Simply put, influence is the capacity to affect the character, development, or behavior of someone or something, or the effect itself.
For instance “the influence of television violence”
The art of influencing is to know what situation calls for what tactic. Leaders and managers must understand the range of influence tactics they have available, know when and how to use them, and sharpen their skills so that they can influence others effectively. Effective influencers know when to use authoritative, hard tactics when to use soft tactics when to ask when to tell when to take over, and when to let go.
“Leadership is a conscious choice to act out of a deep sense and awareness to one’s situation and surroundings.”
Leadership requires moving people from point A to point B. How effectively a leader uses “hard” or “soft” influence tactics determines how well others are influenced to move or change their current direction.
The difference between a hard influence tactic and a soft influence tactic is the amount of freedom a person has to say no to the attempt to influence. The harder an influence tactic is, the more it resembles a military order or command to be followed without question. Softer tactics seek to internally motivate a person to follow leadership to point B. While hard influence tactics get results, they can create a relational strain that makes future attempts to influence more difficult. On the other hand, using soft influence tactics in a crisis can result in delayed behavior.
The Eleven Tactics of Influence
The effective leader needs as many influence tactics at her or his disposal as possible. The University of Nebraska recently published eleven key influence tactics, listed from hard (direct, authoritative) to soft (indirect, collaborative):
1. Pressure
Seeks influence through demands, threats, or intimidation to convince others to comply with a request or to support a proposal.
2. Assertiveness
Seeks influence include repeatedly making requests, setting timelines for project completion, or expressing anger toward individuals who do not meet expectations.
3. Legitimating
Seeks influence by persuading others that the request is something they should comply with given their situation or position.
4. Coalition
Seeks influence through the aid of others to persuade them to do something or uses the support of others as an argument for them to agree.
5. Exchange
Seeks influence by making explicit or implicit a promise that others will receive rewards or tangible benefits if they comply with a request or remind others of a favor that should be reciprocated.
6. Upward Appeals
Seeks influence through the approval/acceptance of those in higher positions within the organization before requesting someone.
7. Ingratiating
Seeks influence by getting others in a good mood or to think favorably of them before asking them to do something.
8. Rational Persuasion
Seeks influence through logical arguments and factual evidence to persuade others that a proposal or request is viable and likely to result in task objectives.
9. Personal Appeals
Seeks influence through others’ compliance to their request by asking a “special favor for them,” or relying on interpersonal relationships to influence their behavior.
10. Inspirational Appeals
Seeks influence through making an emotional request or proposal that arouses enthusiasm by appealing to other’s values and ideals, or by increasing their confidence that they can succeed.
11. Consultation
Seeks influence by involving others’ participation in making a decision or planning how to implement a proposed policy, strategy, or change.
While all eleven tactics will need to be drawn upon depending on the situation at hand, the influence tactics occurring later on the list above are more effective at influencing others long-term.
A child who runs into a busy street doesn’t need consultation or inspirational appeals, nor does the employee who is guilty of sexual harassment. A more direct, hard tactic is appropriate in both cases, as these actions must be immediately stopped.
On the other hand, seeking to influence donors to give more to a non-profit‘s cause cannot be accomplished with legitimating, pressure, or assertiveness tactics. Shifting a donor from a giver-because-of-an-emergency to a true ongoing, donor-investor requires inspirational appeals, where internal attitudes are changed. Such is applicable in the humanitarian circuit.
Finally, if an employee is seeking to influence a boss, the consultation tactic is undoubtedly the strongest option, as one cannot expect leaders to merely comply with a command issued by a subordinate.
Adunke Olatunji
Share your story or advertise with us: Whatsapp: +2347068606071 Email: info@newspotng.com
