ interests are directly opposed
Compatible - both parties want the same thing
Integrative - cooperative, expand pie for mutual gain
Information to share/avoid for negotiations
SHARE
share priorities among issues
- individual gain not hindered by revealing priorities among issues (rank ordering)
share BATNA when it is strong
- highlight strengths of BATNA without details
- can be a source of power in your favour
AVOID
avoid sharing resistance point - disadvantage
avoid sharing preferences amongst alternatives, can lead to disadvantages for information
Anchoring Bias for Negotiations
use anchoring bias to advantage
- first person who makes offer usually “wins”
- first offers amount for 50% of variance in final outcomes
- every increase $1 in first offer, means $0.50 in final agreement
What is a good deal?
Good Deal
- better than alternatives
- above resistance point
- ideally, close to your target
Criteria 1&2 are needed, 3 is nice to have
Integrative Agreement
- build trust and share info
- ask questions
- give away some info
- make multiple offers simultaneously
- make package offers
- search for post-settlement settlements
integrative possibilities
- multiple issues
- multiple possibilities
- differing interests
- differing strengths of preference (time horizons, expectations, risk)
Advantages
- prevents impasses
- improves outcomes
- improves implementation
- strengthens relationship
How to prepare for negotiations/do them
Distributive
- define BATNA, resistance point, target, and prepare to justify positions
Integrative
- analyze everyone’s interests, priorities, what is negotiable, think outside the box
How to do
Distributive
- open high
- establish positions and find ZOPA
- demand concessions and signal closeness to concessions
Integrative
- cooperate and build trust
- ask for/share info about interest and priorities
- exchange multi-issue proposals
Leadership
leader seeks voluntary participation of subs to reach goals
Leaders vs. Managers - complementary, not competing
- leaders are people focused and want to drive change
- managers want to maintain and keep being a good employee
Transformational Leadership
inspire followers with 4 tactics
Idealized Influence - role model for ethical behaviour, instill pride, gain trust and respect
Intellectual Stimulation - challenging org. norms, encourage divergent thinking, motivate followers to innovate (psych safety)
Individualized Consideration - recognize unique growth of followers, provide coaching and consultation
Inspirational Motivation - articulate vision that appeals and inspires
“People make the place”
Create a vision - defining feature of transformational leadership
- influences org success and survival
Components of Visions
Core Ideology: guiding principles of company, fundamental reason
Future Goals: responsive to changing conditions
Transformational leaders are made, not just personality and intelligence
- weakly correlated with four of Big Five
- moderately correlated with extraversion as more charismatic, stimulating, engage followers
- IQ is bad
Why do leaders lose their way?
Leadership Trap
- rewards fuel desire for more
- success can be intoxicating
- focus on external satisfaction can lose grounding
Dark Side
- imposter complex, inability to acknowledge failures/take responsibility
Ethical Leadership Reputation Matrix - check notes
Influences on Ethical Decision-Making
Moral Development of the Person - Kohlberg’s Stages
Ethical Intensity of Decision
Ethical Principles Used
Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development
Pre-conventional (selfish): decisions are motivated by selfishness
- punishment and obedience
Conventional (societal expectations): decisions conform with societal expectations
Post-conventional (internalized principles): use internalized principles to make decisions
- most people never reach post-conventional (80%)
Ethnical Intensity Depends On
Magnitude of Consequences - benefits or harm
Social Consensus - agreement on behaviour being bad or good, if everyone agrees is less intense
Probability of Effect - chance that something will happen and result in harm to others
Temporal Immediacy - time between act and consequences
Proximity of Effect - social, psychological, cultural, physical distance between decision maker and those affected by decision
Concentration of Effect - if act effects individual or group, individual is more intense