Discussion Question
Read the Chapter 13-14 of the book,（I uploaded) Out of all the reading assignments, prepare a Discussion Question (DQ). The DQ should focus on something about the material that you found to be INTERESTING, STIMULATING, IMPORTANT, UNCLEAR, or CONTROVERSIAL. Prepare only one DQ (not one from each reading source or chapter). (I don’t think you should read all of those, just skim it and find a part you are interested in and write the DQ based on that)
The DQ example: — When implementing Management by Walking Around (p. 12), how do you find a balance between being holed up at your desk versus risking your employees feeling that you are micromanaging them? Do you see examples of this happening in your office?
Besides, you should also reply to other two DQs from others. You can comment on others’ DQ once you have submitted yours. So after you deliver the answer of your DQ, I’ll send you two of others’ DQs and please reply to them.
434
13-1 Contrast leadership and power.
13-2 Explain the three bases of formal
power and the two bases of
personal power.
13-3 Explain the role of dependence in
power relationships.
13-4 Identify power or influence tactics
and their contingencies.
13-5 Identify the causes and
consequences of abuse of power.
13-6 Describe how politics work in
organizations.
13-7 Identify the causes, consequences,
and ethics of political behavior.
13 Power and
Politics
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
After studying this chapter, you should be able to:
So
ur
ce
: K
im
H
on
g-
Ji
/R
eu
te
rs
/
A
la
m
y
S
to
ck
P
ho
to
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 434 29/09/17 4:15 pm
Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 435
A TALE OF PRESIDENTIAL CORRUPTION
Answer quickly: If someone were given the ability to exert his or her will over others for his or her self-interest, would this person do it?
On Wednesday, December 19, 2012, Park Guen-hye became the first
female president of South Korea. Park was considered a trailblazer in
South Korean politics and the heir to a long political legacy. The 60-year-old
politician was the daughter of former South Korean president Park Chung-
hee. Guen-hye had begun her political career at a young age when, at the
age of 22, she took on first lady duties after her mother’s assassination
by a North Korean gunman. When she became president of South Korea,
she made many promises, making many citizens hopeful that she would
revive the country’s slowing economic growth. These promises included
pushing for regulations of some of South Korea’s largest companies, such
as Samsung and Hyundai. Park ran and won based on pledges to support
and build small and medium-sized businesses while encouraging more
exports.
Within four years, Park Guen-hye was impeached and tried on charges
of corruption. Park had always been close to Choi Soon-sil, the daughter
of another public figure. Soon-sil’s father was the head of the Church of
Eternal Life and a close family friend of former president Park Chung-hee.
Employability Skills Matrix (ESM)
Myth or
Science?
Career
OBjectives
An Ethical
Choice
Point/
Counter
point
Experiential
Exercise
Ethical
Dilemma
Case
Incident 1
Case
Incident 2
Critical
Thinking
✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Communication ✓ ✓ ✓
Collaboration ✓ ✓
Knowledge
Application and
Analysis
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Social
Responsibility ✓ ✓ ✓
MyLab Management Chapter Warm Up
If your professor has assigned this activity, go to www.pearson.com/
mylab/management to complete the chapter warm up.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 435 29/09/17 4:15 pm
436 PART 3 The Group
It seems Choi used her long-time friendship with the president to force Sam-
sung and many other large companies to donate to her charities. The scan-
dal goes much deeper than bribes, however. Choi had an unusual amount of
power over the leader of South Korea. Besides using her relationship with
the president to gain $70 million in donations to her nonprofit foundations,
Choi also was given illegal access to confidential documents and edited
presidential speeches.
Park Guen-hye won the election partly because she was seen as less
corrupt than her predecessors. In the last 30 years of democracy in South
Korea, two presidents have already been jailed. President Lee Myung-bak
was also implicated in a bribery scandal before leaving office. Similar to
Park, Lee’s friend and brother Sang-deuk used his connection to the presi-
dent to collect bribes from two Korean banks. Several of Lee’s former aides
were also charged with receiving bribes.
So what caused Park’s transformation from South Korea’s seemingly
least corrupt politician to an impeached president charged with corrup-
tion? Some South Koreans believe that Choi’s power as a religious leader
and family friend is to blame. Did Choi have influence over the new presi-
dent because she held the keys to her salvation? Or was Park corrupted by
receiving tremendous power?
The tale of Park’s downfall is not unique to South Korea. Political par-
ties are considered the most corrupt public institutions, according to Trans-
parency International’s 2013 survey on global corruption. The organization
found that a quarter of survey respondents had paid a bribe to politicians
in the past year. Around the globe, from India to southern Europe to the
United States, there are stories of political leaders using their power for
their own self-interest. This phenomenon occurs at all levels. In Florida,
former Opa-locka commissioner Luis Santiago used his position to gain
$40,000 in bribes. In Maryland, state senator Nathaniel T. Oaks was caught
pushing through legislation for a fake real estate project in exchange for
$15,000 in bribes.
In all these stories, officials were elected to serve the interests of the
public, yet they used their power to serve their own interests instead. Many
of these citizens were elected because they claimed they could clean up
a corrupt system. Then, when they gained power themselves, they used
their influence to further their own goals. As we can see from Park Guen-
hye’s story, however, there are other ways of gaining power besides obtain-
ing a leadership position in politics. Cho Soon-sil obtained power through
religious institutions and personal connections. Many of the bribery scan-
dals described above were possible because someone controlled resources
such as wealth or economic power.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 436 29/09/17 4:15 pm
Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 437
Sources: Based on M. Park, P. Hancocks and K. J. Kwon, “Park Guen-hye Claims South Korea
Presidential Victory,” CNN, December 19, 2012, http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/18/world/
asia/south-korea-presidential-election/; K. J. Kwon and M. Park, “South Korean Presi-
dent Apologizes for Bribery Scandals in His Inner Circle,” CNN, July 24, 2012, http://www
.cnn.com/2012/07/24/world/asia/south-korean-president-apology/index.html; Associ-
ated Press, “Impeached South Korean President Indicted, Faces Trial,” New York Post,
April 17, 2017, http://nypost.com/2017/04/17/impeached-south-korean-president-
indicted/; BBC Profiles, “Profile: South Korean President Park Guen-hye,” BBC News,
March 10, 2017, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-20787271; A. E. Marimow and
O. Wiggins, “Code Word ‘Lollipop’: That Was Bribe Cue for Maryland State Senator, Investi-
gators Charge,” The Washington Post, April 7, 2017; J. Weaver, “Opa-locka Politician Pleads
Guilty to Bribery, as FBI Continues Corruption Probe,” Miami Herald, January 10, 2017,
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article125617409.html; R. Jennings, “Five
Things to Know about South Korea’s Presidential Scandal,” Forbes, November 9, 2016,
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphjennings/2016/11/09/5-sad-and-creepy-things-you-
should-know-about-south-koreas-presidential-scandal/#59a510541556; and K. Rapoza,
“Transparency International Spells It Out: Politicians Are the Most Corrupt,” Forbes, July 9,
2013, https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2013/07/09/transparency-international-
spells-it-out-politicians-are-the-most-corrupt/#7497bca21c33.
In this chapter, we will learn about power, including how a person obtains power and the tactics employees use to exert their will over others. We will
also learn the role of political behavior in maintaining power within an orga-
nization. Power in organizations is a compelling force: People who have power
deny it, people who want it try not to look like they’re seeking it, and those who
are good at getting it are secretive about how they do so.1 We begin by explor-
ing our natural association of power with leadership.
Power and Leadership
In organizational behavior (OB), power refers to the capacity that A has to
influence the behavior of B so that B acts in accordance with A’s wishes.2 Some-
one can thus have power but not use it; it is a capacity or potential. Probably
the most important aspect of power is that it is a function of dependence. The
greater B’s dependence on A, the greater A’s power in the relationship. Depen-
dence, in turn, is based on alternatives that B perceives and the importance B
places on the alternative(s) that A controls. A person can have power over you
only if he or she controls something you desire. If you want a college degree
and have to pass a certain course to get it, and your current instructor is the
only faculty member in the college who teaches that course, she has power over
you because your alternatives are highly limited and you place a high degree of
importance on the outcome. Similarly, if you’re attending college on funds pro-
vided by your parents, you probably recognize the power they hold over you.
But once you’re out of school, have a job, and are making a good income, your
parents’ power is reduced significantly.
Money is a powerful variable for dependence. Who among us has not heard
of a rich relative who controls family members merely through the implicit or
13-1 Contrast leadership and power.
power The capacity that A has to influence
the behavior of B so that B acts in accordance
with A’s wishes.
dependence B’s relationship to A when A
possesses something that B requires.
MyLab Management Watch It
If your professor has assigned this activity, go to www.pearson.com/
mylab/management to complete the video exercise.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 437 29/09/17 4:15 pm
438 PART 3 The Group
explicit threat of “writing them out of the will”? Another example is found on
Wall Street, where portfolio manager Ping Jiang allegedly was able to coerce his
subordinate, analyst Andrew Tong, into taking female hormones and wearing
lipstick and makeup. Why such power? Jiang controlled Tong’s access to day
trading and thus his livelihood.3
A careful comparison of our description of power with our description of
leadership in Chapter 12 reveals the concepts are closely intertwined. Leaders
use power as a means of attaining group goals. How are the two terms, leader-
ship and power, different? Power does not require goal compatibility, just depen-
dence. Leadership, on the other hand, requires some congruence between
the goals of the leader and those being led. A second difference relates to the
direction of influence. Leadership research focuses on the downward influence
on followers. It minimizes the importance of lateral and upward influence pat-
terns. Power research takes all factors into consideration. For a third difference,
leadership research often emphasizes style. It seeks answers to questions such
as: “How supportive should a leader be?” and “How much decision making
should be shared with followers?” In contrast, the research on power focuses
on tactics for gaining compliance. Leadership concentrates on the individual
leader’s influence, while the study of power acknowledges that groups as well as
individuals can use power to control other individuals or groups.
You may have noted that, for a power situation to exist, one person or group
needs to have control over resources that the other person or group values.
This is usually the case in established leadership situations. However, power
relationships are possible in all areas of life, and power can be obtained in
many ways. Let’s explore the various sources of power next.
Bases of Power
Where does power come from? What gives an individual or a group influence
over others? We answer these questions by dividing the bases or sources of
power into two general groupings—formal and personal—and breaking down
each into more specific categories.4
Formal Power
Formal power is based on an individual’s position in an organization. It can
come from the ability to coerce or reward, or from formal authority.
Coercive Power The coercive power base depends on the target’s fear of nega-
tive results from failing to comply. On the physical level, coercive power rests
on the application, or the threat of application, of bodily distress through the
infliction of pain, the restriction of movement, or the withholding of basic
physiological or safety needs.
At the organizational level, A has coercive power over B if A can dismiss, sus-
pend, or demote B, assuming B values her job. If A can assign B work activities B
finds unpleasant, or treat B in a manner B finds embarrassing, A possesses coer-
cive power over B. Coercive power comes also from withholding key informa-
tion. People in an organization who have data or knowledge that others need
can make others dependent on them. When subordinates are being abused by
supervisors, coercive power is the main force that keeps them from retaliating.5
Reward Power The opposite of coercive power is reward power, which people
comply with because it produces positive benefits; someone who can distribute
rewards that others view as valuable has power over them. These rewards can be
13-2 Explain the three bases of formal power and the two
bases of personal power.
coercive power A power base that depends
on fear of the negative results from failing to
comply.
reward power Compliance achieved based
on the ability to distribute rewards that others
view as valuable.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 438 29/09/17 4:15 pm
Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 439
financial—such as controlling pay rates, raises, and bonuses—or nonfinancial,
including recognition, promotions, interesting work assignments, friendly col-
leagues, and preferred work shifts or sales territories.6
Legitimate Power In formal groups and organizations, probably the most com-
mon access to one or more of the power bases is through legitimate power.
It represents the formal authority to control and use organizational resources
based on the person’s structural position in the organization.
Legitimate power is broader than the power to coerce and reward. Spe-
cifically, it includes members’ acceptance of the authority of a hierarchical
position. We associate power so closely with the concept of hierarchy that
just drawing longer lines in an organization chart leads people to infer the
leaders are especially powerful.7 In general, when school principals, bank
presidents, or army captains speak, teachers, tellers, and first lieutenants
usually comply.
Personal Power
Many of the most competent and productive chip designers at Intel have power,
but they aren’t managers and they have no formal power. What they have is per-
sonal power, which comes from an individual’s unique characteristics.8 There
are two bases of personal power: expertise and the respect and admiration of
others. Personal power is not mutually exclusive from formal power, but it can
be independent.
Expert Power Expert power is influence wielded as a result of expertise, spe-
cial skills, or knowledge.9 As jobs become more specialized, we become depen-
dent on experts to achieve goals. It is generally acknowledged that physicians
have expertise and hence expert power: Most of us follow our doctor’s advice.
Computer specialists, tax accountants, economists, industrial psychologists,
and other specialists wield power as a result of their expertise.
legitimate power The power a person
receives as a result of his or her position
in the formal hierarchy of an organization.
expert power Influence based on special
skills or knowledge.
Internet entrepreneur Mark Zucker-
berg, cofounder and CEO of Facebook,
has expert power. Shown here talking
with employees, Zuckerberg earned
the title “software guy” during college
because of his expertise in computer
programming. Today, Facebook
depends on his expertise to achieve
company goals.
Source: Tony Avelar/FR155217/AP Images
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 439 29/09/17 4:15 pm
440 PART 3 The Group
Referent Power Referent power is based on identification with a person who
has desirable resources or personal traits.10 If I like, respect, and admire you,
you can exercise power over me because I want to please you.
Referent power develops out of admiration of another and a desire to be
like that person. It helps explain, for instance, why celebrities are paid millions
of dollars to endorse products in commercials. Marketing research shows peo-
ple such as LeBron James and Tom Brady have the power to influence your
choice of athletic shoes and credit cards. With a little practice, you and I could
probably deliver as smooth a sales pitch as these celebrities, but the buying
public doesn’t identify with us. Some people who are not in formal leadership
positions have referent power and exert influence over others because of their
charismatic dynamism, likability, and emotional appeal.11
Which Bases of Power Are Most Effective?
Of the three bases of formal power (coercive, reward, legitimate) and two bases
of personal power (expert, referent), which are most important? Research sug-
gests the personal sources of power are most effective. Both expert and ref-
erent power are positively related to employees’ satisfaction with supervision,
their organizational commitment, and their performance, whereas reward and
legitimate power seem to be unrelated to these outcomes. One source of for-
mal power—coercive power—can be damaging.
Referent power can be a powerful motivator. Consider Steve Stoute’s com-
pany, Translation, which matches pop-star spokespersons with corporations
that want to promote their brands. Stoute has paired Justin Timberlake with
McDonald’s, Beyoncé with Tommy Hilfiger, and Jay-Z with Reebok. Stoute’s
business seems to be all about referent power. His firm aims to use the cred-
ibility of artists and performers to reach youth culture.12 The success of these
well-known companies attests to Stoute’s expectation that the buying public
identifies with and emulates his spokespersons and therefore thinks highly of
the represented brands.
Dependence: The Key to Power
The most important aspect of power is that it is a function of dependence. In
this section, we show how understanding dependence helps us understand the
degrees of power.
The General Dependence Postulate
Let’s begin with a general postulate: The greater B’s dependence on A, the more
power A has over B. When you possess anything others require that you alone
control, you make them dependent on you and therefore you gain power over
them.13 As the old saying goes, “In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is
king!” But if something is plentiful, possessing it will not increase your power.
Therefore, the more you can expand your own options, the less power you
place in the hands of others. This explains why most organizations develop
multiple suppliers rather than give their business to only one. It also explains
why so many people aspire to financial independence. Independence reduces
the power others can wield to limit our access to opportunities and resources.
What Creates Dependence?
Dependence increases when the resource you control is important, scarce, and
nonsubstitutable.14
referent power Influence based on iden-
tification with a person who has desirable
resources or personal traits.
13-3 Explain the role of dependence in power
relationships.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 440 29/09/17 4:15 pm
Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 441
Importance If nobody wants what you have, it’s not going to create depen-
dence. Note, however, that there are many degrees of importance, from need-
ing the resource for survival to wanting a resource that is in fashion or adds to
convenience.
Scarcity Ferruccio Lamborghini, who created the exotic supercars that still
carry his name, understood the importance of scarcity and used it to his advan-
tage during World War II. When Lamborghini was in Rhodes with the Italian
army, his superiors were impressed with his mechanical skills because he dem-
onstrated an almost uncanny ability to repair tanks and cars no one else could
fix. After the war, he admitted his ability was largely due to his having been the
first person on the island to receive the repair manuals, which he memorized
and then destroyed to make himself indispensable.15
We see the scarcity–dependence relationship in the power situation of
employment. Where the supply of labor is low relative to demand, workers can
negotiate compensation and benefits packages far more attractive than those
in occupations with an abundance of candidates. For example, today, college
administrators have no problem finding English instructors because there is a
high supply and low demand. In contrast, the market for network systems ana-
lysts is comparatively tight, with demand high and supply limited. The result-
ing bargaining power of computer-engineering faculty members allows them to
negotiate higher salaries, lighter teaching loads, and other benefits.
Nonsubstitutability The fewer viable substitutes for a resource, the more
power a person controlling that resource has. At universities that value faculty
publishing, for example, the more recognition the faculty member receives
through publication, the more control that person has because other universi-
ties want faculty members who are highly published and visible.
Social Network Analysis: A Tool for Assessing Resources
One tool to assess the exchange of resources and dependencies within an
organization is social network analysis.16 This method examines patterns of com-
munication among organizational members to identify how information flows
Scientist Maria Kovalenko is in a
position of power at Gilead Sciences,
a research-based biopharmaceutical
firm. Scientists are in a powerful
occupational group at Gilead because
they discover and develop medicines
that improve the lives of patients
and contribute to Gilead’s growth and
success.
Source: David Paul Morris/Bloomberg/Getty Images
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 441 29/09/17 4:15 pm
442 PART 3 The Group
between them. Within a social network, or connections between people who
share professional interests, each individual or group is called a node, and the
links between nodes are called ties. When nodes communicate or exchange
resources frequently, they are said to have very strong ties. Other nodes that
are not engaged in direct communication with one another achieve resource
flows through intermediary nodes. In other words, some nodes act as brokers
between otherwise unconnected nodes. A graphical illustration of the asso-
ciations among individuals in a social network is called a sociogram and func-
tions like an informal version of an organization chart. The difference is that a
formal organization chart shows how authority is supposed to flow, whereas a
sociogram shows how resources really flow in an organization. An example of a
sociogram is shown in Exhibit 13-1.
Networks can create substantial power dynamics, such as enforcing norms
(see Chapter 9) or creating change within an organization. Thus, employ-
ees who have many connections to an organizational social network are less
likely to engage in corruption.17 Those in the position of brokers tend to
have more power because they can leverage the unique resources they can
acquire from different groups. In other words, many people depend on bro-
kers, which gives the brokers more power. For example, organizational culture
changes such as corporate social responsibility (CSR) awareness often begin
in a single connected group of individuals, grow in strength, and then slowly
move to other connected groups through brokers over time.18 Data from the
United Kingdom’s National Health Service show that change agents—people
entrusted with helping an organization to make a significant change—have
more success if they are information brokers.19 These functions are not with-
out cost, however. One study found that people identified as central to advice
An Organizational SociogramExhibit 13-1
Project Team
Suppliers
Operations
Albert
Thomas
AnneMartha
Eric
Sales &
Marketing
Finance
Customer
ServiceCustomers
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 442 29/09/17 4:15 pm
Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 443
networks were more likely to quit their jobs, possibly because they did a great
deal of extra work without reward.20
A social network analysis in an organization can be implemented in many
ways.21 Some organizations keep track of the flow of e-mail communications
or document sharing across departments. These big-data tools are an easy way
to gather objective information about how individuals exchange information.
Other organizations look at data from human resources (HR) information sys-
tems, analyzing how supervisors and subordinates interact with one another.
These data sources can produce sociograms showing how resources and power
flow. Leaders can then identify powerful brokers who exert the strongest
influence on many groups, and address these key individuals.
Power Tactics
What power tactics do people use to translate power bases into specific action?
What options do they have for influencing their bosses, coworkers, or employ-
ees? Research has identified nine distinct influence tactics:22
• Legitimacy. Relying on your authority position or saying that a request is
in accordance with organizational policies or rules.
• Rational persuasion. Presenting logical arguments and factual evidence to
demonstrate that a request is reasonable.
• Inspirational appeals. Developing emotional commitment by appealing to
a target’s values, needs, hopes, and aspirations.
• Consultation. Increasing support by involving the target in deciding how
to accomplish your plan.
• Exchange. Rewarding the target with benefits or favors in exchange for
acceding to a request.
• Personal appeals. Asking for compliance based on friendship or loyalty.
• Ingratiation. Using flattery, praise, or friendly behavior prior to making a
request.
• Pressure. Using warnings, repeated demands, and threats.
• Coalitions. Enlisting the aid or support of others to persuade the target to
agree.
Using Power Tactics
Some tactics are more effective than others. Rational persuasion, inspirational
appeals, and consultation tend to be the most effective, especially when the
audience is highly interested in the outcomes of a decision process. The pres-
sure tactic tends to backfire and is typically the least effective of the nine.23 You
can increase your chance of success by using two or more tactics together or
sequentially, as long as your choices are compatible.24 Using ingratiation and
legitimacy together can lessen negative reactions, but only when the audience
does not really care about the outcome of a decision process or the policy is
routine.25
Let’s consider the most effective way of getting a raise. You can start with
a rational approach—figure out how your pay compares to that of your orga-
nizational peers, land a competing job offer, gather data that testify to your
performance, or use salary calculators like Salary.com to compare your pay with
others in your occupation—then share your findings with your manager. The
results can be impressive. Kitty Dunning, a vice president at Don Jagoda Associ-
ates, landed a 16 percent raise when she e-mailed her boss numbers showing
she had increased sales.26
13-4 Identify power or influ-ence tactics and their
contingencies.
power tactics Ways in which individuals
translate power bases into specific actions.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 443 29/09/17 4:15 pm
444 PART 3 The Group
While rational persuasion may work in this situation, the effectiveness of
some influence tactics depends on the direction of influence,27 and of course
on the audience. As Exhibit 13-2 shows, rational persuasion is the only tac-
tic effective across organizational levels. Inspirational appeals work best as a
downward-influencing tactic with subordinates. When pressure works, it’s
generally downward only. Personal appeals and coalitions are most effective
as lateral influence. Other factors relating to the effectiveness of influence
include the sequencing of tactics, a person’s skill in using the tactic, and the
organizational culture.
In general, you’re more likely to be effective if you begin with “softer” tac-
tics that rely on personal power, such as personal and inspirational appeals,
rational persuasion, and consultation. If these fail, you can move to “harder”
tactics, such as exchange, coalitions, and pressure, which emphasize formal
power and incur greater costs and risks.28 A single soft tactic is more effective
than a single hard tactic, and combining two soft tactics or a soft tactic and
rational persuasion is more effective than any single tactic or combination of
hard tactics.29
As we mentioned, the effectiveness of tactics depends on the audience.30
People especially likely to comply with soft power tactics tend to be more reflec-
tive and intrinsically motivated; they have high self-esteem and a greater desire
for control. Those likely to comply with hard power tactics are more action-
oriented and extrinsically motivated, and more focused on getting along with
others than on getting their own way.
Cultural Preferences for Power Tactics
Preference for power tactics varies across cultures.31 Those from individualist
countries tend to see power in personalized terms and as a legitimate means
of advancing their personal ends, whereas those in collectivist countries see
power in social terms and as a legitimate means of helping others.32 A study
comparing managers in the United States and China found U.S. managers pre-
ferred rational appeal, whereas Chinese managers preferred coalition tactics.33
Reason-based tactics are consistent with the U.S. preference for direct con-
frontation and rational persuasion to influence others and resolve differences,
while coalition tactics align with the Chinese preference for meeting difficult
or controversial requests with indirect approaches.
Applying Power Tactics
People differ in their political skill, or their ability to influence others to
attain their own objectives. The politically skilled are more effective users
of all influence tactics, leading to many positive outcomes in the workplace.
People who are politically skilled have higher self-efficacy, job satisfaction,
Preferred Power Tactics by Influence DirectionExhibit 13-2
Upward Influence Downward Influence Lateral Influence
Rational persuasion Rational persuasion
Inspirational appeals
Pressure
Consultation
Ingratiation
Exchange
Legitimacy
Rational persuasion
Consultation
Ingratiation
Exchange
Legitimacy
Personal appeals
Coalitions
political skill The ability to influence others
so that one’s objectives are attained.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 444 29/09/17 4:15 pm
Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 445
work productivity, and career success. They are less likely to be victims of
workplace aggression. Political skill is also more effective when the stakes
are high, such as when the individual is accountable for important orga-
nizational outcomes. Finally, the politically skilled are able to exert their
influence without others detecting it, a key element in effectiveness (it’s
damaging to be labeled political).34 These individuals are able to use their
political skills in environments with low levels of procedural and distributive
justice. Politically skilled individuals tend to receive higher performance
ratings when they ask strategically for feedback in a way that enhances
their image in the organization.35 However, when an organization has fairly
applied rules, free of favoritism or biases, political skill is actually negatively
related to job performance ratings.36
We know cultures within organizations differ markedly—some are
warm, relaxed, and supportive; others are formal and conservative. Some
encourage participation and consultation, some encourage reason, and
still others rely on pressure. People who fit the culture of the organization
tend to obtain more influence.37 Specifically, extraverts tend to be more
influential in team-oriented organizations, and highly conscientious people
are more influential in organizations that value working alone on technical
tasks. People who fit the culture are influential because they can perform
especially well in the domains deemed most important for success. Thus,
the organization itself influences which subset of power tactics is viewed as
acceptable for use.
How Power Affects People
Until this point, we’ve discussed what power is and how it is acquired. But we’ve
not yet answered one important question: “Does power corrupt?”
There is certainly evidence that there are corrupting aspects of power. Power
leads people to place their own interests ahead of others’ needs or goals. Why
does this happen? Power not only leads people to focus on their self-interests
because they can, it liberates them to focus inward and thus come to place
greater weight on their own aims and interests. Power also appears to lead indi-
viduals to “objectify” others (to see them as tools to obtain their instrumental
goals) and to see relationships as more peripheral.38
That’s not all. Powerful people react—especially negatively—to any threats
to their competence. People in positions of power hold on to power when they
can, and individuals who face threats to their power are exceptionally willing
to take actions to retain it whether their actions harm others or not. Those
given power are more likely to make self-interested decisions when faced with
a moral hazard, such as when hedge fund managers take more risks with other
people’s money because they’re rewarded for gains but less often punished for
losses. People in power are more willing to denigrate others. Power also leads
to overconfident decision making.39
Frank Lloyd Wright, perhaps the greatest U.S. architect, is a good example
of power’s corrupting effects. Early in his career, Wright worked for and was
mentored by a renowned architect, Louis Sullivan (sometimes known as the
father of the skyscraper). Before Wright achieved greatness, he was generous
in his praise for Sullivan. Later in his career, that praise faded, and Wright even
took credit for one of Sullivan’s noted designs. Wright was never a benevolent
man, but as his power accumulated, so did his potential to behave in a “mon-
strous” way toward others.40
13-5 Identify the causes and consequences of abuse
of power.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 445 29/09/17 4:15 pm
446 PART 3 The Group
Power Variables
As we’ve discussed, power does appear to have some important disturbing
effects on us. But that is hardly the whole story—power is more complicated
than that. It doesn’t affect everyone in the same way, and there are even posi-
tive effects of power. Let’s consider each of these in turn.
First, the toxic effects of power depend on the wielder’s personality. Research
suggests that if we have an anxious personality, power does not corrupt us
because we are less likely to think that using power benefits us.41 Second, the
corrosive effect of power can be contained by organizational systems. One study
found, for example, that while power made people behave in a self-serving
manner, when accountability for this behavior was initiated, the self-serving
behavior stopped. Third, we have the means to blunt the negative effects of
power. One study showed that simply expressing gratitude toward powerful oth-
ers makes them less likely to act aggressively against us. Finally, remember the
saying that those with little power abuse what little they have? There seems to be
some truth to this in that the people most likely to abuse power are those who
start low in status and gain power. Why? It appears having low status is threaten-
ing, and the fear this creates is used in negative ways if power is later given.42
As you can see, some factors can moderate the negative effects of power. But
there can be general positive effects. Power energizes and increases motivation
to achieve goals. It can also enhance our motivation to help others. One study
found, for example, that a desire to help others translated into actual work
behavior when people felt a sense of power.43
This study points to an important insight about power. It is not so much
that power corrupts as it reveals what we value. Supporting this line of reasoning,
another study found that power led to self-interested behavior only in those
with a weak moral identity (the degree to which morals are core to someone’s
identity). In those with a strong moral identity, power enhanced their moral
awareness and willingness to act.44
Sexual Harassment: Unequal Power in the Workplace
Sexual harassment is defined as any unwanted activity of a sexual nature that
affects an individual’s employment or creates a hostile work environment.
According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC),
sexual harassment happens when a person encounters “unwelcome sexual
advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of
a sexual nature” on the job that disrupts work performance or that creates an
“intimidating, hostile, or offensive” work environment.45 Although the defini-
tion changes from country to country, most nations have at least some poli-
cies to protect workers. Whether the policies or laws are followed is another
question, however. Equal employment opportunity legislation is established in
Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Oman, for example, but studies suggest it might not
be well implemented.46
Generally, sexual harassment is more prevalent in male-dominated societ-
ies. For example, a study in Pakistan found that up to 93 percent of female
workers were sexually harassed.47 In Singapore, up to 54 percent of workers
(women and men) reported they were sexually harassed.48 The percentages in
the United States and some other countries are generally much lower but still
troubling. Surveys indicate about one-quarter of U.S. women and 10 percent
of men have been sexually harassed.49 Data from the EEOC suggest that sexual
harassment is decreasing: Sexual harassment claims now make up 10 percent of
all discrimination claims, compared with 20 percent in the mid-1990s. Of this
percentage, though, claims from men have increased from 11 percent of total
claims in 1997 to 17.5 percent today.50 Sexual harassment is disproportionately
sexual harassment Any unwanted activity
of a sexual nature that affects an individual’s
employment and creates a hostile work
environment.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 446 29/09/17 4:15 pm
Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 447
prevalent for women in certain types of jobs. In the restaurant industry, for
instance, 80 percent of female wait staff reported having been sexually harassed
by coworkers or customers, compared to 70 percent of male wait staff.51
Most studies confirm that power is central to understanding sexual harass-
ment.52 This seems true whether the harassment comes from a supervisor,
coworker, or employee. And sexual harassment is more likely to occur when
there are large power differentials. The supervisor–employee dyad best charac-
terizes an unequal power relationship, where formal power gives the supervisor
the capacity to reward and coerce. Because employees want favorable perfor-
mance reviews, salary increases, and the like, supervisors control resources
most employees consider important and scarce. When there aren’t effective
controls to detect and prevent sexual harassment, abusers are more likely to
act. For example, male respondents in one study in Switzerland who were high
in hostile sexism reported higher intentions to engage in sexual harassment in
organizations that had low levels of justice, suggesting that failure to have con-
sistent policies and procedures for all employees might increase levels of sexual
harassment.53
Sexual harassment can have a detrimental impact on individuals and the
organization, but it can be avoided. The manager’s role is critical:
1. Make sure an active policy defines what constitutes sexual harassment, informs
employees they can be fired for inappropriate behavior, and establishes procedures for
making complaints.
2. Reassure employees that they will not encounter retaliation if they file a complaint.
3. Investigate every complaint, and inform the legal and HR departments.
4. Make sure offenders are disciplined or terminated.
5. Set up in-house seminars to raise employee awareness of sexual harassment issues.
The bottom line is that managers have a responsibility to protect their employ-
ees from a hostile work environment. They may easily be unaware that one of
their employees is being sexually harassed, but being unaware does not protect
them or their organization. If investigators believe a manager could have known
about the harassment, both the manager and the company can be held liable.
A federal jury awarded this woman
a $95 million judgment in a sexual
harassment lawsuit against her
employer for harassment from her
supervisor that included unwanted
physical contact. The jury found
the supervisor guilty of assault and
battery, and the company liable for
negligent supervision and sexual
harassment.
Source: Bill Greenblatt/UPI/Newscom
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 447 29/09/17 4:15 pm
448 PART 3 The Group
Politics: Power in Action
Whenever people get together in groups, power will be exerted. People in
organizations want to carve out a niche to exert influence, earn rewards, and
advance their careers. If they convert their power into action, we describe them
as being engaged in politics. Those with good political skills have the ability to
use their bases of power effectively.54 Politics are not only inevitable; they might
be essential, too (see OB Poll).
Definition of Organizational Politics
There is no shortage of definitions of organizational politics. Essentially, this type
of politics focuses on the use of power to affect decision making in an organiza-
tion, sometimes for self-serving and organizationally unsanctioned behaviors.55
For our purposes, political behavior in organizations consists of activities that
are not required as part of an individual’s formal role but that influence, or
attempt to influence, the distribution of advantages and disadvantages within
the organization.56
This definition encompasses what most people mean when they talk about
organizational politics. Political behavior is outside specified job requirements.
It requires some attempt to use power bases. It includes efforts to influence
the goals, criteria, or processes used for decision making. Our definition is
broad enough to include varied political behaviors such as withholding key
information from decision makers, joining a coalition, whistle-blowing, spread-
ing rumors, leaking confidential information to the media, exchanging favors
with others for mutual benefit, and lobbying on behalf of or against a partic-
ular individual or decision alternative. In this way, political behavior is often
negative, but not always.
The Reality of Politics
Interviews with experienced managers show that most believe political behav-
ior is a major part of organizational life.57 Many managers report some use
of political behavior is ethical, as long as it doesn’t directly harm anyone else.
13-6 Describe how politics work in organizations.
political behavior Activities that are not
required as part of a person’s formal role in
the organization but that influence, or attempt
to influence, the distribution of advantages
and disadvantages within the organization.
6
0%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Creativity
4%
Initiative
18%
Hard work
27%
Politics
51%
How do employees get ahead in your organization?
OB POLL
Importance of Organizational Politics
Source: Based on D. Crampton, “Is How Americans Feel about Their Jobs Changing?” (September 28, 2012), http://corevalues.com/employee-motivation/
is-how-americans-feel-about-their-jobs-changing.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 448 29/09/17 4:15 pm
Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 449
They describe politics as necessary and believe someone who never uses politi-
cal behavior will have a hard time getting things done. Most also indicate that
they have never been trained to use political behavior effectively. But why,
you may wonder, must politics exist? Isn’t it possible for an organization to be
politics-free? It’s possible—but unlikely.
Organizations have individuals and groups with different values, goals, and
interests.58 This sets up the potential for conflict over the allocation of limited
resources, such as budgets, work space, and salary and bonus pools. If resources
were abundant, all constituencies within an organization could satisfy their
goals. But because they are limited, not everyone’s interests can be satisfied.
Furthermore, gains by one individual or group are often perceived as coming
at the expense of others within the organization (whether they are or not).
These forces create competition among members for the organization’s limited
resources.
Maybe the most important factor leading to politics within organizations
is the realization that most of the “facts” used to allocate limited resources
are open to interpretation. When allocating pay based on performance, for
instance, what is good performance? What’s an adequate improvement? What
constitutes an unsatisfactory job? The manager of any major league baseball
team knows a .400 hitter is a high performer and a .125 hitter is a poor per-
former. You don’t need to be a baseball genius to know you should play your
.400 hitter and send the .125 hitter back to the minors. But what if you have to
choose between players who hit .280 and .290? Then less objective factors come
into play: fielding expertise, attitude, potential, ability to perform in a clutch,
loyalty to the team, and so on. More managerial decisions resemble the choice
between a .280 and a .290 hitter than between a .125 hitter and a .400 hitter. It
is in this large and ambiguous middle ground of organizational life—where the
facts don’t speak for themselves—that politics flourish.
Because most decisions have to be made in a climate of ambiguity—
where facts are rarely objective and thus open to interpretation—people
within organizations will use whatever influence they can to support their
Whistle-blower Michael Woodford was
fired from his position as CEO of Japa-
nese camera-maker Olympus after
informing company officials about
accounting irregularities. Although not
part of his job, Woodford uncovered
a 13-year accounting fraud by some
company executives.
Source: Luke McGregor/Reuters
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 449 29/09/17 4:15 pm
450 PART 3 The Group
goals and interests. That, of course, creates the activities we call politicking.
One person’s “selfless effort to benefit the organization” is seen by another
as a “blatant attempt to further his or her interest.”59
Therefore, to answer the question of whether it is possible for an organiza-
tion to be politics-free, we can say yes—if all members of that organization hold
the same goals and interests, if organizational resources are not scarce, and
if performance outcomes are completely clear and objective. But that doesn’t
describe the organizational world in which most of us live.
The Causes and Consequences
of Political Behavior
Now that we’ve discussed the constant presence of politicking in organizations,
let’s discuss the causes and consequences of these behaviors.
Factors Contributing to Political Behavior
Not all groups or organizations are equally political. In some organizations,
politicking is overt and rampant, while in others politics plays a small role in
influencing outcomes. Why this variation? Research and observation have iden-
tified a number of factors that appear to encourage political behavior. Some are
individual characteristics, derived from the qualities of the people employed
by the organization; others are a result of the organization’s culture or inter-
nal environment. Exhibit 13-3 illustrates how both individual and organiza-
tional factors can increase political behavior and provide favorable outcomes
(increased rewards and averted punishments) for individuals and groups in the
organization.
Individual Factors At the individual level, researchers have identified cer-
tain personality traits, needs, and other factors likely to be related to political
behavior. In terms of traits, we find that employees who are high self-monitors,
13-7 Identify the causes, consequences, and
ethics of political
behavior.
Factors That Influence Political BehaviorExhibit 13-3
Political behavior
Low
High
Favorable outcomes
• Rewards
• Averted punishments
Individual factors
• High self-monitors
• Internal locus of control
• High Machiavellian personality
• Organizational investment
• Perceived job alternatives
• Expectations of success
Organizational factors
• Reallocation of resources
• Promotion opportunities
• Low trust
• Role ambiguity
• Unclear
performance
evaluation system
• Zero-sum reward practices
• Democratic decision making
• High performance pressures
• Self-serving senior managers
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 450 29/09/17 4:15 pm
Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 451
possess an internal locus of control, and have a high need for power are more
likely to engage in political behavior. The high self-monitor is more sensitive to
social cues, exhibits higher levels of social conformity, and is more likely to be
skilled in political behavior than the low self-monitor. Because they believe they
can control their environment, individuals with an internal locus of control are
more prone to take a proactive stance and attempt to manipulate situations in
their favor. Not surprisingly, the Machiavellian personality trait—characterized
by the will to manipulate and the desire for power—is consistent with using
politics as a means to further personal interests.
An individual’s investment in the organization and perceived alternatives
influence the degree to which he or she will pursue illegitimate means of polit-
ical action.60 The more a person expects increased future benefits from the
organization, and the more that person has to lose if forced out, the less likely
he or she is to use illegitimate means. Conversely, the more alternate job oppor-
tunities an individual has—due to a favorable job market, possession of scarce
skills or knowledge, prominent reputation, or influential contacts outside the
organization—the more likely the person is to employ politics.
An individual with low expectations of success from political means is
unlikely to use them. High expectations from such measures are most likely to
be the province of both experienced and powerful individuals with polished
political skills, and inexperienced and naïve employees who misjudge their
chances.
Some individuals engage in more political behavior because they simply
are better at it. Such individuals read interpersonal interactions well, fit their
behavior to situational needs, and excel at networking.61 These people are
often indirectly rewarded for their political efforts. For example, a study of a
construction firm in southern China found that politically skilled subordinates
were more likely to receive recommendations for rewards from their supervi-
sors and that politically oriented supervisors were especially likely to respond
positively to politically skilled subordinates.62 Other studies from countries
around the world have also shown that higher levels of political skill are associ-
ated with higher levels of perceived job performance.63
Organizational Factors Although we acknowledge the role that individual dif-
ferences can play, the evidence more strongly suggests that certain situations
and cultures promote politics. Specifically, when an organization’s resources
are declining, when the existing pattern of resources is changing, and when
there is opportunity for promotions, politicking is more likely to surface.64
When resources are reduced, people may engage in political actions to safe-
guard what they have. Also, any changes, especially those implying significant
reallocation of resources within the organization, are likely to stimulate conflict
and increase politicking.
Cultures characterized by low trust, role ambiguity, unclear performance
evaluation systems, zero-sum (win–lose) reward allocation practices, demo-
cratic decision making, high pressure for performance, and self-serving senior
managers will also create breeding grounds for politicking.65 Because political
MyLab Management Try It
If your professor has assigned this activity, go to www.pearson.com/
mylab/management to complete the Mini Sim.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 451 29/09/17 4:15 pm
452 PART 3 The Group
activities are not required as part of the employee’s formal role, the greater the
role ambiguity, the more employees can engage in unnoticed political activity.
Role ambiguity means that the prescribed employee behaviors are not clear;
therefore, there are fewer limits to the scope and functions of the employee’s
political actions.
The more an organizational culture emphasizes the zero-sum or win–lose
approach to reward allocations, the more employees will be motivated to
engage in politicking. The zero-sum approach treats the reward “pie” as fixed,
so any gain one person or group achieves comes at the expense of another
person or group. For example, if $15,000 is distributed among five employees
for raises, any employee who gets more than $3,000 takes money away from one
or more of the others. Such a practice encourages making others look bad and
increasing the visibility of what you do.
There are also political forces at work in the relationships between orga-
nizations, where politics work differently depending on the organizational
cultures.66 One study showed that when two organizations with very political
environments interacted with one another, the political interactions between
zero-sum approach An approach that treats
the reward “pie” as fixed so that any gains by
one individual are at the expense of another.
Career OBjectives
Should I become political?
My office is so political! Everyone is
just looking for ways to get ahead
by plotting and scheming rather than
doing the job. Should I just go along
with it and develop my own political
strategy?
— Julia
Dear Julia:
There’s definitely a temptation to join
in when other people are behaving
politically. If you want to advance your
career, you need to think about social
relationships and how to work with
other people in a smart and diplomatic
way. But that doesn’t mean you have to
give in to pressure to engage in organi-
zational politics.
Of course, in many workplaces, hard
work and achievement aren’t recog-
nized, which heightens politicking and
lowers performance. But politics aren’t
just potentially bad for the company.
People who are seen as political can be
gradually excluded from social networks
and informal communication. Coworkers
can sabotage a person with a reputation
for dishonesty or manipulation so they
don’t have to deal with him or her. It’s
also likely that a political person will be
the direct target of revenge from those
who feel they’ve been wronged.
If you want to provide a positive
alternative to political behavior in your
workplace, there are a few steps you
can take:
• Document your work efforts, and find
data to back up your accomplish-
ments. Political behavior thrives in
an ambiguous environment where
standards for success are subjec-
tive and open to manipulation. The
best way to shortcut politics is to
move the focus toward clear, objec-
tive markers of work performance.
• Call out political behavior when you
see it. Political behavior is, by its very
nature, secretive and underhanded.
By bringing politics to light, you limit
this capacity to manipulate people
against one another.
• Try to develop a network with only
those individuals who are interested
in performing well together. This
makes it hard for a very political per-
son to get a lot done. On the other
hand, trustworthy and cooperative
people will be able to find many
allies who are genuinely supportive.
These support networks will result in
performance levels that a lone politi-
cal person simply cannot match.
Remember, in the long run a good
reputation can be your greatest asset!
Sources: Based on A. Lavoie “How to Get
Rid of Toxic Office Politics,” Fast Company,
April 10, 2014, http://www.fastcompany
.com/3028856/work-smart/how-to-make-office-
politicking-a-lame-duck; C. Conner, “Office
Politics: Must You Play?,” Forbes, April
14, 2013, http://www.forbes.com/sites/
cherylsnappconner/2013/04/14/office-politics-
must-you-play-a-handbook-for-survivalsuccess/;
and J. A. Colquitt and J. B. Rodell, “Justice,
Trust, and Trust worthiness: A Longitudinal
Analysis Integrating Three Theoretical Per-
spectives,” Academy of Management Journal
54 (2011): 1183–206.
The opinions provided here are of the manag-
ers and authors only and do not necessar-
ily reflect those of their organizations. The
authors or managers are not responsible for
any errors or omissions, or for the results
obtained from the use of this information.
In no event will the authors or managers,
or their related partnerships or corporations
thereof, be liable to you or anyone else for
any decision made or action taken in reliance
on the opinions provided here.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 452 29/09/17 4:15 pm
Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 453
Organizations foster politicking when
they reduce resources. By announcing
plans to downsize its global workforce
of 100,000 employees in an effort to
increase its competitiveness, French
pharmaceutical firm Sanofi stimulated
political activity among employees
who organized protests against the
job cuts.
Source: Robert Pratta/Reuters
Myth or Science?
Powerful Leaders Keep Their (Fr)Enemies Close
This statement appears to be true.We all have heard the term frenemies to describe friends
who are also rivals or people who act
like friends but secretly dislike each
other. Some observers have argued
that frenemies are increasing at work
due to the “abundance of very close,
intertwined relationships that bridge
people’s professional and personal
lives.”
Keeping enemies close may be one
reason Barack Obama appointed Hill-
ary Clinton secretary of state after their
bitter battle for the U.S. presidency, or
in the business world, why one entre-
preneur decided not to sue a former
college classmate who, after working
for her startup as a consultant, took
that knowledge and started his own,
competing company.
Is it really wise to keep your ene-
mies close? And, if so, why?
New research suggests answers to
these questions. Three experimental
studies found individuals chose to work
in the same room as their rival even
when informed they would probably
perform better apart, sit closer to rivals
when working together, and express an
explicit preference to be closer to the
rival. The researchers further found the
primary reason for the “being closer”
effect was the desire to monitor the
rival’s behavior and performance.
The researchers also found the
“keeping enemies closer” effect was
strong under certain conditions—when
the individual was socially dominant,
when the individual felt more com-
petition from the team member,
and when rewards and the ability to
serve as leader were dependent on
performance.
These results suggest the concept
of frenemies is very real and that we
choose to keep our rivals close so we
can keep an eye on the competition
they bring.
Sources: Based on M. Thompson, “How to
Work with Your Startup Frenemies,” Venture-
Beat, December 22, 2012, http://venturebeat
.com/2012/12/22/frenemies/; and N. L.
Mead and J. K. Maner, “On Keeping Your Ene-
mies Close: Powerful Leaders Seek Proximity
to Ingroup Power Threats,” Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology 102 (2012):
576–91.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 453 29/09/17 4:15 pm
454 PART 3 The Group
them hurt performance in collaborative projects. On the other hand, when
companies with less internal political behavior interacted with one another,
even political disputes between them did not lead to lower performance in
collaborative projects. This study shows companies should be wary of forming
alliances with companies that have high levels of internal political behavior.
How Do People Respond to Organizational Politics?
Trish loves her job as a writer on a weekly U.S. television comedy series but
hates the internal politics. “A couple of the writers here spend more time kiss-
ing up to the executive producer than doing any work. And our head writer
clearly has his favorites. While they pay me a lot and I get to really use my cre-
ativity, I’m sick of having to be on alert for backstabbers and constantly having
to self-promote my contributions. I’m tired of doing most of the work and get-
ting little of the credit.” We all know friends or relatives like Trish who regularly
complain about the politics at their jobs. But how do people in general react to
organizational politics? Let’s look at the evidence.
For most people who have modest political skills or are unwilling to
play the politics game, outcomes tend to be predominantly negative. See
Exhibit 13-4 for a diagram of this situation. However, very strong evidence
indicates perceptions of organizational politics are negatively related to job
satisfaction.67 Politics may lead to self-reported declines in employee perfor-
mance, perhaps because employees perceive political environments to be
unfair, which demotivates them.68 Not surprisingly, when politicking becomes
too much to handle, it can lead employees to quit.69 When employees of two
agencies in a study in Nigeria viewed their work environments as political,
they reported higher levels of job distress and were less likely to help their
coworkers. Thus, although developing countries such as Nigeria present per-
haps more ambiguous and therefore more political environments in which to
work, the negative consequences of politics appear to be the same as in the
United States.70
There are some qualifiers. First, the politics–performance relationship
appears to be moderated by an individual’s understanding of the hows and
Employee Responses to Organizational PoliticsExhibit 13-4
Organizational
politics may
threaten
employees
Decreased job
satisfaction
Increased
anxiety and stress
Increased
turnover
Reduced
performance
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 454 29/09/17 4:15 pm
Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 455
whys of organizational politics. Researchers noted, “An individual who has a
clear understanding of who is responsible for making decisions and why they
were selected to be the decision makers would have a better understanding
of how and why things happen the way they do than someone who does not
understand the decision-making process in the organization.”71 When both
politics and understanding are high, performance is likely to increase because
these individuals see political activity as an opportunity. This is consistent with
what you might expect for individuals with well-honed political skills. But when
understanding is low, individuals are more likely to see politics as a threat,
which can have a negative effect on job performance.72
Second, political behavior at work moderates the effects of ethical leader-
ship.73 One study found that male employees were more responsive to ethical
leadership and showed the most citizenship behavior when levels of both poli-
tics and ethical leadership were high. Women, on the other hand, appeared
most likely to engage in citizenship behavior when the environment was consis-
tently ethical and apolitical.
Third, when employees see politics as a threat, they often respond with
defensive behaviors—reactive and protective behaviors to avoid action,
blame, or change.74 (Exhibit 13-5 provides some examples.) In the short
run, employees may find that defensiveness protects their self-interest, but
in the long run it wears them down. People who consistently rely on defen-
siveness find that eventually it is the only way they know how to behave. At
that point, they lose the trust and support of their peers, bosses, employees,
and clients.
defensive behaviors Reactive and protective
behaviors to avoid action, blame, or change.
Defensive BehaviorsExhibit 13-5
Avoiding Action
Overconforming. Strictly interpreting your responsibility by saying things like “The rules
clearly state…”or “This is the way we’ve always done it.”
Buck passing. Transferring responsibility for the execution of a task or decision to
someone else.
Playing dumb. Avoiding an unwanted task by falsely pleading ignorance or inability.
Stretching. Prolonging a task so that one person appears to be occupied—for example,
turning a two-week task into a 4-month job.
Stalling. Appearing to be more or less supportive publicly while doing little or nothing
privately.
Avoiding Blame
Bluffing. Rigorously documenting activity to project an image of competence and
thoroughness, known as “covering your rear.”
Playing safe. Evading situations that may reflect unfavorably. It includes taking on only
projects with a high probability of success, having risky decisions approved by superiors,
qualifying expressions of judgment, and taking neutral positions in conflicts.
Justifying. Developing explanations that lessen one’s responsibility for a negative outcome
and/or apologizing to demonstrate remorse, or both.
Scapegoating. Placing the blame for a negative outcome on external factors that are not
entirely blameworthy.
Misrepresenting. Manipulation of information by distortion, embellishment, deception,
selective presentation, or obfuscation.
Avoiding Change
Prevention. Trying to prevent a threatening change from occurring.
Self-protection. Acting in ways to protect one’s self-interest during change by guarding
information or other resources.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 455 29/09/17 4:15 pm
456 PART 3 The Group
Impression Management
We know people have an ongoing interest in how others perceive and evaluate
them. For example, North Americans spend billions of dollars on diets, health
club memberships, cosmetics, and plastic surgery—all intended to make them
more attractive to others. Being perceived positively by others has benefits in
an organizational setting. It might, for instance, help us initially to get the jobs
we want in an organization and, once hired, to get favorable evaluations, supe-
rior salary increases, and more rapid promotions. The process by which indi-
viduals attempt to control the impressions that others form of them is called
impression management (IM).75
Who might we predict will engage in IM? No surprise here. It’s our old
friend, the high self-monitor.76 Low self-monitors tend to present images of
themselves that are consistent with their personalities, regardless of the ben-
eficial or detrimental effects for them. In contrast, high self-monitors are good
at reading situations and molding their appearances and behavior to fit each
situation. If you want to control the impressions others form of you, what IM
techniques can you use? Exhibit 13-6 summarizes some of the most popular
with examples.
Keep in mind that when people engage in IM, they are sending a false mes-
sage that might be true under other circumstances.77 Excuses, for instance,
may be offered with sincerity. Referring to the example in Exhibit 13-6, you can
actually believe that ads contribute little to sales in your region. But misrepre-
sentation can have a high cost. If you cry wolf once too often, no one is likely
to believe you when the wolf really comes. So the impression manager must be
cautious not to be perceived as insincere or manipulative.78
One study found that when managers attributed an employee’s citizen-
ship behaviors to impression management, they actually felt angry (probably
because they felt manipulated) and gave subordinates lower performance rat-
ings. When managers attributed the same behaviors to prosocial values and
concern about the organization, they felt happy and gave higher performance
ratings.79 In sum, people don’t like to feel others are manipulating them
through impression management, so such tactics should be employed with
caution. Not all impression management consists of talking yourself up, either.
Recent research suggests modesty, in the form of generously providing credit
to others and understating your own contributions to success, may create a
more positive impression on others.80
Most of the studies to test the effectiveness of IM techniques have related
IM to two criteria: interview success and performance evaluations. Let’s con-
sider each of these.
Interviews and IM The evidence indicates that most job applicants use IM tech-
niques in interviews and that it works.81 Interviewers are rarely able to detect
when an individual is engaging in impression management, especially when
applicants are using deception to engage in impression management.82 To
develop a sense of how effective different IM techniques are in interviews, one
study grouped data from thousands of recruiting and selection interviews into
appearance-oriented efforts (like looking professional), explicit tactics (like
flattering the interviewer or talking up your own accomplishments), and ver-
bal cues (like using positive terms and showing general enthusiasm).83 Across
all the dimensions, it was quite clear that IM was a powerful predictor of how
well people did. However, there was a twist. When interviews were highly struc-
tured, meaning the interviewer’s questions were written out in advance and
focused on applicant qualifications, the effects of IM were substantially weaker.
Manipulative behaviors like IM are more likely to have an effect in ambigu-
ous and unstructured interviews. In addition, the effectiveness of impression
impression management (IM) The process
by which individuals attempt to control the
impressions that others form of them.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 456 29/09/17 4:15 pm
Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 457
management depends on the applicants’ ability to correctly identify what traits
or skills the interviewer is looking for.84
Performance Evaluations and IM In terms of performance evaluations, the
picture is quite different. Ingratiation is positively related to performance rat-
ings, meaning those who ingratiate themselves with their supervisors get higher
performance evaluations. However, self-promotion appears to backfire: Those
Impression Management (IM) TechniquesExhibit 13-6
Conformity
Agreeing with someone else’s opinion to gain his or her approval is a form of
ingratiation.
Example: A manager tells his boss, “You’re absolutely right on your reorganization plan
for the western regional office. I couldn’ t agree with you more.”
Favors
Doing something nice for someone to gain that person’ s approval is a form of
ingratiation.
Example: A salesperson says to a prospective client, “I’ve got two tickets to the theater
tonight that I can’t use. Take them. Consider it a thank-you for taking the time to talk
with me.”
Excuses
Explaining a predicament-creating event aimed at minimizing the apparent severity
of the predicament is a defensive IM technique.
Example: A sales manager says to her boss, “We failed to get the ad in the paper on time,
but no one responds to those ads anyway.”
Apologies
Admitting responsibility for an undesirable event and simultaneously seeking to get a
pardon for the action is a defensive IM technique.
Example: An employee says to his boss, “I’m sorry I made a mistake on the report. Please
forgive me.”
Self-Promotion
Highlighting your best qualities, downplaying your deficits, and calling attention to
your achievements is a self-focused IM technique.
Example: A salesperson tells his boss, “Matt worked unsuccessfully for three years to try
to get that account. I sewed it up in six weeks. I’m the best closer this company has.”
Enhancement
Claiming that something you did is more valuable than most other members of the
organizations would think is a self-focused IM technique.
Example: A journalist tells his editor, “My work on this celebrity divorce story was really
a major boost to our sales” (even though the story only made it to page 3 in the
entertainment section).
Flattery
Complimenting others about their virtues in an effort to make yourself appear perceptive
and likeable is an assertive IM technique.
Example: A new sales trainee says to her peer, “You handled that client’s complaint so
tactfully! I could never have handled that as well as you did.”
Exemplification
Doing more than you need to in an effort to show how dedicated and hard working you
are is an assertive IM technique.
Example: An employee sends e-mails from his work computer when he works late so that
his supervisor will know how long he’s been working.
Source: Based on M. C. Bolino, K. M. Kacmar, W. H. Turnley, and J. B. Gilstrap, “A Multi-Level Review of Impression Management Motives
and Behaviors,” Journal of Management 34, no. 6 (2008): 1080–109.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 457 29/09/17 4:15 pm
458 PART 3 The Group
who self-promote actually may receive lower performance ratings.85 There is an
important qualifier to these general findings. It appears that individuals high
in political skill are able to translate IM into higher performance appraisals,
whereas those lower in political skill are more likely to be hurt by their IM
attempts.86 Another study of 760 boards of directors found that individuals who
ingratiated themselves with current board members (e.g., expressed agreement
with the director, pointed out shared attitudes and opinions, complimented
the director) increased their chances of landing on a board.87 Interns who
attempted to use ingratiation with their supervisors in one study were usually
disliked—unless they had high levels of political skill. For those who had this
ability, ingratiation led to higher levels of liking from supervisors and higher
performance ratings.88
What explains these consistent results across multiple studies and contexts?
If you think about them, they make sense. Ingratiating always works because
everyone—both interviewers and supervisors—likes to be treated nicely. How-
ever, self-promotion may work only in interviews and backfire on the job: The
interviewer has little idea whether you’re blowing smoke about your accom-
plishments, but the supervisor knows because it’s his or her job to observe you.
Are our conclusions about responses to politics valid around the world?
Should we expect employees in Israel, for instance, to respond the same way
An Ethical Choice
How Much Should You Manage Interviewer
Impressions?
A lmost everyone agrees that dressing professionally, high-lighting previous accomplish-
ments, and expressing interest in
the job are reasonable impression
management tactics to improve your
presentation in an interview. Strate-
gies like flattering the interviewer and
using positive nonverbal cues like
smiling and nodding are also often
advised.
Is there an upside to such impres-
sion management? Research gener-
ally shows there is. The more effort
applicants put into highlighting their
skills, motivation, and admiration for
the organization, the more likely they
are to be hired. A recent study in Tai-
wan examined this relationship, find-
ing that interviewers saw applicants
who talked confidently about their
qualifications as a better fit for the
job, and applicants who said positive
things about the organization as a
better fit for the organization. Positive
nonverbal cues improved interviewer
moods, which also improved the appli-
cant’s ratings.
Despite evidence that making an
effort to impress an interviewer can pay
off, you can go too far. Evidence that
a person misrepresented qualifications
in the hiring process is usually grounds
for immediate termination. Even so-
called white lies are a problem if they
create unfounded expectations. For
example, if you noted that you man-
aged budgets in the past when all you
were doing was tracking expenditures,
you lack skills your boss will expect you
to have. When you fail to deliver, it will
look very bad for you. However, if you
describe your experience more accu-
rately but note your desire to learn, the
company will know you need additional
training and that you’ll need a bit of
extra time.
So what does an ethical, effective
interview strategy entail? The key is
to find a positive but truthful way to
manage impressions. Don’t be afraid
to let an employer know about your
skills and accomplishments, and be
sure to show your enthusiasm for the
job. At the same time, keep your state-
ments as accurate as possible, and be
careful not to overstate your abilities.
In the long run, you’re much more likely
to be happy and successful in a job
where both you and the interviewer can
assess fit honestly.
Sources: Based on C. Chen and M. Lin, “The
Effect of Applicant Impression Management
Tactics on Hiring Recommendations: Cogni-
tive and Affective Processes,” Applied Psy-
chology: An International Review 63, no. 4,
(2014): 698–724; J. Levashina, C. J. Hartwell,
F. P. Morgeson, and M. A. Campion “The
Structured Employment Interview: Narrative
and Quantitative Review of the Research Lit-
erature,” Personnel Psychology (Spring 2014):
241–93; and M. Nemko, “The Effective,
Ethical, and Less Stressful Job Interview,”
Psychology Today, March 25, 2014, https://
www.psychologytoday.com/blog/how-do-
life/201503/the-effective-ethical-and-less-
stressful-job-interview.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 458 29/09/17 4:15 pm
Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 459
to workplace politics that employees in the United States do? Almost all our
conclusions on employee reactions to organizational politics are based on stud-
ies conducted in North America. The few studies that have included other
countries suggest some minor modifications.89 One study of managers in U.S.
culture and three Chinese cultures (People’s Republic of China, Hong Kong,
and Taiwan) found U.S. managers evaluated “gentle persuasion” tactics such as
consultation and inspirational appeal as more effective than did their Chinese
counterparts.90 Other research suggests effective U.S. leaders achieve influence
by focusing on the personal goals of group members and the tasks at hand
(an analytical approach), whereas influential East Asian leaders focus on rela-
tionships among group members and meeting the demands of people around
them (a holistic approach).91 Another study of Chinese supervisors and sub-
ordinates found that subordinates were seen as more agreeable and conscien-
tious when they engaged in self-effacing behaviors, but only if these behaviors
made them appear modest rather than supplicating.92
The Ethics of Behaving Politically
Although there are no clear-cut ways to differentiate ethical from unethical
politicking, there are some questions you should consider. For example, what is
the utility of engaging in politicking? Sometimes we do it for little good reason.
Major league baseball player Al Martin claimed he played football at the Uni-
versity of Southern California (USC) when in fact he never did. As a baseball
player, he had little to gain by pretending to have played football! Outright
lies like this may be a rather rare and extreme example of impression manage-
ment, but many of us have at least distorted information to make a favorable
impression. One thing to keep in mind is whether it’s worth the risk. Another
issue to consider is whether the utility of engaging in the political behavior will
balance out harm (or potential harm) to others. Complimenting a supervisor
on her appearance in order to curry favor is probably much less harmful than
grabbing credit for a project that others deserve.
Finally, does the political activity conform to standards of equity and justice?
Sometimes it is difficult to weigh the costs and benefits of a political action,
but its ethicality is clear. The department head who inflates the performance
evaluation of a favored employee and deflates the evaluation of a disfavored
employee—and then uses these evaluations to justify giving the former a big
raise and the latter nothing—has treated the disfavored employee unfairly.
Unfortunately, powerful people can become very good at explaining self-
serving behaviors in terms of the organization’s best interests. They can persua-
sively argue that unfair actions are really fair and just. Those who are powerful,
articulate, and persuasive are most vulnerable to ethical lapses because they are
more likely to get away with them. When faced with an ethical dilemma regard-
ing organizational politics, try to consider whether playing politics is worth the
risk and whether others might be harmed in the process. If you have a strong
power base, recognize the ability of power to corrupt. Remember it’s a lot eas-
ier for the powerless to act ethically, if for no other reason than they typically
have very little political discretion to exploit.
MyLab Management
Personal Inventory Assessments
Go to www.pearson.com/mylab/management to complete the Personal
Inventory Assessment related to this chapter.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 459 29/09/17 4:16 pm
460 PART 3 The Group
Mapping Your Political Career
As we have seen, politics is not just for politicians. You can use the concepts
presented in this chapter in some very tangible ways in your organization. How-
ever, they also have another application: you.
One of the most useful ways to think about power and politics is in terms
of your own career. What are your ambitions? Who has the power to help
you achieve them? What is your relationship to these people? The best way to
answer these questions is with a political map, which can help you sketch out
your relationships with the people on whom your career depends. Exhibit 13-7
contains such a political map.93 Let’s walk through it.
Assume your future promotion depends on five people, including Jamie,
your immediate supervisor. As you can see in the exhibit, you have a close rela-
tionship with Jamie (you would be in real trouble otherwise). You also have
a close relationship with Zack in finance. However, with the others, you have
either a loose relationship (Lane) or none at all (Jia, Marty). One obvious
implication of this map is the need to formulate a plan to gain more influence
over, and a closer relationship with, these people. How might you do that?
The map also provides for a useful way to think about the power network.
Assume the five individuals all have their own networks. In this case, though,
assume these aren’t so much power networks like yours as they are influence
networks of the people who influence the individuals in power positions.
Drawing Your Political MapExhibit 13-7
Zack
Finance
Jamie
Operations
Jamie
Operations
CJ
Jamie’s
Favorite
Blogger
Chris
Jamie’s
Spouse
Anna
Senior
VP,
Jamie’s
Boss
Green is a close connection.
Blue is a loose connection.
Red is no connection at all.
Area of Detail
Marty
IT
Lane
HR
You
Jia
Sales
Tamar
Drew’s
Best
Friend
Mark
Jamie’s
Former
Coworker
Source: Based on D. Clark, “A Campaign Strategy for Your Career,” Harvard Business Review (November 2012): 131–4.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 460 29/09/17 4:16 pm
Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 461
One of the best ways to influence people is indirectly. What if you played
in a tennis league with Mark, Jamie’s former coworker who you know remains
friends with Jamie? To influence Mark, in many cases, may also be to influence
Marty. In addition, why not post an entry on CJ’s blog? You can complete a simi-
lar analysis for the other four decision makers and their networks.
Of course, this map doesn’t show you everything you need to know—no
map does. For example, rarely would all five people have the same amount of
power. Maps are also harder to construct in the era of large social networks. Try
to keep such a map limited to the people who really matter to your career.
All of this may seem a bit Machiavellian to you. Remember, however, only
one person gets the promotion, and your competition may have a map of his
or her own. As we noted in the early part of the chapter, power and politics are
part of organizational life. To decide not to play is deciding not to be effective.
Better to be explicit with a political map than to proceed as if power and poli-
tics didn’t matter.
Summary
Few employees relish being powerless in their jobs and organizations. People
respond differently to the various power bases. Expert and referent power are
derived from an individual’s personal qualities. In contrast, coercion, reward,
and legitimate power are essentially organizationally granted. Competence
especially appears to offer wide appeal, and its use as a power base results in
high performance by group members.
An effective manager accepts the political nature of organizations. Some
people are more politically astute than others, meaning they are aware of the
underlying politics and can manage impressions. Those who are good at play-
ing politics can be expected to get higher performance evaluations and hence
larger salary increases and more promotions than the politically naïve or inept.
The politically astute are also likely to exhibit higher job satisfaction and be bet-
ter able to neutralize job stressors.
Implications for Managers
● To maximize your power, increase others’ dependence on you. For
instance, increase your power in relation to your boss by developing a
needed knowledge or skill for which there is no ready substitute.
● You will not be alone in attempting to build your power bases. Others,
particularly employees and peers, will be seeking to increase your depen-
dence on them while you are trying to minimize it and increase their
dependence on you.
● Try to avoid putting others in a position where they feel they have no
power.
● By assessing behavior in a political framework, you can better predict the
actions of others and use that information to formulate political strate-
gies that will gain advantages for you and your work unit.
● Consider that employees who have poor political skills or are unwilling
to play the politics game generally relate perceived organizational poli-
tics to lower job satisfaction and self-reported performance, increased
anxiety, and higher turnover. Therefore, if you are adept at organiza-
tional politics, help others understand the importance of becoming
politically savvy.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 461 29/09/17 4:16 pm
462 PART 3 The Group
Everyone Wants Power
POINT
We don’t admit to everything we want. For instance, one psy-chologist found people would seldom admit to wanting money, but they thought everyone else wanted it. They were
half right—everyone wants money. And everyone wants power.
Harvard psychologist David McClelland was justifiably famous for
his study of underlying motives. McClelland measured people’s moti-
vation for power based on how they described pictures (this method
is called the Thematic Apperception Test [TAT]). Why didn’t he simply
ask people how much they wanted power? Because he believed that
many more people really wanted power than would admit it or even
consciously realize. And that’s exactly what he found.
Why do we want power? Because it is good for us. It gives us more
control over our own lives. It gives us more freedom to do as we wish.
There are few things worse in life than feeling helpless and few better
than feeling in charge of your destiny. Research shows people with
power and status command more respect from others, have higher
self-esteem (no surprise there), and enjoy better health than those
of less stature.
Take Steve Cohen, founder of SAC Capital Advisors and one of the
most powerful men on Wall Street. Worth $11.1 billion, Cohen buys
Picassos, lives in a mansion, has white-gloved butlers, and travels
the world first class. People will do almost anything to please him—or
even to get near him. One writer notes, “Inside his offices, vast for-
tunes are won and lost. Careers are made and unmade. Type-A egos
are inflated and crushed, sometimes in the space of hours.” All this is
bad for Steve Cohen how?
Usually, people who tell you power doesn’t matter are those who
have no hope of getting it. Wanting power, like being jealous, can be
one of those secrets people just won’t admit to.
COUNTERPOINT
O f course it’s true that some people desire power—and often behave ruthlessly to get it. For most of us, however, power is not high in priority, and for some, it’s actually undesirable.
Research shows that most individuals feel uncomfortable when
placed in powerful positions. One study asked individuals, before
they began work in a four-person team, to “rank, from 1 [highest] to
4 [lowest], in terms of status and influence within the group, what
rank you would like to achieve.” Only about one-third (34 percent)
of participants chose the highest rank. In a second study, research-
ers focused on employees participating in Amazon’s Mechanical Turk
online service. They found that the main reason people wanted power
was to earn respect. If they could get respect without gaining power,
that was preferred. In a third study, researchers found that individuals
desired power only when they had high ability—in other words, when
their influence helped their groups.
These studies suggest that we often confuse the desire for power
with other things—like the desire to be respected and to help our
groups and organizations succeed. In these cases, power is some-
thing most of us seek for more benevolent ends—and only when we
think it does good.
Another study confirmed that most people want respect from their
peers, not power. Cameron Anderson, the author of this research,
sums it up nicely: “You don’t have to be rich to be happy, but instead
be a valuable contributing member to your groups. What makes a per-
son high in status in a group is being engaged, generous with others,
and making self-sacrifices for the greater good.”
Oh, and about Steve Cohen . . . you realize he pleaded guilty and
paid a $1.2 billion fine for failing to prevent insider trading and then
had to shut down SAC, right?
Sources: Based on B. Burrough and B. McLean, “The Hunt for Steve Cohen,” Vanity Fair, June 2013, http://www
.vanityfair.com/news/business/2013/06/steve-cohen-insider-trading-case; C. Anderson, R. Willer, G. J. Kilduff, and
C. E. Brown, “The Origins of Deference: When Do People Prefer Lower Status?,” Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology 102 (2012): 1077–88; C. Anderson, M. W Kraus, A. D. Galinsky, and D. Keltner, “The Local-Ladder
Effect: Social Status and Subjective Well-Being,” Psychological Science 23(7) (2012): 764–71; S. Kennelly, “Happi-
ness Is about Respect, Not Riches,” Greater Good, July 13, 2012, http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/
happiness_is_about_respect_not_riches; and P. Lattman and B. Protess, “$1.2 Billion Fine for Hedge Fund SAC Capi-
tal in Insider Case,” The New York Times Dealbook, November 4, 2013, http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/11/04/
sac-capital-agrees-to-plead-guilty-to-insider-trading/?_r=0.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 462 29/09/17 4:16 pm
Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 463
CHAPTER REVIEW
QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW
13-1 How is leadership different from power?
13-2 What are the similarities and differences
among the five bases of power?
13-3 What is the role of dependence in power
relationships?
13-4 What power or influence tactics and their
contingencies are identified most often?
13-5 What are the causes and consequences
of abuse of power?
13-6 How do politics work in organizations?
13-7 What are the causes, consequences, and
ethics of political behavior?
APPLICATION AND EMPLOYABILITY
Power is an important part of organizational behavior.
Who has power (and who doesn’t) shapes which employ-
ees make decisions and advance in their careers. There
are many tactics that people can use to gain power and
to influence those in power. Individuals can also influ-
ence others through political behaviors. In this chapter,
you used many different skills that are important to your
employability while learning about power and politics.
You learned critical thinking skills while reading about
the debate over whether most people want power, study-
ing research on keeping enemies closer, and learning
how to avoid politics. You also applied your knowledge
to using impression management techniques in job
interviews. In the next section, you will further apply
your knowledge and critical thinking skills to addressing
office romances, promoting gender diversity on executive
boards, and learning the drawbacks to ingratiating one-
self to a boss.
MyLab Management Discussion Questions
Go to www.pearson.com/mylab/management to complete the problems marked with this icon .
EXPERIENTIAL EXERCISE Comparing Influence Tactics
Form groups of three. One person is the influencer, one
will be influenced, and one is the observer. These roles can
be randomly determined.
To begin, create a deck of cards for the seven tactics
to be used in the exercise. These tactics are legitimacy,
rational persuasion, inspirational appeals, consultation,
exchange, ingratiation, and pressure (all are defined in
the chapter). Only the influencer draws cards from the set,
and no one else may see what has been drawn.
The influencer draws a card, and quickly formulates
and acts out a strategy to use this tactic on the party being
influenced. The person being influenced reacts realisti-
cally in a back-and-forth exchange over a brief period and
states whether or not the tactic was effective. The observer
attempts to determine which tactic is being used and
which power base (coercive, reward, legitimate, expert, or
referent) would reinforce this tactic. The influencer con-
firms or denies the approach used.
Change the roles and cards throughout the rounds.
Afterward, discuss the following questions.
Questions
13-8. Based on your observations, which influence situ-
ation would probably have resulted in the best
outcome for the person doing the influencing?
13-9. Was there a good match between the tactics
drawn and the specific role each person took?
In other words, was the tactic useful for the
influencer given his or her base of power relative
to the person being influenced?
13-10. What lessons about power and influence does
this exercise teach you?
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 463 29/09/17 4:16 pm
464 PART 3 The Group
ETHICAL DILEMMA Sexual Harassment and Office Romances
In this chapter, we talked about sexual harassment and
how uneven power dynamics can contribute to sexual
harassment. Sexual harassment often occurs because one
employee, such as a supervisor, can use his or her control
of resources to reward or coerce another employee into
sexual behaviors. For example, when a manager asks a
female subordinate to go on a date with him, the female
subordinate is more likely to say yes because he has con-
trol over resources in the organization. If she declines
his request, he could retaliate and withhold privileges
from her.
Many companies try to prevent sexual harassment by
forbidding coworkers from dating. Some have slightly
softer rules. They forbid employees from dating their
direct supervisors or coworkers in the same department,
presumably so that employees cannot use their power to
perpetrate sexual harassment. These less stringent poli-
cies do not account for informal power that may exist
in organizations. An employee can be in a junior posi-
tion and still be able withhold access to resources, or this
employee can have enough political skill to harm another
employee’s career.
On the other hand, it may be impractical to try to
enforce a policy against office romances. Modern Ameri-
cans spend one-third of their lives working, so it’s likely
that an employee will meet a mate at the office. Accord-
ing to a 2015 survey by Careerbuilder.com, over one-
third of employees have dated a coworker. Many of these
romances involved a power difference as well: 15 percent
admitted that they’d dated a supervisor.
Is it worth discouraging office romances? The same sur-
vey revealed that almost one-third of office relationships
resulted in marriage. And what should you do if Cupid’s
arrow strikes you in the breakroom? National workplace
expert Lynn Taylor has this advice, “Policy or no policy,
love happens. So in the absence of written rules . . . there’s
one common barometer: your common sense.”
Questions
13-11. Do you think offices should include rules about
office romances in their sexual harassment poli-
cies? Why or why not?
13-12. Is it ever okay for a supervisor to date a subordi-
nate? What if someone becomes their romantic
partner’s supervisor after the relationship was
already initiated?
13-13. Why might 36 percent of the survey respondents
say that they hid their romantic relationships from
coworkers? How does this relate to what we learned
about office gossip in Chapter 9?
Sources: Based on J. Smith, “Eight Questions to Ask Yourself before You Start Dating a
Coworker,” Business Insider, May 29, 2016, http://www.businessinsider.com/questions-to-ask-
before-you-start-dating-a-coworker-2016-5/#-1; J. Grasz, “Workers Name Their Top Office
Romance Deal Breakers in New CareerBuilder Survey,” CareerBuilder, February 11, 2015, http://
www.careerbuilder.com/share/aboutus/pressreleasesdetail.aspx?sd=2%2F11%2F2015&id=pr
868&ed=12%2F31%2F2015.
CASE INCIDENT 1 Should Women Have More Power?
We mentioned in this chapter that women tend to have
less power in organizations than men. To demonstrate
gender differences in power, just look at the gender com-
position of executive boards for top-performing com-
panies. As of 2015, only 18.8 percent of Fortune 1000
company board seats were occupied by women, and only
20.6 percent of board seats were occupied by women at
Fortune 500 companies. This disparity not only highlights
the discrimination and the glass ceiling that many women
face, it may also be bad for business.
In Chapter 9, we learned that diverse groups may be
more creative and innovative, and decision making is
more accurate when a group has a variety of perspec-
tives. This principle appears to be true when it comes to
diverse executive boards. A recent review of 140 studies
found that having women on an executive board boosted
returns, especially in countries with stronger shareholder
protections. The same review found that having female
board members helped companies’ marketplace per-
formance in countries with higher gender equality. In
addition, boards with greater gender diversity are bet-
ter at monitoring company performance and engage in
more strategic involvement. Other research suggests that
diverse executive boards are not always beneficial. In
most circumstances, having women with greater power
on a board led to more strategic change in the organiza-
tion. However, this is only true when the company is not
threatened by low performance.
Many countries are trying to improve their economies
by creating quotas that promote more gender-diverse
boards. As of 2008, Norway requires women to hold 36
percent of board seats. France passed legislation in 2011
to promote gender-diverse boards. As a result of the law, 48
percent of new directorships were held by women in 2013.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 464 29/09/17 4:16 pm
Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 465
Questions
13-14. Why do you think having women with greater
power on a board changes firm performance?
13-15. Do you think using a quota system to promote
gender diversity is a good idea? Why or why not?
13-16. Why do you think some countries have more
gender-diverse boards than others?
Sources: Based on M. Farber, “Justin Trudeau Perfectly Sums up Why We Need More Women in Power,”
Fortune, April 7, 2017, http://fortune.com/2017/04/07/justin-trudeau-women-in-the-world-summit-
2017/; S. H. Jeong and D. Harrison, “Glass Breaking, Strategy Making, and Value Creating: Meta-Analytic
Outcomes of Females as CEOs and TMT members,” Academy of Management Journal, in press; C. Post
and C. J. Byron, “Women on Boards and Firm Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis,” Academy of
Management Journal 58, no. 5 (2015): 1546–71; T. M. del Carmen, T. L. Miller, and T. M. Trzebiatowski,
“The Double-Edged Nature of Board Gender Diversity: Diversity, Firm Performance, and the Power
of Women Directors as Predictors of Strategic Change,” Organization Science 25, no. 2 (2014): 609–32;
and M. Liautaud, “Breaking Through: Stories and Best Practices from Companies That Help Women
Succeed,” Huffington Post, April 29, 2016, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/martine-liautaud/stories-
and-best-practices-from-companies-that-help-women-succeed_b_9722518.html.
CASE INCIDENT 2 Where Flattery Will Get You
One of the various impression management techniques
that people use in the workplace is flattering or compli-
menting a person. Many people believe that flattery has a
positive impact on career prospects. Vicky Oliver, author
of 301 Smart Answers to Tough Interview Questions, suggests
using flattery to ask for a raise. Oliver advises employees
to use other impression management techniques, such as
self-promotion (e.g., highlighting your accomplishments)
and enhancement (e.g., showing how your work is supe-
rior to your peers), but she also suggests complimenting
or strategically “flattering” the boss before sitting down to
talk about a salary raise.
Does flattery always work? The answer is yes and no. Flat-
tery may influence someone in power but only if they see the
flattery as sincere. Seeming sincere may be especially diffi-
cult, however, because people who have the most power are
often the hardest to fool. After all, they have more experi-
ence with people flattering them. Recent research suggests
that there may be a way to make flattery more effective: Try
to convince yourself that you actually like the person you
are flattering. In the study, employees who spent more time
considering what they had in common with their boss were
more likely to obtain their goal through flattery.
Even if an employee is successful using flattery, it has
one major drawback. Another recent study found that
executives who flatter their CEOs are more likely to resent
their CEO later on. Though CEOs do not require their
employees to compliment them, many employees feel
demeaned when they go to great lengths to strategically
flatter the boss. Employees who complimented their CEOs
were also more likely to complain to third parties about
their boss. Some even complained to journalists.
Questions
13-17. What are some other consequences of using
flattery at work? Why do these consequences occur?
13-18. The study described in this case also found that
executives resented directing flattery toward
female and minority CEOs more than white males.
Why do you think this finding is true?
13-19. Are there impression management techniques that
are more effective than flattery?
Sources: Based on V. Oliver, “How to Suck Up to Your Boss and Get a Raise,” Fortune, January 9, 2017,
http://fortune.com/2017/01/09/pay-raise-career-advice-leadership-self-promotion-boss/; C. Romm,
“How to Suck Up Without Being Obvious About It,” NY Magazine, July 5, 2016, http://nymag.com/
scienceofus/2016/07/how-to-suck-up-without-being-obvious-about-it.html; and J. McGregor, “Bosses
Be Warned: Your Biggest Kiss-Up Could Be Your Biggest Backstabber,” Daily Herald, April 19,
2017, http://www.dailyherald.com/business/20170416/bosses-be-warned-your-biggest-kiss-up-could-
be-your-biggest-backstabber; M. G. McIntyre, “Disgruntlement Won’t Advance Your Career,” Pittsburgh
Post-Gazette, September 2.
MyLab Management Writing Assignments
If your instructor has assigned this activity, go to www.pearson.com/mylab/management for auto-graded
writing assignments as well as the following assisted-graded writing assignments:
13-20. In Case Incident 1, how would you encourage companies to appoint more female board members in the
short term? In the long term?
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 465 29/09/17 4:16 pm
466 PART 3 The Group
ENDNOTES
1 D. A. Buchanan, “You Stab My Back, I’ll Stab
Yours: Management Experience and Percep-
tions of Organization Political Behavior,” British
Journal of Management 19, no. 1 (2008): 49–64.
2 B. Oc, M. R. Bashshur, and C. Moore, “Speak-
ing Truth to Power: The Effect of Candid Feed-
back on How Individuals with Power Allocate
Resources,” Journal of Applied Psychology 100,
no. 2 (2015): 450–63; and R. E. Sturm and
J. Antonakis, “Interpersonal Power: A Review,
Critique, and Research Agenda,” Journal of
Management 41, no. 1 (2015): 136–63.
3 M. Gongloff, “Steve Cohen, Super-Rich and
Secretive Trader, Faces Possible SEC Investiga-
tion,” Huffington Post, November 28, 2012,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/
steven-cohen-sac-capital_n_2205544.html.
4 E. Landells and S. L. Albrecht, “Organiza-
tional Political Climate: Shared Perceptions
about the Building and Use of Power Bases,”
Human Resource Management Review 23, no. 4
(2013): 357–65; P. Rylander, “Coaches’ Bases
of Power: Developing Some Initial Knowledge
of Athletes’ Compliance with Coaches in
Team Sports,” Journal of Applied Sport Psychol-
ogy 27, no. 1 (2015): 110–21; and G. Yukl,
“Use Power Effectively,” in E. A. Locke (ed.),
Handbook of Principles of Organizational Behavior
(Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004): 242–47.
5 H. Lian, D. J. Brown, D. L. Ferris, L. H.
Liang, L. M. Keeping, and R. Morrison,
“Abusive Supervision and Retaliation: A Self-
Control Framework,” Academy of Management
Journal 57, no. 1 (2014): 116–39.
6 E. A. Ward, “Social Power Bases of Managers:
Emergence of a New Factor,” Journal of Social
Psychology (February 2001): 144–47; and J.
French and B. Raven, “The Bases of Social
Power,” in D. Cartwright (ed.), Studies in Social
Power (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan
Press, 1959): 150–67.
7 French and Raven, “The Bases of Social
Power”; and S. R. Giessner and T. W. Schubert,
“High in the Hierarchy: How Vertical
Location and Judgments of Leaders’ Power
Are Interrelated,” Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes 104, no. 1 (2007):
30–44; Ward, “Social Power Bases of
Managers.”
8 M. Van Djike and M. Poppe, “Striving for
Personal Power as a Basis for Social Power
Dynamics,” European Journal of Social Psychology
27, no. 1 (2006): 537–56.
9 French and Raven, “The Bases of Social
Power.”
10 Ibid.
11 J. D. Kudisch, M. L. Poteet, G. H. Dobbins,
M. C. Rush, and J. A. Russell, “Expert Power,
Referent Power, and Charisma: Toward the
Resolution of a Theoretical Debate,” Journal
of Business and Psychology 10, no. 1 (1995):
177–95.
12 S. Perman, “Translation Advertising: Where
Shop Meets Hip Hop,” Time, August 30, 2010,
http://content.time.com/time/magazine/
article/0,9171,2011574,00.html.
13 Sturm and Antonakis, “Interpersonal
Power.”
14 M. C. J. Caniels and A. Roeleveld, “Power
and Dependence Perspectives on Outsourc-
ing Decisions,” European Management Journal
27, no. 6 (2009): 402–17; R.-J. Bryan, D. Kim,
and R. S. Sinkovics, “Drivers and Performance
Outcomes of Supplier Innovation Generation
in Customer-Supplier Relationships: The Role
of Power-Dependence,” Decision Sciences 43,
no. 6 (2012): 1003–38; and R. M. Emerson,
“Power-Dependence Relations,” American
Sociological Review 27, no. 1 (1962): 31–40.
15 N. Foulkes, “Tractor Boy,” High Life (Octo-
ber 2002): 90.
16 R. S. Burt, M. Kilduff, and S. Tasselli, “Social
Network Analysis: Foundations and Frontiers
on Advantage,” Annual Review of Psychology 64
(2013): 527–47; M. A. Carpenter, M. Li, and
H. Jiang, “Social Network Research in Orga-
nizational Contexts: A Systematic Review of
Methodological Issues and Choices,” Journal
of Management (July 1, 2012): 1328–61; and
M. Kilduff and D. J. Brass, “Organizational
Social Network Research: Core Ideas and
Key Debates.” Academy of Management Annals
(January 1, 2010): 317–57.
17 B. L. Aven, “The Paradox of Corrupt Net-
works: An Analysis of Organizational Crime at
Enron,” Organization Science 26, no. 4 (2015):
980–96.
18 J. Gehman, L. K. Treviño, and R. Garud,
“Values Work: A Process Study of the Emer-
gence and Performance of Organizational Val-
ues Practices,” Academy of Management Journal
(February 1, 2013): 84–112.
19 J. Battilana and T. Casciaro, “Change
Agents, Networks, and Institutions: A Con-
tingency Theory of Organizational Change,”
Academy of Management Journal (April 1, 2012):
381–98.
20 S. M. Soltis, F. Agneessens, Z. Sasovova, and
G. Labianca, “A Social Network Perspective on
Turnover Intentions: The Role of Distributive
Justice and Social Support,” Human Resource
Management (July 1, 2013): 561–84.
21 R. Kaše, Z. King, and D. Minbaeva, “Using
Social Network Research in HRM: Scratching
the Surface of a Fundamental Basis of
HRM,” Human Resource Management (July 1,
2013): 473–83; and R. Cross and L. Prusak,
“The People Who Make Organizations
Go—or Stop,” Harvard Business Review
(June 2002): https://hbr.org/2002/06/
the-people-who-make-organizations-go-or-stop.
22 See, for example, D. M. Cable and T. A.
Judge, “Managers’ Upward Influence Tactic
Strategies: The Roll of Manager Personality
and Supervisor Leadership Style,” Journal
of Organizational Behavior 24, no. 2 (2003):
197–214; M. P. M. Chong, “Influence Behav-
iors and Organizational Commitment: A Com-
parative Study,” Leadership and Organization
Development Journal 35, no. 1 (2014): 54–78;
and G. Blickle, “Influence Tactics Used by
Subordinates: An Empirical Analysis of the
Kipnis and Schmidt Subscales,” Psychological
Reports (February 2000): 143–54.
23 G. R. Ferris, W. A. Hochwarter, C. Douglas,
F. R. Blass, R. W. Kolodinksy, and D. C. Tread-
way, “Social Influence Processes in Organiza-
tions and Human Resource Systems,” in G. R.
Ferris and J. J. Martocchio (eds.), Research in
Personnel and Human Resources Management,
vol. 21 (Oxford, UK: JAI Press/Elsevier, 2003):
65–127; C. A. Higgins, T. A. Judge, and
G. R. Ferris, “Influence Tactics and Work Out-
comes: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Organiza-
tional Behavior (March 2003): 89–106; and M.
Uhl-Bien, R. E. Riggio, K. B. Lowe, and M. K.
Carsten. “Followership Theory: A Review and
Research Agenda,” The Leadership Quarterly
(February 2014): 83–104.
24 Chong, “Influence Behaviors and Organiza-
tional Commitment.”
25 R. E. Petty and P. Briñol, “Persuasion: From
Single to Multiple to Metacognitive Pro-
cesses,” Perspectives on Psychological Science 3,
no. 2 (2008): 137–47.
26 J. Badal, “Getting a Raise from the Boss,”
The Wall Street Journal, July 8, 2006, B1, B5.
27 Chong, “Influence Behaviors and Organiza-
tional Commitment.”
28 Ibid.
29 O. Epitropaki and R. Martin,
“Transformational-Transactional Leadership
and Upward Influence: The Role of Relative
Leader-Member Exchanges (RLMX) and Per-
ceived Organizational Support (POS), Leader-
ship Quarterly 24, no. 2 (2013): 299–315.
30 A. W. Kruglanski, A. Pierro, and E. T.
Higgins, “Regulatory Mode and Preferred
Leadership Styles: How Fit Increases Job Satis-
faction,” Basic and Applied Social Psychology 29,
no. 2 (2007): 137–49; and A. Pierro, L. Cicero,
and B. H. Raven, “Motivated Compliance with
Bases of Social Power,” Journal of Applied Social
Psychology 38, no. 7 (2008): 1921–44.
31 P. P. Fu and G. Yukl, “Perceived Effective-
ness of Influence Tactics in the United States
and China,” Leadership Quarterly (Summer
13-21. Based on the chapter discussion and Case Incident 2, what are some ways employees can make sure that
they use impression management techniques effectively?
13-22. MyLab Management only—additional assisted-graded writing assignment.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 466 29/09/17 4:16 pm
Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 467
2000): 251–66; O. Branzei, “Cultural Explana-
tions of Individual Preferences for Influence
Tactics in Cross-Cultural Encounters,” Inter-
national Journal of Cross Cultural Management
(August 2002): 203–18; G. Yukl, P. P. Fu,
and R. McDonald, “Cross-Cultural Differ-
ences in Perceived Effectiveness of Influence
Tactics for Initiating or Resisting Change,”
Applied Psychology: An International Review
(January 2003): 66–82; P. P. Fu, T. K. Peng,
J. C. Kennedy, and G. Yukl, “Examining the
Preferences of Influence Tactics in Chinese
Societies: A Comparison of Chinese Managers
in Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Mainland China,”
Organizational Dynamics 33, no. 1 (2004):
32–46; and S. Aslani, J. Ramirez-Marin,
J. Brett, J. Yao, Z. Semnani-Azad, Z.-X. Zhang, . . .
and W. Adair, “Dignity, Face, and Honor
Cultures: A Study of Negotiation Strategy and
Outcomes in Three Cultures,” Journal of Orga-
nizational Behavior 37, no. 8 (2016): 1178–201.
32 C. J. Torelli and S. Shavitt, “Culture and
Concepts of Power,” Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology 99, no. 4 (2010): 703–23.
33 Fu and Yukl, “Perceived Effectiveness of
Influence Tactics in the United States and
China.”
34 T. P. Munyon, J. K. Summers, K. M. Thomp-
son, and G. R. Ferris, “Political Skill and Work
Outcomes: A Theoretical Extension, Meta-
Analytic Investigation, and Agenda for the
Future,” Personnel Psychology 68, no. 1 (2015):
143–84; G. R. Ferris, D. C. Treadway, P. L. Per-
rewé, R. L. Brouer, C. Douglas, and S. Lux,
“Political Skill in Organizations,” Journal of
Management (June 2007): 290–320; K. J. Har-
ris, K. M. Kacmar, S. Zivnuska, and J. D. Shaw,
“The Impact of Political Skill on Impression
Management Effectiveness,” Journal of Applied
Psychology 92, no. 1 (2007): 278–85; W. A.
Hochwarter, G. R. Ferris, M. B. Gavin, P. L.
Perrewé, A. T. Hall, and D. D. Frink, “Political
Skill as Neutralizer of Felt Accountability–Job
Tension Effects on Job Performance Ratings:
A Longitudinal Investigation,” Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes 102
(2007): 226–39; D. C. Treadway, G. R. Ferris,
A. B. Duke, G. L. Adams, and J. B. Tatcher,
“The Moderating Role of Subordinate
Political Skill on Supervisors’ Impressions of
Subordinate Ingratiation and Ratings of Sub-
ordinate Interpersonal Facilitation,” Journal
of Applied Psychology 92, no. 3 (2007): 848–55;
and Z. E. Zhou, L. Yang, and P. E. Spector,
“Political Skill: A Proactive Inhibitor of Work-
place Aggression Exposure and an Active
Buffer of the Aggression-Strain Relationship,”
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 20,
no. 4 (2015): 405–19.
35 J. J. Dahling and B. G. Whitaker, “When
Can Feedback-Seeking Behavior Result in a
Better Performance Rating? Investigating the
Moderating Role of Political Skill,” Human
Performance 29, no. 2 (2016): 73–88.
36 M. C. Andrews, K. M. Kacmar, and K. J. Har-
ris, “Got Political Skill? The Impact of Justice
on the Importance of Political Skills for Job
Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94,
no. 6 (2009): 1427–37.
37 C. Anderson, S. E. Spataro, and F. J. Flynn,
“Personality and Organizational Culture as
Determinants of Influence,” Journal of Applied
Psychology 93, no. 3 (2008): 702–10.
38 Y. Cho and N. J. Fast, “Power, Defensive
Denigration, and the Assuaging Effect of
Gratitude Expression,” Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology 48 (2012): 778–82.
39 M. Pitesa and S. Thau, “Masters of the
Universe: How Power and Accountability
Influence Self-Serving Decisions under
Moral Hazard,” Journal of Applied Psychology
98 (2013): 550–58; N. J. Fast, N. Sivanathan,
D. D. Mayer, and A. D. Galinsky, “Power and
Overconfident Decision-Making,” Organiza-
tional Behavior and Human Decision Processes
117 (2012): 249–60; and M. J. Williams, “Serv-
ing the Self from the Seat of Power: Goals
and Threats Predict Leaders’ Self-Interested
Behavior,” Journal of Management 40 (2014):
1365–95.
40 A. Grant, “Yes, Power Corrupts, but Power
Also Reveals,” Government Executive, May 23,
2013, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-
grant/yes-power-corrupts-but-po_b_3085291
.html.
41 J. K. Maner, M. T. Gaillot, A. J. Menzel, and
J. W. Kunstman, “Dispositional Anxiety Blocks
the Psychological Effects of Power,” Personal-
ity and Social Psychology Bulletin 38 (2012):
1383–95.
42 N. J. Fast, N. Halevy, and A. D. Galinsky,
“The Destructive Nature of Power without Sta-
tus,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 48
(2012): 391–94.
43 T. Seppälä, J. Lipponen, A. Bardi, and A.
Pirttilä-Backman, “Change-Oriented Organi-
zational Citizenship Behaviour: An Interactive
Product of Openness to Change Values, Work
Unit Identification, and Sense of Power,” Jour-
nal of Occupational and Organizational Psychol-
ogy 85 (2012): 136–55.
44 K. A. DeCelles, D. S. DeRue, J. D. Margolis,
and T. L. Ceranic, “Does Power Corrupt or
Enable? When and Why Power Facilitates Self-
Interested Behavior,” Journal of Applied Psychol-
ogy 97 (2012): 681–89.
45 “Facts about Sexual Harassment,” The U.S.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,
www.eeoc.gov/facts/fs-sex.html, accessed June
19, 2015.
46 F. Ali and R. Kramar, “An Exploratory Study
of Sexual Harassment in Pakistani Organiza-
tions,” Asia Pacific Journal of Management 32,
no. 1 (2014): 229–49.
47 Ibid.
48 Workplace Sexual Harassment Statis-
tics, Association of Women for Action and
Research, 2015, http://www.aware.org.sg/ati/
wsh-site/14-statistics/.
49 R. Ilies, N. Hauserman, S. Schwochau,
and J. Stibal, “Reported Incidence Rates
of Work-Related Sexual Harassment in the
United States: Using Meta-Analysis to Explain
Reported Rate Disparities,” Personnel Psychology
(Fall 2003): 607–31; and G. Langer, “One in
Four U.S. Women Reports Workplace Harass-
ment,” ABC News, November 16, 2011, http://
abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/
one-in-four-u-s-women-reports-workplace-
harassment/.
50 “Sexual Harassment Charges,” Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission, from
www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/statistics/, accessed
August 20, 2015.
51 B. Popken, “Report: 80% of Waitresses
Report Being Sexually Harassed,” USA Today,
October 7, 2014, http://www.today.com/
money/report-80-waitresses-report-being-
sexually-harassed-2D80199724.
52 L. M. Cortina and S. A. Wasti, “Profiles in
Coping: Responses to Sexual Harassment
across Persons, Organizations, and Cultures,”
Journal of Applied Psychology (February 2005):
182–92; K. Jiang, Y. Hong, P. F. McKay,
D. R. Avery, D. C. Wilson, and S. D. Volpone,
“Retaining Employees through Anti-Sexual
Harassment Practices: Exploring the Medi-
ating Role of Psychological Distress and
Employee Engagement,” Human Resource
Management 54, no. 1 (2015): 1–21; and J. W.
Kunstman, “Sexual Overperception: Power,
Mating Motives, and Biases in Social Judg-
ment,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-
ogy 100, no. 2 (2011): 282–94.
53 F. Krings and S. Facchin, “Organizational
Justice and Men’s Likelihood to Sexually
Harass: The Moderating Role of Sexism and
Personality,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94,
no. 2 (2009): 501–10.
54 G. R. Ferris, D. C. Treadway, R. W. Kolokin-
sky, W. A. Hochwarter, C. J. Kacmar, and D.
D. Frink, “Development and Validation of the
Political Skill Inventory,” Journal of Manage-
ment (February 2005): 126–52.
55 A. Pullen and C. Rhodes, “Corporeal Ethics
and the Politics of Resistance in Organiza-
tions,” Organization 21, no. 6 (2014): 782–96.
56 G. R. Ferris and W. A. Hochwarter, “Orga-
nizational Politics,” in S. Zedeck (ed.), APA
Handbook of Industrial and Organizational
Psychology, vol. 3 (Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association, 2011): 435–59.
57 D. A. Buchanan, “You Stab My Back, I’ll
Stab Yours: Management Experience and Per-
ceptions of Organization Political Behavior,”
British Journal of Management 19, no. 1 (2008):
49–64.
58 J. Pfeffer, Power: Why Some People Have It—
And Others Don’t (New York: Harper Collins,
2010).
59 S. M. Rioux and L. A. Penner, “The Causes
of Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A
Motivational Analysis,” Journal of Applied Psy-
chology (December 2001): 1306–14; M. A.
Finkelstein and L. A. Penner, “Predicting
Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Inte-
grating the Functional and Role Identity
Approaches,” Social Behavior & Personality 32,
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 467 29/09/17 4:16 pm
468 PART 3 The Group
no. 4 (2004): 383–98; and J. Schwarzwald,
M. Koslowsky, and M. Allouf, “Group Member-
ship, Status, and Social Power Preference,”
Journal of Applied Social Psychology 35, no. 3
(2005): 644–65.
60 See, for example, J. Walter, F. W. Keller-
mans, and C. Lechner, “Decision Making
within and between Organizations: Rationality,
Politics, and Alliance Performance,” Journal of
Management 38, no. 5 (2012): 1582–610.
61 G. R. Ferris, D. C. Treadway, P. L. Perrewe,
R. L. Grouer, C. Douglas, and S. Lux, “Politi-
cal Skill in Organizations,” Journal of Manage-
ment 33 (2007): 290–320.
62 J. Shi, R. E. Johnson, Y. Liu, and M. Wang,
“Linking Subordinate Political Skill to Super-
visor Dependence and Reward Recommenda-
tions: A Moderated Mediation Model,” Journal
of Applied Psychology 98 (2013): 374–84.
63 W. A. Gentry, D. C. Gimore, M. L. Shuffler,
and J. B. Leslie, “Political Skill as an Indica-
tor of Promotability among Multiple Rater
Sources,” Journal of Organizational Behavior 33
(2012): 89–104; I. Kapoutsis, A. Paplexandris,
A. Nikolopoulous, W. A. Hochwarter, and G.
R. Ferris, “Politics Perceptions as a Moderator
of the Political Skill-Job Performance Relation-
ship: A Two-Study, Cross-National, Construc-
tive Replication,” Journal of Vocational Behavior
78 (2011): 123–35.
64 M. Abbas, U. Raja, W. Darr, and D. Bouck-
enooghe, “Combined Effects of Perceived
Politics and Psychological Capital on Job
Satisfaction, Turnover Intentions, and Per-
formance,” Journal of Management 40, no. 7
(2014): 1813–30; and C. C. Rosen, D. L. Fer-
ris, D. J. Brown, and W.-W. Yen, “Relationships
among Perceptions of Organizational Politics
(POPs), Work Motivation, and Salesperson
Performance,” Journal of Management and
Organization 21, no. 2 (2015): 203–16.
65 See, for example, M. D. Laird, P. Harvey,
and J. Lancaster, “Accountability, Entitle-
ment, Tenure, and Satisfaction in Generation
Y,” Journal of Managerial Psychology 30, no. 1
(2015): 87–100; J. M. L. Poon, “Situational
Antecedents and Outcomes of Organizational
Politics Perceptions,” Journal of Managerial
Psychology 18, no. 2 (2003): 138–55; and K. L.
Zellars, W. A. Hochwarter, S. E. Lanivich, P. L.
Perrewe, and G. R. Ferris, “Accountability for
Others, Perceived Resources, and Well Being:
Convergent Restricted Non-Linear Results
in Two Samples,” Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology 84, no. 1 (2011):
95–115.
66 J. Walter, F. W. Kellermanns, and C. Lech-
ner, “Decision Making within and between
Organizations: Rationality, Politics, and Alli-
ance Performance,” Journal of Management 38
(2012): 1582–610.
67 W. A. Hochwarter, C. Kiewitz, S. L. Castro, P.
L. Perrewe, and G. R. Ferris, “Positive Affectiv-
ity and Collective Efficacy as Moderators of
the Relationship between Perceived Politics
and Job Satisfaction,” Journal of Applied Social
Psychology (May 2003): 1009–35; C. C. Rosen,
P. E. Levy, and R. J. Hall, “Placing Percep-
tions of Politics in the Context of Feedback
Environment, Employee Attitudes, and Job
Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 91,
no. 1 (2006): 211–30; and Abbas, Raja, Darr,
and Bouckenooghe, “Combined Effects of
Perceived Politics and Psychological Capital
on Job Satisfaction, Turnover Intentions, and
Performance.”
68 S. Aryee, Z. Chen, and P. S. Budhwar,
“Exchange Fairness and Employee Perfor-
mance: An Examination of the Relationship
between Organizational Politics and Pro-
cedural Justice,” Organizational Behavior &
Human Decision Processes (May 2004): 1–14.
69 C. Kiewitz, W. A. Hochwarter, G. R. Ferris,
and S. L. Castro, “The Role of Psychological
Climate in Neutralizing the Effects of Orga-
nizational Politics on Work Outcomes,” Jour-
nal of Applied Social Psychology (June 2002):
1189–207; M. C. Andrews, L. A. Witt, and K.
M. Kacmar, “The Interactive Effects of Orga-
nizational Politics and Exchange Ideology
on Manager Ratings of Retention,” Journal of
Vocational Behavior, April 2003, 357–69; and
C. Chang, C. C. Rosen, and P. E. Levy, “The
Relationship between Perceptions of Orga-
nizational Politics and Employee Attitudes,
Strain, and Behavior: A Meta-Analytic Exami-
nation,” Academy of Management Journal 52, no.
4 (2009): 779–801.
70 O. J. Labedo, “Perceptions of Organisa-
tional Politics: Examination of the Situational
Antecedent and Consequences among Nige-
ria’s Extension Personnel,” Applied Psychol-
ogy: An International Review 55, no. 2 (2006):
255–81.
71 K. M. Kacmar, M. C. Andrews, K. J. Harris,
and B. Tepper, “Ethical Leadership and Sub-
ordinate Outcomes: The Mediating Role of
Organizational Politics and the Moderating
Role of Political Skill,” Journal of Business Ethics
115, no. 1 (2013): 33–44.
72 Ibid.
73 K. M. Kacmar, D. G. Bachrach, K. J. Harris,
and S. Zivnuska, “Fostering Good Citizenship
through Ethical Leadership: Exploring the
Moderating Role of Gender and Organiza-
tional Politics,” Journal of Applied Psychology 96
(2011): 633–42.
74 C. Homburg and A. Fuerst, “See No Evil,
Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil: A Study of
Defensive Organizational Behavior towards
Customer Complaints,” Journal of the Academy
of Marketing Science 35, no. 4 (2007): 523–36.
75 See, for instance, M. C. Bolino and W. H.
Turnley, “More Than One Way to Make an
Impression: Exploring Profiles of Impression
Management,” Journal of Management 29, no.
2 (2003): 141–60; S. Zivnuska, K. M. Kacmar,
L. A. Witt, D. S. Carlson, and V. K. Bratton,
“Interactive Effects of Impression Manage-
ment and Organizational Politics on Job Per-
formance,” Journal of Organizational Behavior
(August 2004): 627–40; and M. C. Bolino,
K. M. Kacmar, W. H. Turnley, and J. B. Gil-
strap, “A Multi-Level Review of Impression
Management Motives and Behaviors,” Journal
of Management 34, no. 6 (2008): 1080–109.
76 D. J. Howard and R. A. Kerin, “Individual
Differences in the Name Similarity Effect: The
Role of Self-Monitoring,” Journal of Individual
Differences 35, no. 2 (2014): 111–18.
77 D. H. M. Chng, M. S. Rodgers, E. Shih, and
X.-B. Song, “Leaders’ Impression Manage-
ment during Organizational Decline: The
Roles of Publicity, Image Concerns, and
Incentive Compensation,” The Leadership
Quarterly 26, no. 2 (2015): 270–85; and L.
Uziel, “Life Seems Different with You Around:
Differential Shifts in Cognitive Appraisal in
the Mere Presence of Others for Neuroticism
and Impression Management,” Personality and
Individual Differences 73 (2015): 39–43.
78 J. Ham and R. Vonk, “Impressions of
Impression Management: Evidence of Sponta-
neous Suspicion of Ulterior Motivation,” Jour-
nal of Experimental Social Psychology 47, no. 2
(2011): 466–71; and W. M. Bowler, J. R. B. Hal-
besleben, and J. R. B. Paul, “If You’re Close
with the Leader, You Must Be a Brownnose:
The Role of Leader–Member Relationships
in Follower, Leader, and Coworker Attribu-
tions of Organizational Citizenship Behavior
Motives,” Human Resource Management Review
20, no. 4 (2010): 309–16.
79 J. R. B. Halbesleben, W. M. Bowler, M. C.
Bolino, and W. H Turnley, “Organizational
Concern, Prosocial Values, or Impression
Management? How Supervisors Attribute
Motives to Organizational Citizenship Behav-
ior,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 40, no. 6
(2010): 1450–89.
80 G. Blickle, C. Diekmann, P. B. Schneider,
Y. Kalthöfer, and J. K. Summers, “When Mod-
esty Wins: Impression Management through
Modesty, Political Skill, and Career Success—A
Two-Study Investigation,” European Journal of
Work and Organizational Psychology (December
1, 2012): 899–922.
81 L. A. McFarland, A. M. Ryan, and S. D.
Kriska, “Impression Management Use and
Effectiveness across Assessment Methods,”
Journal of Management 29, no. 5 (2003): 641–
61; C. A. Higgins and T. A. Judge, “The Effect
of Applicant Influence Tactics on Recruiter
Perceptions of Fit and Hiring Recommenda-
tions: A Field Study,” Journal of Applied Psychol-
ogy 89, no. 4 (2004): 622–32; and W. C. Tsai,
C.-C. Chen, and S. F. Chiu, “Exploring Bound-
aries of the Effects of Applicant Impression
Management Tactics in Job Interviews,” Jour-
nal of Management (February 2005): 108–25.
82 N. Roulin, A. Bangerter, and J. Levashina,
“Honest and Deceptive Impression Manage-
ment in the Employment Interview: Can It
Be Detected and How Does It Impact Evalua-
tions?,” Personnel Psychology 68, no. 2 (2015):
395–444.
83 M. R. Barrick, J. A. Shaffer, and S. W.
DeGrassi. “What You See May Not Be
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 468 29/09/17 4:16 pm
Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 469
What You Get: Relationships among Self-
Presentation Tactics and Ratings of Interview
and Job Performance,” Journal of Applied
Psychology 94, no. 6 (2009): 1394–411.
84 B. Griffin, “The Ability to Identify Criteria:
Its Relationship with Social Understanding,
Preparation, and Impression Management in
Affecting Predictor Performance in a High-
Stakes Selection Context,” Human Performance
27, no. 4 (2014): 147–64.
85 E. Molleman, B. Emans, and N. Turus-
bekova, “How to Control Self-Promotion
among Performance-Oriented Employees: The
Roles of Task Clarity and Personalized Respon-
sibility,” Personnel Review 41 (2012): 88–105.
86 K. J. Harris, K. M. Kacmar, S. Zivnuska,
and J. D. Shaw, “The Impact of Political Skill
on Impression Management Effectiveness,”
Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 1 (2007):
278–85; and D. C. Treadway, G. R. Ferris, A. B.
Duke, G. L. Adams, and J. B. Thatcher, “The
Moderating Role of Subordinate Political Skill
on Supervisors’ Impressions of Subordinate
Ingratiation and Ratings of Subordinate
Interpersonal Facilitation,” Journal of Applied
Psychology 92, no. 3 (2007): 848–55.
87 J. D. Westphal and I. Stern, “Flattery Will
Get You Everywhere (Especially if You Are a
Male Caucasian): How Ingratiation, Board-
room Behavior, and Demographic Minority
Status Affect Additional Board Appointments
of U.S. Companies,” Academy of Management
Journal 50, no. 2 (2007): 267–88.
88 Y. Liu, G. R. Ferris, J. Xu, B. A. Weitz, and
P. L. Perrewé, “When Ingratiation Backfires:
The Role of Political Skill in the Ingratiation-
Internship Performance Relationship,” Acad-
emy of Management Learning and Education 13
(2014): 569–86.
89 See, for example, E. Vigoda, “Reactions
to Organizational Politics: A Cross-Cultural
Examination in Israel and Britain,” Human
Relations (November 2001): 1483–1518; and
Y. Zhu and D. Li, “Negative Spillover Impact
of Perceptions of Organizational Politics on
Work-Family Conflict in China,” Social Behavior
and Personality 43, no. 5 (2015): 705–14.
90 J. L. T. Leong, M. H. Bond, and P. P. Fu,
“Perceived Effectiveness of Influence Strate-
gies in the United States and Three Chinese
Societies,” International Journal of Cross Cultural
Management (May 2006): 101–20.
91 Y. Miyamoto and B. Wilken, “Culturally
Contingent Situated Cognition: Influencing
Other People Fosters Analytic Perception in
the United States but Not in Japan,” Psychologi-
cal Science 21, no. 11 (2010): 1616–22.
92 Y. Wang and S. Highhouse, “Different Con-
sequences of Supplication and Modesty: Self-
Effacing Impression Management Behaviors
and Supervisory Perceptions of Subordinate
Personality,” Human Performance 29, no. 5
(2016): 394–407.
93 D. Clark, “A Campaign Strategy for Your
Career,” Harvard Business Review (November
2012): 131–34.
M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 469 29/09/17 4:16 pm
470
14-1 Describe the three types of conflict
and the three loci of conflict.
14-2 Outline the conflict process.
14-3 Contrast distributive and integrative
bargaining.
14-4 Apply the five steps of the negotia-
tion process.
14-5 Show how individual differences
influence negotiations.
14-6 Assess the roles and functions of
third-party negotiations.
14 Conflict and Negotiation
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
After studying this chapter, you should be able to:
So
ur
ce
: R
on
en
Z
vu
lla
n/
R
eu
te
rs
/A
la
m
y
S
to
ck
P
ho
to
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 470 29/09/17 4:25 pm
Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 471
BARGAINING CHIPS
What gives someone the ability to negotiate? Power? Money? Relation-ships? Can someone with seemingly no power, little access to the
outside world, and almost no economic resources still have the power to
bargain? Yes.
Derrick Houston seemed to have nothing to negotiate with. The Missis-
sippi inmate was serving a sentence for armed robbery at a state prison in
Leakesville, Mississippi, in April 2017. His sentence would last for over two
decades. But with such a long sentence, Houston knew he could not live in
the inhumane conditions offered by the prison. While state officials claimed
that conditions in the prisons were meant to maintain security because of
gang activity, many residents of the prison felt they were being subjected
to cruel treatment. Many inmates were kept in lockdown for days at a time,
despite laws that require at least five hours of recreational activity a week.
At the same time, limits on visitors meant that many inmates could rarely
see family and friends.
Physical conditions also needed to be improved in the facility. Many of
the inmates had serious mental health issues and would throw feces and
urine in their cells. This led to unsanitary conditions, including infestations
of roaches, rats, spiders, and flies. On top of this, the prison did not have
air conditioning, which could be dangerous for inmates when temperatures
reached the triple digits in the summer.
Employability Skills Matrix (ESM)
Myth or
Science?
Career
OBjectives
An Ethical
Choice
Point/
Counterpoint
Experiential
Exercise
Ethical
Dilemma
Case
Incident 1
Case
Incident 2
Critical
Thinking ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Communication ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Collaboration ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Knowledge
Application and
Analysis
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Social
Responsibility ✓ ✓ ✓
MyLab Management Chapter Warm Up
If your professor has assigned this activity, go to www.pearson.com/
mylab/management to complete the chapter warm up.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 471 29/09/17 4:25 pm
472 PART 3 The Group
One inmate commented, “If a citizen left their dog or pet in the outside
heat of a condemned dog house where [the] temperature is 130 degrees,
they would be arrested for animal cruelty and the pet would be taken away.
So why should humans be treated worse than animals?” The inmates tried
to negotiate by using the only bargaining chip they had: their stomachs.
The inmates began refusing to eat, knowing that health problems from
starvation would draw press and state officials’ attention. The tactic
proved successful. By the end of the month, Houston and the rest of the
protesting inmates were transferred to a prison with better conditions.
Wendy, Derrick Houston’s wife, was very relieved. “[We] have been trying
to get my husband transferred from Southern Mississippi Correctional Insti-
tution (SMCI) for over a year. If we had known a hunger strike would get him
transferred, then he should have gotten on it a year ago,” she wrote in an
e-mail to a reporter.
A hunger strike may seem extreme, but it is a relatively common strategy
when prisoners want to negotiate better conditions. They occur frequently in
American prisons. The same month that Houston and many other inmates
were striking in Mississippi, hundreds of inmates were also taking part
in a hunger strike in Northwest Detention Center in Tacoma, Washington.
Inmates at the Washington prison were especially vulnerable because they
were undocumented immigrants without the same legal rights as the prison-
ers in Mississippi. Like Houston, they complained about conditions as well
as incredibly low prison wages that they felt violated antislavery laws.
Around the globe, the same tactic was being used by Palestinian inmates
in Israeli prisons. Unlike the strikes in American prisons, the Palestinian
hunger strike was especially political in nature. Led by a prominent Pales-
tinian figure, Marwan Barghouti, the strike was meant to draw attention to
persecution of Palestinian citizens in Israel. Besides leading the hunger
strike, Barghouti was also punished for smuggling essays on Palestinian
resistance to the New York Times.
Hunger strikes highlight many of the concepts we will cover in this chap-
ter. First, they highlight a response to conflict. In the cases above, the con-
flicts between inmates and prison officials were dysfunctional. As you will
learn from this text, however, some conflict is beneficial, and even neces-
sary, because it enhances creativity and drives change in organizations.
Second, the negotiation process tended to alleviate the conflict. By using
their health as a bargaining tool, inmates in Mississippi were able to gain
better conditions. Would the same tactic always be successful in every
context? Not necessarily. We will also explain many factors, from emotions
to personality, that influence the success of negotiation techniques across
situations.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 472 29/09/17 4:25 pm
Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 473
Sources: Based on I. Fisher, “Over 1,000 Palestinian Prisoners in Israel Stage Hunger Strike,”
New York Times, April 17, 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/17/world/ middleeast/
marwan-barghouti-hunger-strike-israel.html; J. Amy, “Mississippi Corrections Says Prison
Hunger Strike Over,” The Clarion-Ledger, April 12, 2017, http://www.clarionledger.com/story/
news/2017/04/12/mississippi-prison-hunger-strike/100365860/; J. Mitchell, “Inmates
Say They’re On Hunger Strike to Protest Leakesville Prison Conditions,” USA Today, April 4,
2017, https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/04/04/hunger-strike-enters-third-day-
at-leakesville-prison/100026768/; and S. Bernard, “Detainees Launch New Hunger Strike
at Northwest Detention Center,” Seattle Weekly, April 10, 2017, http://www.seattleweekly
.com/news/detainees-launch-new-hunger-strike-at-northwest-detention-center/.
A Definition of Conflict
There has been no shortage of definitions for the word conflict,1 but common
to most is the idea that conflict is a perception. If no one is aware of a conflict,
then it is generally agreed no conflict exists. Also needed to begin the conflict
process are opposition or incompatibility, and interaction.
We define conflict broadly as a process that begins when one party perceives
that another party has affected or is about to negatively affect something the
first party cares about. Conflict describes the point in ongoing activity when
interaction becomes disagreement. People experience a wide range of conflicts
in organizations over an incompatibility of goals, differences in interpretations
of facts, disagreements over behavioral expectations, and the like. Our defini-
tion covers the full range of conflict levels, from overt and violent acts to subtle
forms of disagreement.
There is no consensus over the role of conflict in groups and organizations.
In the past, researchers tended to argue about whether conflict was uniformly
good or bad. Such simplistic views eventually gave way to approaches recogniz-
ing that not all conflicts are the same and that different types of conflict have
different effects.2
Contemporary perspectives differentiate types of conflict based on their
effects. Functional conflict supports the goals of the group, improves its per-
formance, and is thus a constructive form of conflict.3 For example, a debate
among members of a work team about the most efficient way to improve pro-
duction can be functional if unique points of view are discussed and compared
openly. Conflict that hinders group performance is destructive or dysfunctional
conflict.4 A highly personal struggle for control in a team that distracts from
the task at hand is dysfunctional. Exhibit 14-1 provides an overview depicting
the effect of levels of conflict. To understand different types of conflict, we will
discuss next the types of conflict and the loci of conflict.
Types of Conflict
One means of understanding conflict is to identify the type of disagreement,
or what the conflict is about. Is it a disagreement about goals? Is it about peo-
ple who just do not get along well with one another? Or is it about the best
way to get things done? Although each conflict is unique, researchers have
classified conflicts into three categories: task, relationship, or process. Task
conflict relates to the content and goals of the work. Relationship conflict
focuses on interpersonal relationships. Process conflict is about how the work
gets done.5
14-1 Describe the three types of conflict and the three
loci of conflict.
conflict A process that begins when one
party perceives that another party has nega-
tively affected or is about to negatively affect
something that the first party cares about.
functional conflict Conflict that supports
the goals of the group and improves its
performance.
dysfunctional conflict Conflict that hinders
group performance.
task conflict Conflict over content and
goals of the work.
relationship conflict Conflict based on
interpersonal relationships.
process conflict Conflict over how work
gets done.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 473 29/09/17 4:25 pm
474 PART 3 The Group
Studies demonstrate that relationship conflicts, at least in work settings, are
almost always dysfunctional6 (although they may improve creativity under some
circumstances).7 Why? It appears that the friction and interpersonal hostilities
inherent in relationship conflicts increase personality clashes and decrease
mutual understanding, which hinders the completion of organizational tasks.
Of the three types, relationship conflicts also appear to be the most psycho-
logically exhausting for individuals.8 This type of conflict can also be very
problematic for employees who are new to the organization because newcom-
ers rely on coworkers to learn information about the job.9 Because they tend
to revolve around personalities, you can see how relationship conflicts can
become destructive. After all, we can’t expect to change our coworkers’ person-
alities, and we would generally take offense at criticisms directed at who we are
as opposed to how we behave.
While scholars agree that relationship conflict is dysfunctional, there is
considerably less agreement about whether task and process conflicts are func-
tional. Early research suggested that task conflict within groups correlated to
higher group performance, but a review of 116 studies found that generalized
task conflict was essentially unrelated to group performance. However, there
Conflict and Unit PerformanceExhibit 14-1
A
(Low) (High)Level of Conflict
Un
it
Pe
rfo
rm
an
ce
(High)
B
C
Situation
A
B
C
Level of
Conflict
Low
or
none
Optimal
High
Type of
Conflict
Dysfunctional
Functional
Dysfunctional
Unit’s Internal
Characteristics
Apathetic
Stagnant
Nonresponsive
to change
Lack of new
ideas
Viable
Self-critical
Innovative
Disruptive
Chaotic
Uncooperative
Unit Performance
Outcome
Low
High
Low
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 474 29/09/17 4:25 pm
Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 475
were factors of the conflict that could create a relationship between conflict
and performance.10 One such factor was whether the conflict included top
management or occurred lower in the organization. Task conflict among top
management teams was positively associated with performance, whereas con-
flict lower in the organization was negatively associated with group perfor-
mance, perhaps because people in top positions may not feel as threatened in
their organizational roles by conflict. This review also found that it mattered
whether other types of conflict were occurring at the same time. If task and
relationship conflict occurred together, task conflict was more likely negative,
whereas if task conflict occurred by itself, it more likely was positive. Also, some
scholars have argued that the strength of conflict is important—if task conflict
is very low, people aren’t really engaged or addressing the important issues. If
task conflict is too high, however, infighting quickly degenerates into relation-
ship conflict. Moderate levels of task conflict may thus be optimal. Supporting
this argument, one study in China found that moderate levels of task conflict
in the early development stage increased creativity in groups, but high levels
decreased team performance.11
The personalities of the teams appear to matter. One study demonstrated
that teams of individuals who are, on average, high in openness and emo-
tional stability are better able to turn task conflict into increased group per-
formance.12 The reason may be that open and emotionally stable teams can
put task conflict in perspective and focus on how the variance in ideas can
help solve the problem rather than letting it degenerate into relationship
conflicts.
What about process conflict? Researchers found that process conflicts
are about delegation and roles. Conflicts over delegation often revolve
around the perception of some members as shirking, and conflicts over
roles can leave some group members feeling marginalized. Thus, process
conflicts often become highly personalized and quickly devolve into rela-
tionship conflicts. It’s also true, of course, that arguing about how to do
something takes time away from actually doing it. We’ve all been part of
groups in which the arguments and debates about roles and responsibilities
seem to go nowhere.
Loci of Conflict
Another way to understand conflict is to consider its locus, or the framework
within which the conflict occurs. Here, too, there are three basic types. Dyadic
conflict is conflict between two people. Intragroup conflict occurs within a
group or team. Intergroup conflict is conflict between groups or teams.13
Nearly all the literature on task, relationship, and process conflict consid-
ers intragroup conflict (within the group). That makes sense given that groups
and teams often exist only to perform a particular task. However, it doesn’t nec-
essarily tell us all we need to know about the context and outcomes of conflict.
For example, research has found that for intragroup task conflict to influence
performance within the team positively, it is important that the team has a
supportive climate in which mistakes aren’t penalized and every team mem-
ber “[has] the other’s back.”14 Similarly, the personal needs of group members
may determine when task conflict has a positive impact on performance. In a
study of Korean work groups, task conflict was beneficial for performance when
members were high on the need for achievement.15
But is this concept applicable to the effects of intergroup conflict? Think
about, say, the teams in the National Football League (NFL). As we said, for a
team to adapt and improve, perhaps a certain amount of intragroup conflict
dyadic conflict Conflict that occurs between
two people.
intragroup conflict Conflict that occurs within
a group or team.
intergroup conflict Conflict between different
groups or teams.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 475 29/09/17 4:25 pm
476 PART 3 The Group
(but not too much) is good for team performance, especially when the team
members support one another. But would we care whether members from one
NFL team supported members from another team? Probably not. In fact, if
groups are competing with one another so that only one team can “win,” inter-
team conflict seems almost inevitable. Still, it must be managed. Intense inter-
group conflict can be quite stressful to group members and might well affect
the way they interact. One study found, for example, that high levels of con-
flict between teams caused individuals to focus on complying with norms within
their teams.16
It may surprise you that individuals become most important in intergroup
conflicts. One study that focused on intergroup conflict found an interplay
between an individual’s position within a group and the way that individual
managed conflict between groups. Group members who were relatively periph-
eral in their own group were better at resolving conflicts between their group
and another one. But this happened only when those peripheral members
were still accountable to their group.17 Thus, being at the core of your work
group does not necessarily make you the best person to manage conflict with
other groups.
Another intriguing question about loci is whether conflicts interact with or
buffer one another. Assume, for example, that Jia and Marcus are on the same
team. What happens if they don’t get along interpersonally (dyadic conflict)
and their team also has high task conflict? Progress might be halted. What hap-
pens to their team if two other team members, Shawna and Justin, do get along
well? The team might still be dysfunctional, or the positive relationship might
prevail.
Thus, understanding functional and dysfunctional conflict requires not only
that we identify the type of conflict; we also need to know where it occurs. It’s
possible that while the concepts of task, relationship, and process conflict are
useful in understanding intragroup or even dyadic conflict, they are less useful
in explaining the effects of intergroup conflict. But how do we make conflict
as productive as possible? A better understanding of the conflict process, dis-
cussed next, will provide insight about potential controllable variables.
Under the leadership of George
Zimmer, the founder and CEO of Men’s
Warehouse (MW) and its advertising
spokesperson, the retailer grew into
a multimillion-dollar firm with 1,143
stores. After retiring as CEO, Zimmer
served as executive chairman of
MW’s board until an intragroup con-
flict between him and other members
resulted in his removal from the board.
Source: Patrick Fallon/Bloomberg/Getty Images
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 476 29/09/17 4:25 pm
Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 477
The Conflict Process
The conflict process has five stages: potential opposition or incompatibil-
ity, cognition and personalization, intentions, behavior, and outcomes (see
Exhibit 14-2).18
Stage I: Potential Opposition or Incompatibility
The first stage of conflict is the appearance of conditions—causes or sources—
that create opportunities for it to arise. These conditions may not lead directly
to conflict, but one of them is necessary if it is to surface. We group the con-
ditions into three general categories: communication, structure, and personal
variables.
Communication Susan had worked in supply chain management at Bristol-
Myers Squibb for three years. She enjoyed her work largely because her man-
ager, Harry, was a great boss. Then Harry was promoted and Chuck took his
place. Six months later, Susan says her job is frustrating. “Harry and I were
on the same wavelength. It’s not that way with Chuck. He tells me something,
and I do it. Then he tells me I did it wrong. I think he means one thing but
says something else. It’s been like this since the day he arrived. I don’t think
a day goes by when he isn’t yelling at me for something. You know, there are
some people you just find it easy to communicate with. Well, Chuck isn’t one of
those!”
Susan’s comments illustrate that communication can be a source of con-
flict.19 Her experience represents the opposing forces that arise from seman-
tic difficulties, misunderstandings, and “noise” in the communication channel
(see Chapter 11). These factors, along with jargon and insufficient informa-
tion, can be barriers to communication and may be potential antecedent con-
ditions to conflict. The potential for conflict has also been found to increase
with too little or too much communication. Communication is functional up to
a point, after which it is possible to overcommunicate, increasing the potential
for conflict.
Structure Charlotte is a salesperson and Mercedes is the company credit man-
ager at Portland Furniture Mart, a large discount furniture retailer. The women
have known each other for years and have much in common: They live two
blocks apart, and their oldest daughters attend the same middle school and
14-2 Outline the conflict process.
conflict process A process that has five
stages: potential opposition or incompatibility,
cognition and personalization, intentions,
behavior, and outcomes.
The Conflict ProcessExhibit 14-2
Increased
group
performance
Decreased
group
performance
Overt conflict
• Party’s
behavior
• Other’s
reaction
Conflict-handling
intentions
• Competing
• Collaborating
• Compromising
• Avoiding
• Accommodating
Antecedent conditions
• Communication
• Structure
• Personal variables
Perceived
conflict
Cognition and
personalization
Intentions Behavior OutcomesPotential opposition
or incompatibility
Stage II Stage III Stage IV Stage VStage I
Felt
conflict
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 477 29/09/17 4:25 pm
478 PART 3 The Group
are best friends. If Charlotte and Mercedes had different jobs, they might be
friends, but at work they constantly disagree. Charlotte’s job is to sell furniture,
and she does it well. Most of her sales are made on credit. Because Mercedes’s
job is to minimize credit losses, she regularly has to turn down the credit appli-
cations of Charlotte’s customers. It’s nothing personal between the women; the
requirements of their jobs just bring them into conflict.
The conflicts between Charlotte and Mercedes are structural in nature. The
term structure in this context includes variables such as the size of the group,
degree of specialization in tasks assigned to group members, jurisdictional clar-
ity, member–goal compatibility, leadership styles, reward systems, and degree
of dependence between groups. The larger the group and the more special-
ized its activities, the greater the likelihood of conflict. Tenure and conflict are
inversely related, meaning that the longer a person stays with an organization,
the less likely conflict becomes. Therefore, the potential for conflict is greatest
when group members are younger and when turnover is high.
Personal Variables Have you ever met someone you immediately disliked?
Perhaps you disagreed with most of his opinions. Even insignificant character-
istics—his voice, facial expressions, or word choice—may have annoyed you.
Sometimes our impressions are negative. When you have to work with people
you don’t like, the potential for conflict arises.
Our last category of potential sources of conflict is personal variables, which
include personality, emotions, and values. People high in the personality traits
of disagreeableness, neuroticism, or self-monitoring (see Chapter 5) are prone
to tangle with other people more often—and to react poorly when conflicts
occur.20 Emotions can cause conflict even when they are not directed at oth-
ers. An employee who shows up to work irate from her hectic morning com-
mute may carry that anger into her workday, which can result in a tension-filled
meeting.21 Differences in preferences and values can generate higher levels of
conflict. For example, a study in Korea found that when group members didn’t
agree about their desired achievement levels, there was more task conflict;
when group members didn’t agree about their desired interpersonal closeness,
there was more relationship conflict; and when group members didn’t have
similar desires for power, there was more conflict over status.22
Stage II: Cognition and Personalization
If the conditions cited in Stage I negatively affect something one party cares
about, then the potential for opposition or incompatibility becomes actualized
in the second stage.
As we noted in our definition of conflict, one or more of the parties must be
aware that antecedent conditions exist. However, just because a disagreement
is a perceived conflict does not mean it is personalized. It is at the felt conflict
level, when individuals become emotionally involved, that they experience anx-
iety, tension, frustration, or hostility.
Stage II is important because it’s where conflict issues tend to be defined,
where the parties decide what the conflict is about.23 The definition of conflict
is important because it delineates the set of possible settlements. Most evidence
suggests that people tend to default to cooperative strategies in interpersonal
interactions unless there is a clear signal that they are faced with a competi-
tive person. However, if our salary disagreement is a zero-sum situation (the
increase in pay you want means there will be that much less in the raise pool
for me), I am going to be far less willing to compromise than if I can frame the
conflict as a potential win–win situation (the dollars in the salary pool might be
increased so both of us could get the added pay we want).
perceived conflict Awareness by one or
more parties of the existence of conditions
that create opportunities for conflict to arise.
felt conflict Emotional involvement in
a conflict that creates anxiety, tenseness,
frustration, or hostility.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 478 29/09/17 4:25 pm
Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 479
Second, emotions play a major role in shaping perceptions.24 Negative emo-
tions allow us to oversimplify issues, lose trust, and put negative interpreta-
tions on the other party’s behavior.25 In contrast, positive feelings increase our
tendency to see potential relationships among elements of a problem, take a
broader view of the situation, and develop innovative solutions.26
Stage III: Intentions
Intentions intervene between people’s perceptions and emotions, and their
overt behavior. They are decisions to act in a given way.27
Intentions are a distinct stage because we have to infer the other’s intent to
know how to respond to behavior. Many conflicts escalate simply because one
party attributes the wrong intentions to the other. There is slippage between
intentions and behavior, so behavior does not always reflect a person’s inten-
tions accurately.
We can also think of conflict-handling intentions as falling along two dimen-
sions. These two dimensions—assertiveness (the degree to which one party
attempts to satisfy his or her own concerns) and cooperativeness (the degree to
which one party attempts to satisfy the other party’s concerns)—can help us
identify five conflict-handling intentions: competing (assertive and uncoopera-
tive), collaborating (assertive and cooperative), avoiding (unassertive and unco-
operative), accommodating (unassertive and cooperative), and compromising
(midrange on both assertiveness and cooperativeness).28
Competing When one person seeks to satisfy his or her own interests regard-
less of the impact on the other parties in the conflict, that person is competing.
We are more apt to compete when resources are scarce.
Collaborating When parties in conflict each desire to fully satisfy the concerns
of all parties, there is cooperation and a search for a mutually beneficial out-
come. In collaborating, parties intend to solve a problem by clarifying differ-
ences rather than by accommodating various points of view. If you attempt
to find a win–win solution that allows both parties’ goals to be completely
achieved, that’s collaborating.
Avoiding A person may recognize that a conflict exists and want to withdraw
from or suppress it. Examples of avoiding include trying to ignore a conflict
and keeping away from others with whom you disagree.
Accommodating A party who seeks to appease an opponent may be willing to
place the opponent’s interests above his or her own, sacrificing to maintain the
relationship. We refer to this intention as accommodating. Supporting some-
one else’s opinion despite your reservations about it, for example, is accom-
modating.
Compromising In compromising, there is no winner or loser. Rather, there is
a willingness to rationalize the object of the conflict and accept a solution with
incomplete satisfaction of both parties’ concerns. The distinguishing character-
istic of compromising therefore is that each party intends to give up something.
Stage IV: Behavior
When most people think of conflict, they tend to focus on Stage IV because
this is where conflicts become visible. The behavior stage includes statements,
actions, and reactions made by conflicting parties, usually as overt attempts
intentions Decisions to act in a given way.
competing A desire to satisfy one’s
interests, regardless of the impact on the
other party to the conflict.
collaborating A situation in which the
parties to a conflict each desire to satisfy
fully the concerns of all parties.
avoiding The desire to withdraw from
or suppress a conflict.
accommodating The willingness of one
party in a conflict to place the opponent’s
interests above his or her own.
compromising A situation in which each
party to a conflict is willing to give up
something to resolve the conflict.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 479 29/09/17 4:25 pm
480 PART 3 The Group
to implement their own intentions. As a result of miscalculations or unskilled
enactments, overt behaviors sometimes deviate from original intentions.29
Stage IV is a dynamic process of interaction. For example, you make a
demand on me, I respond by arguing, you threaten me, I threaten you back,
and so on. Exhibit 14-3 provides a way of visualizing conflict behavior. All con-
flicts exist somewhere along this continuum. At the lower end are conflicts
characterized by subtle, indirect, and highly controlled forms of tension, such
as a student challenging a point the instructor has made. Conflict intensities
escalate as they move upward along the continuum until they become highly
destructive. Strikes, riots, and wars clearly fall in this upper range. Conflicts that
reach the upper range of the continuum are almost always dysfunctional. Func-
tional conflicts are typically confined to the lower range of the continuum.
Intentions that are brought into a conflict are eventually translated into
behaviors. Competing brings out active attempts to contend with team members,
and more individual effort to achieve ends without working together. Collaborat-
ing creates investigation of multiple solutions with other members of the team
and trying to find a solution that satisfies all parties as much as possible. Avoid-
ance is seen in behavior like refusals to discuss issues and reductions in effort
toward group goals. People who accommodate put their relationships ahead of
the issues in the conflict, deferring to others’ opinions and sometimes acting
as a subgroup with them. When people compromise, they both expect to (and
do) sacrifice parts of their interests, hoping that if everyone does the same, an
agreement will emerge.
A review that examined the effects of the four sets of behaviors across mul-
tiple studies found that openness and collaborating were both associated with
superior group performance, whereas avoiding and competing strategies
were associated with significantly worse group performance.30 These effects
were nearly as large as the effects of relationship conflict. Collaboration may be
especially effective for tasks that require innovation, but it can lead to mistrust
and conflict when groups are splintered into smaller groups of two or three
based on task.31 Individuals who have been assigned power tend to have a more
difficult time using collaborative strategies.32 This further demonstrates that it
is not just the existence of conflict or even the type of conflict that creates prob-
lems but rather the ways people respond to conflict and manage the process
once conflicts arise.
If a conflict is dysfunctional, what can the parties do to deescalate it?
Or, conversely, what options exist if conflict is too low to be functional and
Conflict-Intensity ContinuumExhibit 14-3
Annihilatory
conflict
Overt efforts to destroy the other party
Aggressive physical attacks
Threats and ultimatums
Assertive verbal attacks
Overt questioning or challenging of others
Minor disagreements or misunderstandings
No conflict
Sources: Based on S. P. Robbins, Managing Organizational Conflict: A Nontraditional Approach (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall,
1974): 93–97; and F. Glasi, “The Process of Conflict Escalation and the Roles of Third Parties,” in G. B. J. Bomers and R. Peterson
(eds.), Conflict Management and Industrial Relations (Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff, 1982): 119–40.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 480 29/09/17 4:25 pm
Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 481
needs to be increased? This brings us to techniques of conflict management.
Exhibit 14-4 lists the major resolution and stimulation techniques that allow
managers to control conflict levels. We have already described several as con-
flict-handling intentions. Under ideal conditions, a person’s intentions should
translate into comparable behaviors.
Stage V: Outcomes
The action–reaction interplay between conflicting parties creates conse-
quences. As our model demonstrates (see Exhibit 14-1), these outcomes may
be functional if the conflict improves the group’s performance, or dysfunc-
tional if it hinders performance.
Functional Outcomes How might conflict act as a force to increase group per-
formance? It is hard to visualize a situation in which open or violent aggression
could be functional. But it’s possible to see how low or moderate levels of con-
flict could improve group effectiveness. Note that all our examples focus on
task and process conflicts and exclude the relationship variety.
Conflict is constructive when it improves the quality of decisions, stimulates
creativity and innovation, encourages interest and curiosity among group mem-
bers, provides the medium for problems to be aired and tensions released, and
fosters self-evaluation and change. Mild conflicts also may generate energizing
emotions so members of groups become more active, energized, and engaged
in their work.33
conflict management The use of resolution
and stimulation techniques to achieve the
desired level of conflict.
Conflict Management TechniquesExhibit 14-4
Conflict-Resolution Techniques
Problem solving Meeting face to face for the purpose of identifying the problem and resolving it
through open discussion.
Superordinate goals Creating a shared goal that cannot be attained without the cooperation of each of the
conflicting parties.
Expansion of resources Expanding the supply of a scarce resource (for example, money, promotion, opportunities,
office space).
Avoidance Withdrawing from or suppressing the conflict.
Smoothing Playing down differences while emphasizing common interests between the conflicting parties.
Compromise Having each party to the conflict give up something of value.
Authoritative command Letting management use its formal authority to resolve the conflict and then communicating
its desires to the parties involved.
Altering the human variable Using behavioral change techniques such as human relations training to alter attitudes and
behaviors that cause conflict.
Altering the structural variables Changing the formal organization structure and the interaction patterns of conflicting parties
through job redesign, transfers, creation of coordinating positions, and the like.
Conflict-Stimulation Techniques
Communication Using ambiguous or threatening messages to increase conflict levels.
Bringing in outsiders Adding employees to a group whose backgrounds, values, attitudes, or managerial styles
differ from those of present members.
Restructuring the organization Realigning work groups, altering rules and regulations, increasing interdependence, and
making similar structural changes to disrupt the status quo.
Appointing a devil’s advocate Designating a critic to purposely argue against the majority positions held by the group.
Source: Based on S. P. Robbins, Managing Organizational Conflict: A Nontraditional Approach (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974): 59–89.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 481 29/09/17 4:25 pm
482 PART 3 The Group
Dysfunctional Outcomes The destructive consequences of conflict on the
performance of a group or an organization are generally well known: Uncon-
trolled opposition breeds discontent, which acts to dissolve common ties and
eventually leads to the destruction of the group. And, of course, a substantial
body of literature documents how dysfunctional conflicts can reduce group
effectiveness.34 Among the undesirable consequences are poor communica-
tion, reductions in group cohesiveness, and subordination of group goals
to the primacy of infighting among members. All forms of conflict—even
the functional varieties—appear to reduce group member satisfaction and
trust.35 When active discussions turn into open conflicts between members,
information sharing between members decreases significantly.36 At the
extreme, conflict can bring group functioning to a halt and threaten the
group’s survival.
Managing Functional Conflict If managers recognize that conflict can be bene-
ficial in some situations, what can they do to manage conflict effectively in their
organizations? In addition to knowing the principles of conflict motivation we
just discussed, there are some practical guidelines for managers.
First, one of the keys to minimizing counterproductive conflicts is recogniz-
ing when there really is a disagreement. Many apparent conflicts are due to
people using different verbiage to discuss the same general course of action.
For example, someone in marketing might focus on “distribution problems,”
while someone from operations will talk about “supply chain management” to
describe essentially the same issue. Successful conflict management recognizes
these different approaches and attempts to resolve them by encouraging open,
frank discussion focused on interests rather than issues.
IBM encourages employees to engage
in functional conflict that results in
innovations, such as the Watson
supercomputer designed to learn
through the same process human
brains use. For innovation to flourish,
IBM relies on the creative tension
from employees’ different ideas and
skills and provides a work environ-
ment that promotes risk taking and
outside-the-box thinking.
Source: Jon Simon/Feature Photo Service/Newscom
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 482 29/09/17 4:25 pm
Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 483
Another approach is to have opposing groups pick parts of the solution that
are most important to them and then focus on how each side can get its top
needs satisfied. Neither side may get exactly what it wants, but each side will
achieve the most important parts of its agenda.37
Third, groups that resolve conflicts successfully discuss differences of opin-
ion openly and are prepared to manage conflict when it arises.38 The most dis-
ruptive conflicts are those that are never addressed directly. An open discussion
makes it much easier to develop a shared perception of the problems at hand;
it also allows groups to work toward a mutually acceptable solution.
Fourth, managers need to emphasize shared interests in resolving conflicts
so groups that disagree with one another don’t become too entrenched in their
points of view and start to take the conflicts personally. Groups with coopera-
tive conflict styles and a strong underlying identification with the overall group
goals are more effective than groups with a competitive style.39
Differences across countries in conflict resolution strategies may be based
on collectivistic tendencies and motives.40 Collectivist cultures see people as
deeply embedded in social situations, whereas individualist cultures see them
as autonomous. As a result, collectivists are more likely to seek to preserve rela-
tionships and promote the good of the group as a whole. They avoid the direct
expression of conflict, preferring indirect methods for resolving differences of
opinion. Collectivists may also be more interested in demonstrations of con-
cern and working through third parties to resolve disputes, whereas individual-
ists are more likely to confront differences of opinion directly and openly.
Some research supports this theory. Compared to collectivist Japanese negotia-
tors, their more individualist U.S. counterparts are more likely to see offers as unfair
and to reject them. Another study revealed that, whereas U.S. managers were more
likely to use competing tactics in the face of conflicts, compromising and avoiding
were the most preferred methods of conflict management in China.41 Interview
data suggest, however, that top management teams in Chinese high-technology
firms prefer collaboration even more than compromising and avoiding.42
Cross-cultural negotiations can also create issues of trust.43 One study of
Indian and U.S. negotiators found that respondents reported having less trust
in their cross-culture negotiation counterparts. The lower level of trust was asso-
ciated with less discovery of common interests between parties, which occurred
because cross-culture negotiators were less willing to disclose and solicit infor-
mation. Another study found that both U.S. and Chinese negotiators tended to
have an ingroup bias, which led them to favor negotiating partners from their
own cultures. For Chinese negotiators, this was particularly true when account-
ability requirements were high.
Having considered conflict—its nature, causes, and consequences—we now
turn to negotiation, which often resolves conflict.
MyLab Management Watch It
If your professor has assigned this activity, go to www.pearson.com/
mylab/management to complete the video exercise.
MyLab Management
Personal Inventory Assessments
Go to www.pearson.com/mylab/management to complete the Personal
Inventory Assessment related to this chapter.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 483 29/09/17 4:25 pm
484 PART 3 The Group
is negotiating over who gets what share of a fixed pie. By fixed pie, we mean a
set amount of goods or services to be divvied up. When the pie is fixed, or the
parties believe it is, they tend to engage in distributive bargaining.
The essence of distributive bargaining is depicted in Exhibit 14-6. Parties
A and B represent two negotiators. Each has a target point that defines what he
or she would like to achieve. Each also has a resistance point, which marks the
lowest acceptable outcome—the point beyond which the party would break off
negotiations rather than accept a less favorable settlement. The area between
these two points makes up each party’s aspiration range. As long as there is some
overlap between A’s and B’s aspiration ranges, there exists a settlement range
in which each one’s aspirations can be met.
When you are engaged in distributive bargaining, one of the best things you
can do is make the first offer, and make it an aggressive one. Making the first
offer shows power; individuals in power are much more likely to make initial
offers, speak first at meetings, and thereby gain the advantage. Another reason
this is a good strategy is the anchoring bias, mentioned in Chapter 6. People
tend to fixate on initial information. Once that anchoring point has been set,
they fail to adequately adjust it based on subsequent information. A savvy nego-
tiator sets an anchor with the initial offer, and scores of negotiation studies
show that such anchors greatly favor the person who sets them.47
Say that you have a job offer, and your prospective employer asks you what
sort of starting salary you want. You’ve just been given a gift—you have a chance
to set the anchor, meaning you should ask for the highest salary you think the
employer could reasonably offer. Asking for a million dollars is only going to
make most of us look ridiculous, which is why we suggest being on the high end
of what you think is reasonable. Too often, we err on the side of caution, afraid
of scaring off the employer and thus settling for far too little. It is possible to
scare off an employer, and it’s true employers don’t like candidates to be asser-
tive in salary negotiations, but liking isn’t the same as doing what it takes to hire
or retain someone.48 What happens much more often is that we ask for less
than we could have obtained.
Integrative Bargaining Jake was a Chicago luxury boutique owned by Jim Wet-
zel and Lance Lawson. In the early days of the business, Wetzel and Lawson
moved millions of dollars of merchandise from many up-and-coming designers.
They developed such a good rapport that many designers would send allot-
ments to Jake without requiring advance payment. When the economy soured
in 2008, Jake had trouble selling inventory, and designers were not being paid
for what they had shipped to the store. Despite the fact that many designers
were willing to work with the store on a delayed payment plan, Wetzel and Law-
son stopped returning their calls. Lamented one designer, Doo-Ri Chung, “You
kind of feel this familiarity with people who supported you for so long. When
distributive bargaining Negotiation
that seeks to divide up a fixed amount
of resources; a win–lose situation.
fixed pie The belief that there is only a set
amount of goods or services to be divvied up
between or among the parties.
Negotiation
Negotiation permeates the interactions of almost everyone in groups and orga-
nizations. There’s the obvious: Labor bargains with management. There’s the
not-so-obvious: Managers negotiate with employees, peers, and bosses; sales-
people negotiate with customers; purchasing agents negotiate with suppliers.
And there’s the subtle: An employee agrees to cover for a colleague for a few
minutes in exchange for a future benefit. In today’s loosely structured organi-
zations, in which members work with colleagues over whom they have no direct
authority and with whom they may not even share a common boss, negotiation
skills are critical.
We can define negotiation as a process that occurs when two or more parties
decide how to allocate scarce resources.44 Although we commonly think of the
outcomes of negotiation in one-shot economic terms, like negotiating over the
price of a car, every negotiation in organizations also affects the relationship
between negotiators and the way negotiators feel about themselves.45 Depend-
ing on how much the parties are going to interact with one another, sometimes
maintaining the social relationship and behaving ethically will be just as impor-
tant as achieving an immediate outcome of bargaining. Note that we use the
terms negotiation and bargaining interchangeably.
Bargaining Strategies
There are two general approaches to negotiation—distributive bargaining and
integrative bargaining.46 As Exhibit 14-5 shows, they differ in their goal and moti-
vation, focus, interests, information sharing, and duration of relationship. Let’s
define each and illustrate the differences.
Distributive Bargaining You see a used car advertised for sale online that looks
great. You go see the car. It’s perfect, and you want it. The owner tells you the
asking price. You don’t want to pay that much. The two of you negotiate. The
negotiating strategy you’re engaging in is called distributive bargaining. Its
identifying feature is that it operates under zero-sum conditions—that is, any
gain I make is at your expense, and vice versa. Every dollar you can get the
seller to cut from the car’s price is a dollar you save, and every dollar the seller
can get from you comes at your expense. The essence of distributive bargaining
14-3 Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining.
negotiation A process in which two or
more parties exchange goods or services and
attempt to agree on the exchange rate for
them.
Distributive versus Integrative BargainingExhibit 14-5
Bargaining
Characteristic
Distributive
Bargaining
Integrative
Bargaining
Goal Get as much of the pie as
possible
Expand the pie so that both
parties are satisfied
Motivation Win–lose Win–win
Focus Positions (“I can’t go
beyond this point on this
issue.”)
Interests (“Can you explain why
this issue is so important to you?”)
Interests Opposed Congruent
Information sharing Low (Sharing information
will only allow other party
to take advantage.)
High (Sharing information will
allow each party to find ways to
satisfy interests of each party.)
Duration of relationship Short term Long term
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 484 29/09/17 4:25 pm
Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 485
is negotiating over who gets what share of a fixed pie. By fixed pie, we mean a
set amount of goods or services to be divvied up. When the pie is fixed, or the
parties believe it is, they tend to engage in distributive bargaining.
The essence of distributive bargaining is depicted in Exhibit 14-6. Parties
A and B represent two negotiators. Each has a target point that defines what he
or she would like to achieve. Each also has a resistance point, which marks the
lowest acceptable outcome—the point beyond which the party would break off
negotiations rather than accept a less favorable settlement. The area between
these two points makes up each party’s aspiration range. As long as there is some
overlap between A’s and B’s aspiration ranges, there exists a settlement range
in which each one’s aspirations can be met.
When you are engaged in distributive bargaining, one of the best things you
can do is make the first offer, and make it an aggressive one. Making the first
offer shows power; individuals in power are much more likely to make initial
offers, speak first at meetings, and thereby gain the advantage. Another reason
this is a good strategy is the anchoring bias, mentioned in Chapter 6. People
tend to fixate on initial information. Once that anchoring point has been set,
they fail to adequately adjust it based on subsequent information. A savvy nego-
tiator sets an anchor with the initial offer, and scores of negotiation studies
show that such anchors greatly favor the person who sets them.47
Say that you have a job offer, and your prospective employer asks you what
sort of starting salary you want. You’ve just been given a gift—you have a chance
to set the anchor, meaning you should ask for the highest salary you think the
employer could reasonably offer. Asking for a million dollars is only going to
make most of us look ridiculous, which is why we suggest being on the high end
of what you think is reasonable. Too often, we err on the side of caution, afraid
of scaring off the employer and thus settling for far too little. It is possible to
scare off an employer, and it’s true employers don’t like candidates to be asser-
tive in salary negotiations, but liking isn’t the same as doing what it takes to hire
or retain someone.48 What happens much more often is that we ask for less
than we could have obtained.
Integrative Bargaining Jake was a Chicago luxury boutique owned by Jim Wet-
zel and Lance Lawson. In the early days of the business, Wetzel and Lawson
moved millions of dollars of merchandise from many up-and-coming designers.
They developed such a good rapport that many designers would send allot-
ments to Jake without requiring advance payment. When the economy soured
in 2008, Jake had trouble selling inventory, and designers were not being paid
for what they had shipped to the store. Despite the fact that many designers
were willing to work with the store on a delayed payment plan, Wetzel and Law-
son stopped returning their calls. Lamented one designer, Doo-Ri Chung, “You
kind of feel this familiarity with people who supported you for so long. When
distributive bargaining Negotiation
that seeks to divide up a fixed amount
of resources; a win–lose situation.
fixed pie The belief that there is only a set
amount of goods or services to be divvied up
between or among the parties.
Staking Out the Bargaining ZoneExhibit 14-6
Party A’s aspiration range
Party B’s aspiration range
Party B’s
target
point
Party A’s
resistance
point
Party B’s
resistance
point
Party A’s
target
point
Settlement
range
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 485 29/09/17 4:25 pm
486 PART 3 The Group
they have cash-flow issues, you want to make sure you are there for them as
well.”49 Chung’s attitude shows the promise of integrative bargaining. In con-
trast to distributive bargaining, integrative bargaining assumes that one or
more of the possible settlements can create a win–win solution. Of course, as
the Jake example shows, both parties must be engaged for integrative bargain-
ing to work.
Exhibit 14-7 illustrates how the two bargaining strategies can be utilized
within the same negotiation episode. Early on in the episode, integrative strate-
gies can be used, while later in the episode, distributive strategies can be used.
Continuing with the previous example, if Wetzel and Lawson agreed to work
with Chung to resolve their inventory dilemma, Chung could first clarify her
needs to Wetzel and Lawson then articulate her interests in maintaining their
relationship, all while trying to not come to a compromise right away. Once
all of the needs and interests are established for both parties, she could then
switch to a distributive strategy where she sets goals aligned with her needs and
interests and attempts to maximize the extent to which these goals are met.
In terms of intraorganizational behavior, integrative bargaining is preferable
to distributive bargaining because the former builds long-term relationships.
integrative bargaining Negotiation that
seeks one or more settlements that can
create a win–win solution.
Officials of General Motors and
United Auto Workers participate in
the ceremonial handshake that opens
new contract negotiations. They are
committed to integrative bargaining
and work toward negotiating win–win
settlements that boost GM’s competi-
tiveness. From left are GM CEO Mary
Barra, UAW president Dennis Williams,
GM VP Cathy Clegg, and UAW VP Cindy
Estrada.
Source: Paul Sancya/AP Images
Integration of Two Bargaining Strategies Within a Negotiation EpisodeExhibit 14-7
Try to understand
your needs and
other party’s needs
Focus on interests,
not positions;
articulate interest
clearly
Avoid compromising
too early, as that often
leads to sub-optimal
agreements – make
sure the interests of
both parties are met
Once interests are
clarified, now is
the time to set goals
Now that the pie has
been expanded,
draw down
concessions so that
they get progressively
smaller
Integrative:
Clarify Needs
Integrative:
Articulate Interests
Integrative:
Avoid Early
Compromise
Distributive:
Set High Goals
Distributive:
Slice the Pie
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 486 29/09/17 4:26 pm
Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 487
Integrative bargaining bonds negotiators and allows them to leave the bargain-
ing table feeling they have achieved a victory. Distributive bargaining, however,
leaves one party a loser. It tends to build animosity and deepen divisions when
people have to work together on an ongoing basis. Research shows that, over
repeated bargaining episodes, a losing party who feels positively about the
negotiation outcome is much more likely to bargain cooperatively in subse-
quent negotiations.
Why, then, don’t we see more integrative bargaining in organizations? The
answer lies in the conditions necessary for it to succeed, including opposing
parties who are open with information and candid about concerns, are sensi-
tive to the other’s needs and trust, and maintain flexibility.50 Because these con-
ditions seldom exist in organizations, negotiations often take a win-at-any-cost
dynamic. Employees’ personal characteristics and perceived accountability also
play a role in whether negotiators come to an integrative solution. The use and
effectiveness of negotiation strategies may depend on the regulatory focus of
the parties involved (i.e., promotion or prevention focus; see Chapter 7) and
accountability to a third party, such as a supervisor. Individuals are also more
likely to use integrative bargaining when the other party expresses emotional
ambivalence.51
Compromise may be your worst enemy in negotiating a win–win agree-
ment. Compromising reduces the pressure to bargain integratively. After all,
if you or your opponent caves in easily, no one needs to be creative to reach
a settlement. People then settle for less than they could have obtained if they
had been forced to consider the other party’s interests, trade off issues, and
be creative.52 Consider a classic example in which two siblings are arguing
over who gets an orange. Unknown to them, one sibling wants the orange to
Myth or Science?
Teams Negotiate Better Than Individuals
in Collectivistic Cultures
According to a recent study, this statement appears to be false.In general, the literature has
suggested that teams negotiate more
effectively than individuals negotiat-
ing alone. Some evidence indicates
that team negotiations create more
ambitious goals, and that teams com-
municate more with each other than
individual negotiators do.
Common sense suggests that if this
is indeed the case, it is especially true
in collectivistic cultures, where individu-
als are more likely to think of collective
goals and be more comfortable work-
ing in teams. A study of the negotia-
tion of teams in the United States and
in Taiwan, however, suggests that this
common sense is wrong. The research-
ers conducted two studies comparing
two-person teams with individual
negotiators. They defined negotiating
effectiveness as the degree to which
the negotiation produced an optimal
outcome for both sides. U.S. teams
did better than solo individuals in both
studies. In Taiwan, solo individuals did
better than teams.
Why did this happen? The research-
ers determined that, in Taiwan, norms
respecting harmony already exist, and
negotiating in teams only amplifies
that tendency. This poses a problem
because teams “satisfice” (settle for
a satisfactory but less than optimal
solution) to avoid conflict when norms
for cooperation are exceptionally high.
When Taiwanese individuals negotiate
solo, at least they can clearly represent
their own interests. In contrast, because
the United States is individualistic, solo
negotiators may focus on their own
interests, which makes reaching integra-
tive solutions more difficult. When Amer-
icans negotiate in teams, they become
less inclined to focus on individual inter-
ests and therefore can reach solutions.
Overall, these findings suggest that
negotiating individually works best in
collectivistic cultures, and negotiating
in teams works best in individualistic
cultures.
Sources: Based on M. J. Gelfand, et al.,
“Toward a Culture-by-Context Perspective on
Negotiation: Negotiating Teams in the United
States and Taiwan,” Journal of Applied Psy-
chology 98 (2013): 504–13; and A. Graf,
S. T. Koeszegi, and E.-M. Pesendorfer, “Elec-
tronic Negotiations in Intercultural Inter-
firm Relationships,” Journal of Managerial
Psychology 25 (2010): 495–512.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 487 29/09/17 4:26 pm
488 PART 3 The Group
drink the juice, whereas the other wants the orange peel to bake a cake. If one
capitulates and gives the other the orange, they will not be forced to explore
their reasons for wanting the orange, and thus they will never find the win–win
solution: They could each have the orange because they want different parts.
The Negotiation Process
Exhibit 14-8 provides a simplified model of the negotiation process. It views
negotiation as made up of five steps: (1) preparation and planning, (2) defi-
nition of ground rules, (3) clarification and justification, (4) bargaining and
problem solving, and (5) closure and implementation.53
Preparation and Planning Before you start negotiating, do your homework.
What’s the nature of the conflict? What’s the history leading up to this negotia-
tion? Who’s involved and what are their perceptions of the conflict? What do
you want from the negotiation? What are your goals? If you’re a supply man-
ager at Dell Computer, for instance, and your goal is to get a significant cost
reduction from your keyboard supplier, make sure this goal stays paramount in
discussions and doesn’t get overshadowed by other issues. It helps to put your
goals in writing and develop a range of outcomes—from “most hopeful” to
“minimally acceptable”—to keep your attention focused.
You should also assess what you think are the other party’s goals. What is he
or she likely to ask? How entrenched is his or her position likely to be? What
intangible or hidden interests may be important to him or her? On what might
he or she be willing to settle? When you can anticipate your opponent’s posi-
tion, you are better equipped to counter arguments with facts and figures that
support your position.
Relationships change as a result of negotiation, so take that into consider-
ation. If you could “win” a negotiation but push the other side into resentment
or animosity, it might be wiser to pursue a more compromising style. If preserv-
ing the relationship will make you seem easily exploited, you may consider a
14-4 Apply the five steps of the negotiation process.
The NegotiationExhibit 14-8
Preparation and
planning
Definition of
ground rules
Clarification and
justification
Bargaining and
problem solving
Closure and
implementation
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 488 29/09/17 4:26 pm
Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 489
more aggressive style. As an example of how the tone of a relationship in nego-
tiations matters, people who feel good about the process of a job offer negotia-
tion are more satisfied with their jobs and are less likely to leave the job a year
later regardless of their actual outcomes from these negotiations.54
Once you’ve gathered your information, develop a strategy. You should
determine your and the other side’s best alternative to a negotiated agreement
(BATNA). Your BATNA determines the lowest value acceptable to you for a
negotiated agreement. Any offer you receive that is higher than your BATNA is
better than an impasse.
In nearly all cases, the party with superior alternatives will do better in
a negotiation, so experts advise negotiators to solidify their BATNA prior
to any interaction. There is an interesting exception to this general rule—
negotiators with absolutely no alternative to a negotiated agreement some-
times “go for broke” because they don’t even consider what would happen if
the negotiation falls through.55 Think carefully about what the other side is
willing to give up. People who underestimate their opponent’s willingness to
give on key issues before the negotiation even starts end up with lower out-
comes.56 Conversely, you shouldn’t expect success in your negotiation effort
unless you’re able to make the other side an offer it finds more attractive
than its BATNA.
Definition of Ground Rules Once you’ve done your planning and developed
a strategy, you’re ready to define with the other party the ground rules and
procedures of the negotiation itself. Who will do the negotiating? Where will it
take place? What time constraints, if any, will apply? To what issues will negotia-
tion be limited? Will you follow a specific procedure if an impasse is reached?
During this phase, the parties will exchange their initial proposals or demands.
Clarification and Justification When you have exchanged initial positions, you
and the other party will explain, amplify, clarify, bolster, and justify your origi-
nal demands. This step needn’t be confrontational. Rather, it’s an opportunity
for educating each other on the issues, why they are important, and how you
arrived at your initial demands. Provide the other party with any documenta-
tion that supports your position.
Bargaining and Problem Solving The essence of the negotiation process is the
actual give-and-take in trying to hash out an agreement. This is where both par-
ties need to make concessions.
Closure and Implementation The final step in the negotiation process is formal-
izing your agreement and developing procedures necessary for implementing
and monitoring it. For major negotiations—from labor–management negotia-
tions to bargaining over lease terms—this requires hammering out the specifics
in a formal contract. For other cases, closure of the negotiation process is noth-
ing more formal than a handshake.
Individual Differences in Negotiation
Effectiveness
Are some people better negotiators than others? The answer is complex. Four
factors influence how effectively individuals negotiate: personality, mood/
emotions, culture, and gender.
BATNA The best alternative to a negotiated
agreement; the least a party in a negotiation
should accept.
14-5 Show how individual differences influence
negotiations.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 489 29/09/17 4:26 pm
490 PART 3 The Group
Personality Traits in Negotiations Can you predict an opponent’s negotiating
tactics if you know something about his or her personality? Because personal-
ity and negotiation outcomes are related but only weakly, the answer is, at best,
sort of.57 Most research has focused on the Big Five trait of agreeableness, for
obvious reasons—agreeable individuals are cooperative, compliant, kind, and
conflict-averse. We might think such characteristics make agreeable individuals
easy prey in negotiations, especially distributive ones. The evidence suggests,
however, that overall agreeableness is weakly related to negotiation outcomes.
Why is this so?
It appears that the degree to which agreeableness, and personality more
generally, affects negotiation outcomes depends on the situation. The impor-
tance of being extraverted in negotiations, for example, very much depends on
how the other party reacts to someone who is assertive and enthusiastic. One
complicating factor for agreeableness is that it has two facets: The tendency to
be cooperative and compliant is one, but so is the tendency to be warm and
empathetic.58 It may be that while the former is a hindrance to negotiating
favorable outcomes, the latter helps. Empathy, after all, is the ability to take
the perspective of another person and gain insight into and an understanding
of him or her. We know perspective taking benefits integrative negotiations, so
perhaps the null effect for agreeableness is due to the two tendencies pulling
against one another. If this is the case, then the best negotiator is a competi-
tive but empathetic one, and the worst is a gentle but empathetic one. Recent
research also suggests that personality traits such as agreeableness and extraver-
sion do have an effect, but the effect depends on personality similarity between
parties, not overall levels. For example, if both parties are disagreeable, they
will negotiate with each other more effectively than if one party was disagree-
able and the other were agreeable.59
The type of negotiations may matter as well. In one study, agreeable indi-
viduals reacted more positively and felt less stress (measured by their cortisol
levels) in integrative negotiations than in distributive ones. Low levels of stress,
in turn, made for more effective negotiation outcomes.60 Similarly, in hard-
edged distributive negotiations, where giving away information leads to a dis-
advantage, extraverted negotiators do less well because they tend to share more
information than they should.61
Self-efficacy is one individual-difference variable that seems to relate con-
sistently to negotiation outcomes.62 This is a fairly intuitive finding—it isn’t too
surprising to hear that those who believe they will be more successful in nego-
tiation situations tend to perform more effectively. Maybe individuals who are
more confident stake out stronger claims, are less likely to back down from
their positions, and exhibit confidence that intimidates others. Although the
exact mechanism is not yet clear, it does seem that negotiators may benefit
from trying to get a boost in confidence before going to the bargaining table.
Research suggests intelligence predicts negotiation effectiveness, but, as with
personality, the effects aren’t especially strong.63 In a sense, these weak links
mean you’re not severely disadvantaged, even if you’re an agreeable extravert,
when it’s time to negotiate. We all can learn to be better negotiators.64
Moods and Emotions in Negotiations Do moods and emotions influence
negotiation? They do, but the way they work depends on the emotion as well
as the context. A negotiator who shows anger can induce concessions, for
instance, because the other negotiator believes no further concessions from
the angry party are possible. One factor that governs this outcome, however,
is power—you should show anger in negotiations only if you have at least
as much power as your counterpart. If you have less, showing anger actually
seems to provoke hardball reactions from the other side.65 Evoking emotions,
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 490 29/09/17 4:26 pm
Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 491
such as sympathy, or expressing other emotions like sadness may also be used
to persuade others.66
Another factor is how genuine your anger is—“faked” anger, or anger pro-
duced from surface acting (see Chapter 4), is not effective, but showing anger
that is genuine (deep acting) is.67 It also appears that having a history of show-
ing anger, rather than sowing the seeds of revenge, actually induces more con-
cessions because the other party perceives the negotiator as tough.68 Finally,
culture seems to matter. For instance, one study found that when East Asian
participants showed anger, it induced more concessions than when the negotia-
tor expressing anger was from the United States or Europe, perhaps because of
the stereotype of East Asians as refusing to show anger.69
Another relevant emotion is disappointment. Generally, a negotiator who
perceives disappointment from his or her counterpart concedes more. In one
study, Dutch students were given 100 chips to bargain over. Negotiators who
expressed disappointment were offered 14 more chips than those who didn’t.
In a second study, showing disappointment yielded an average concession of
12 chips. Unlike a show of anger, the relative power of the negotiators made no
difference in either study.70
Career OBjectives
How can I get a better job?
I feel like my career is at a standstill,
and I want to talk to my boss about
getting a more developmental assign-
ment. How can I negotiate effectively
for a better job position?
— Wei
Dear Wei:
You’re certainly starting out on the right
foot. A lot of people focus on salary as
a way to achieve success and negoti-
ate for the best short-run offer. There’s
obviously an advantage to this strategy
in the short run, but sustained career
growth has better payoffs in the long
run. Developing skills can help put you
on track for multiple salary increases.
A strong skill set from developmental
assignments will also give you a better
position for future negotiations because
you will have more career options.
Long-term career negotiations based
on developmental assignments are
also often easier to bring up with a
supervisor. That’s because salary
negotiations are often a zero-sum situ-
ation, but career development nego-
tiations can bring positive outcomes
to both sides. When negotiating for a
developmental assignment, make sure
you emphasize a few points with your
supervisor:
• When it comes to salary negotiations,
either you get the money, or the com-
pany keeps the money. Given that,
your interests and the interests of
your managers are directly opposed.
On the other hand, negotiating for
developmental assignments usually
means finding ways to improve not
just your skills but also your contri-
bution to the company’s bottom line.
You can, in complete honesty, frame
the discussion around these mutual
benefits.
• Let your supervisor know that you are
interested in getting better at your job
and that you are motivated to improve
through a developmental assignment.
Asking your supervisor for opportuni-
ties to grow is a clear sign that you
are an employee worth investing in.
• Be open to creative solutions. It’s
possible that there are some idiosyn-
cratic solutions (also called I-deals)
for enhancing both your interests
and those of your supervisor. One of
the best things about an integrative
bargaining situation like this is that
you and your negotiation partner
can find novel solutions that neither
would have imagined separately.
Think strategically about your career,
and you’ll likely find you can negotiate
not just for a better paycheck tomorrow
but for a paycheck that keeps increas-
ing in the years to come.
Sources: Based on Y. Rofcanin, T. Kiefer, and
K. Strauss, “How I-Deals Build Resources
to Facilitate Reciprocation: Mediating Role
of Positive Affective States,” Academy of
Management Proceedings (August 2014),
doi:10.5465/AMBPP.2014.16096abstract;
C. Liao, S. J. Wayne, and D. M. Rousseau,
“Idiosyncratic Deals in Contemporary Orga-
nizations: A Qualitative and Meta-Analytical
Review,” Journal of Organizational Behavior
(October 16, 2014), doi:10.1002/job.1959;
and V. Brenninkmeijer and M. Hekkert-Koning,
“To Craft or Not to Craft,” Career Development
International 20 (2015): 147–62.
The opinions provided here are of the manag-
ers and authors only and do not necessar-
ily reflect those of their organizations. The
authors or managers are not responsible for
any errors or omissions, or for the results
obtained from the use of this information.
In no event will the authors or managers,
or their related partnerships or corporations
thereof, be liable to you or anyone else for
any decision made or action taken in reliance
on the opinions provided here.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 491 29/09/17 4:26 pm
492 PART 3 The Group
Anxiety also appears to have an impact on negotiation. For example, one
study found that individuals who experienced more anxiety about a negotia-
tion used more deceptions in dealing with others.71 Another study found that
anxious negotiators expect lower outcomes, respond to offers more quickly,
and exit the bargaining process more quickly, leading them to obtain worse
outcomes.72
People generally negotiate more effec-
tively within cultures than between
them. Politeness and positivity char-
acterize the typical conflict-avoidant
negotiations in Japan, such as with
labor union leader Hidekazu Kitagawa
(right), shown here presenting wage
and benefits demands to Ikuo Mori,
president of Fuji Heavy Industries,
which makes Subaru vehicles.
Source: */Kyodo/Newscom
An Ethical Choice
Using Empathy to Negotiate More Ethically
Y ou may have noticed that much of our advice for negotiating effectively depends on under-
standing the perspective and goals of
the person with whom you are negotiat-
ing. Preparing checklists of your negoti-
ation partner’s interests, likely tactics,
and BATNA have all been shown to
improve negotiation outcomes. Can
these steps make you a more ethical
negotiator as well? Studies suggest
that they might.
Researchers asked respondents to
indicate how much they tended to think
about other people’s feelings and emo-
tions and to describe the types of tac-
tics they engaged in during a negotiation
exercise. More empathetic individuals
consistently engaged in fewer unethical
negotiation behaviors like making false
promises and manipulating information
and emotions.
When considering how to improve
your ethical negotiation behavior, follow
these guidelines:
1. Try to understand your negotiation
partner’s perspective. This isn’t
accomplished just by understand-
ing cognitively what the other per-
son wants but by empathizing with
the emotional reaction he or she will
likely have to the possible outcomes.
2. Be aware of your own emotions
because many moral reactions are
fundamentally emotional. One study
found that engaging in unethical
negotiation strategies increased
feelings of guilt so, by extension,
feeling guilty in a negotiation may
mean you are engaging in behavior
you’ll regret later.
3. Beware of empathizing so much that
you work against your own interests.
Just because you try to understand
the motives and emotional reactions
of the other side does not mean you
have to assume the other person is
going to be honest and fair in return.
So be on guard.
Sources: Based on T. R. Cohen, “Moral Emo-
tions and Unethical Bargaining: The Differ-
ential Effects of Empathy and Perspective
Taking in Deterring Deceitful Negotiation,”
Journal of Business Ethics 94, no. 4 (2010):
569–79; and R. Volkema, D. Fleck, and
A. Hofmeister, “Predicting Competitive-
Unethical Negotiating Behavior and Its Con-
sequences,” Negotiation Journal 26, no. 3
(2010): 263–86.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 492 29/09/17 4:26 pm
Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 493
As you can see, emotions—especially negative ones—matter to negotiation.
Even emotional unpredictability affects outcomes; researchers have found that
negotiators who express positive and negative emotions in an unpredictable
way extract more concessions because this behavior makes the other party feel
less in control.73 As one negotiator put it, “Out of the blue, you may have to
react to something you have been working on in one way, and then something
entirely new is introduced, and you have to veer off and refocus.”74
Culture in Negotiations Do people from different cultures negotiate differ-
ently? The simple answer is the obvious one: Yes, they do. However, there are
many nuances in the way this works. It isn’t as simple as “these negotiators are
the best”; indeed, success in negotiations depends on the context.
So what can we say about culture and negotiations? First, it appears that
people generally negotiate more effectively within cultures than between them.
For example, a Colombian is apt to do better negotiating with a Colombian
than with a Sri Lankan. Second, it appears that in cross-cultural negotiations, it
is especially important that the negotiators be high in openness. This suggests a
good strategy is to choose cross-cultural negotiators who are high on openness
to experience, and to avoid factors such as time pressure that tend to inhibit
learning about the other party.75 Third, people are more likely to use certain
negotiation strategies depending on what culture they belong to. For example,
people from China and Qatar are more likely to use a competitive negotiation
strategy than do people from the United States.76
Because emotions are culturally sensitive, negotiators need to be especially
aware of the emotional dynamics in cross-cultural negotiation. One study, for
example, explicitly compared how U.S. and Chinese negotiators reacted to
an angry counterpart. Chinese negotiators increased their use of distributive
negotiating tactics, whereas U.S. negotiators decreased their use of these tac-
tics. That is, Chinese negotiators began to drive a harder bargain once they
saw that their negotiation partner was becoming angry, whereas U.S. negotia-
tors capitulated somewhat in the face of angry demands. Why the difference?
It may be that individuals from East Asian cultures feel that using anger to get
their way in a negotiation is not a legitimate tactic, so they refuse to cooperate
when their opponents become upset.77
Gender Differences in Negotiations There are many areas of organizational
behavior (OB) in which men and women are not that different. Negotiation
is not one of them. It seems fairly clear that men and women negotiate dif-
ferently, men and women are treated differently by negotiation partners, and
these differences affect outcomes (see OB Poll).
A popular stereotype is that women are more cooperative and pleasant in
negotiations than men. Though this is controversial, there is some merit to it.
Men tend to place a higher value on status, power, and recognition, whereas
women tend to place a higher value on compassion and altruism. Women do
tend to value relationship outcomes more than men, and men tend to value
economic outcomes more than women.78
These differences affect both negotiation behavior and negotiation outcomes.
Compared to men, women tend to behave in a less assertive, less self-interested,
and more accommodating manner. As one review concluded, women “are more
reluctant to initiate negotiations, and when they do initiate negotiations, they ask
for less, are more willing to accept [the] offer, and make more generous offers to
their negotiation partners than men do.”79 A study of MBA students at Carnegie-
Mellon University found that the male students took the step of negotiating their
first offer 57 percent of the time, compared to 4 percent for the female students.
The net result? A $4,000 difference in starting salaries.80
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 493 29/09/17 4:26 pm
494 PART 3 The Group
One comprehensive literature review suggests that the tendency for men to
receive better negotiation outcomes in some situations does not cover all situa-
tions.81 Indeed, evidence suggested women and men bargained more equally in
certain situations, women sometimes outperformed men, and men and women
obtained more nearly equal outcomes when negotiating on behalf of someone
else. In other words, everyone was better at advocating for others than they
were at advocating for themselves. Another review of 123 studies found that
gender differences are smaller when negotiators have experience with negoti-
ating. Women also perform better in situations with low role incongruity.82
Factors that increased the predictability of negotiations also tended to
reduce gender differences. When the range of negotiation settlements was well
defined, men and women were more equal in outcomes. When more experi-
enced negotiators were at the table, men and women were also more nearly
equivalent. The study authors proposed that when situations are more ambigu-
ous, with less well-defined terms and less experienced negotiators, stereotypes
may have stronger effects, leading to larger gender differences in outcomes.
So what can be done to change this troublesome state of affairs? First,
organizational culture plays a role. If an organization, even unwittingly, rein-
forces gender-stereotypic behaviors (men negotiating competitively, women
negotiating cooperatively), it will negatively affect negotiations when anyone
goes against stereotype. Men and women need to know that it is acceptable for
each to show a full range of negotiating behaviors. Thus, a female negotiator
who behaves competitively and a male negotiator who behaves cooperatively
need to know that they are not violating expectations. Making sure negotia-
tions are designed to focus on well-defined and work-related terms also has
promise for reducing gender differences by minimizing the ambiguous space
for stereotypes to operate. This focus on structure and work relevance also
obviously helps focus negotiations on factors that improve the organization’s
performance.
Research is less clear on whether women can improve their outcomes by
showing some gender-stereotypic behaviors. Researchers Laura Kray and col-
leagues suggested that female negotiators who were instructed to behave with
“feminine charm” (be animated in body movements, make frequent eye con-
tact with their partners, smile, laugh, be playful, and frequently compliment
Men Ask More
Source: Based on A. Gouveia, “Why Americans Are Too Scared to Negotiate Salary,” San Francisco Chronicle, April 3, 2013, downloaded May 30, 2013,
from http://www.sfgate.com/jobs/.
Do you always
negotiate for
salary following
a job offer?
Women Men
Yes
30%No
70%
No
54%
Yes
46%
OB POLL
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 494 29/09/17 4:26 pm
Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 495
their partners) did better in negotiations than women not so instructed. These
behaviors didn’t work for men.83
Other researchers disagree and argue that what can best benefit women is
to break down gender stereotypes for the individuals who hold them.84 It’s pos-
sible this is a short-term/long-term situation: In the short term, women can
gain an advantage in negotiation by being both assertive and charming, but in
the long term, their interests are best served by eliminating these sorts of sex
role stereotypes.
Evidence suggests women’s own attitudes and behaviors hurt them in nego-
tiations. Managerial women demonstrate less confidence than men in anticipa-
tion of negotiating and are less satisfied with their performance afterward, even
when their performance and the outcomes they achieve are similar to those for
men.85 Women are also less likely to see an ambiguous situation as an oppor-
tunity for negotiation. Women may unduly penalize themselves by failing to
engage in negotiations that would be in their best interests. Some research sug-
gests that women are less aggressive in negotiations because they are worried
about backlash from others.
Negotiating in a Social Context
We have been mostly discussing negotiations that occur among parties that
meet only once and in isolation from other individuals. In organizations, how-
ever, many negotiations are open-ended and public. When you are trying to
figure out who in a work group should do a tedious task, negotiating with
your boss to get a chance to travel internationally, or asking for more money
for a project, there’s a social component to the negotiation. You are probably
negotiating with someone you already know and will work with again, and the
negotiation and its outcome are likely to be topics people will talk about. To
understand negotiations in practice, then, we must consider the social factors
of reputation and relationships.
Reputation
Your reputation is the way other people think and talk about you. When it
comes to negotiation, having a reputation for being trustworthy matters. In
short, trust in a negotiation process opens the door to many forms of integra-
tive negotiation strategies that benefit both parties.86 The most effective way
to build trust is to behave in an honest way across repeated interactions. Then
others will feel more comfortable making open-ended offers with many differ-
ent outcomes. This helps to achieve win–win outcomes because both parties
can work to achieve what is most important to themselves while still benefitting
the other party.
Sometimes we either trust or distrust people based on word of mouth about
a person’s characteristics. What type of characteristics help a person develop a
trustworthy reputation? A combination of competence and integrity.87 Nego-
tiators higher in self-confidence and cognitive ability are seen as more compe-
tent by negotiation partners.88 They are also considered better able to describe
accurately a situation and their own resources, and they are more credible
when they make suggestions for creative solutions to impasses. Individuals who
have a reputation for integrity can also be more effective in negotiations.89
They are seen as more likely to keep their promises and present information
accurately, so others are more willing to accept their promises as part of a bar-
gain. This opens many options for the negotiator that wouldn’t be available
to someone who is not seen as trustworthy. Finally, individuals who have more
14-6 Assess the roles and functions of third-party
negotiations.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 495 29/09/17 4:26 pm
496 PART 3 The Group
solid reputations are better liked and have more friends and allies—in other
words, they have more social resources, which may give them more implicit
power in negotiations.
Relationships
There is more to repeated negotiations than just reputation. The social, inter-
personal component of relationships with repeated negotiations means that
individuals go beyond valuing what is simply good for themselves and instead
start to think about what is best for the other party and the relationship as a
whole.90 Repeated negotiations built on a foundation of trust also broaden the
range of options because a favor or concession today can be offered in return
for some repayment further down the road.91 Repeated negotiations also facili-
tate integrative problem solving. This occurs partly because people begin to see
their negotiation partners in a more personal way over time and come to share
emotional bonds.92 Repeated negotiations also make integrative approaches
more workable because a sense of trust and reliability has been built up.93
In sum, it’s clear that an effective negotiator needs to think about more
than just the outcomes of a single interaction. Negotiators who consistently act
in a way that demonstrates competence, honesty, and integrity usually have bet-
ter outcomes in the long run.
Third-Party Negotiations
Until this point, we’ve discussed bargaining in terms of direct negotiations.
Occasionally, however, individuals or group representatives reach a stalemate
and are unable to resolve their differences through direct negotiations. In such
cases, they may turn to a third party to help them find a solution. There are
three basic third-party roles: mediator, arbitrator, and conciliator.
A mediator is a neutral third party who facilitates a negotiated solution by
using reasoning and persuasion, suggesting alternatives, and the like. Media-
tors are widely used in labor–management negotiations and in civil court dis-
putes. Their overall effectiveness is fairly impressive. For example, the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) reported a settlement rate
through mediation at 72.1 percent.94 But the situation is the key to whether
mediation will succeed; the conflicting parties must be motivated to bargain
and resolve their conflict. In addition, conflict intensity can’t be too high; medi-
ation is most effective under moderate levels of conflict. Finally, perceptions of
the mediator are important; to be effective, the mediator must be perceived as
neutral and noncoercive.
An arbitrator is a third party with the authority to dictate an agreement.
Arbitration can be voluntary (requested by the parties) or compulsory (forced
on the parties by law or contract). The big plus of arbitration over mediation is
that it always results in a settlement. Whether there is a downside depends on
how heavy-handed the arbitrator appears. If one party is left feeling overwhelm-
ingly defeated, that party is certain to be dissatisfied and the conflict may resur-
face at a later time.
A conciliator is a trusted third party who provides an informal communica-
tion link between the negotiator and the opponent. This role was made famous
by Robert Duval in the first Godfather film. As Don Corleone’s adopted son and
a lawyer by training, Duval acted as an intermediary between the Corleones
and the other Mafioso families. Comparing conciliation to mediation in terms
of effectiveness has proven difficult because the two overlap a great deal. In
practice, conciliators typically act as more than mere communication conduits.
They also engage in fact finding, interpret messages, and persuade disputants
to develop agreements.
mediator A neutral third party who
facilitates a negotiated solution by using
reasoning, persuasion, and suggestions for
alternatives.
arbitrator A third party to a negotiation who
has the authority to dictate an agreement.
conciliator A trusted third party who
provides an informal communication link
between the negotiator and the opponent.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 496 29/09/17 4:26 pm
Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 497
Summary
While many people assume conflict lowers group and organizational perfor-
mance, this assumption is frequently incorrect. Conflict can be either construc-
tive or destructive to the functioning of a group or unit. Levels of conflict can
be either too high or too low to be constructive. Either extreme hinders per-
formance. An optimal level is one that prevents stagnation, stimulates creativity,
allows tensions to be released, and initiates the seeds of change without being
disruptive or preventing the coordination of activities.
Implications for Managers
● Choose an authoritarian management style in emergencies, when unpop-
ular actions need to be implemented (such as cost cutting, enforcement
of unpopular rules, discipline), and when the issue is vital to the organi-
zation’s welfare. Be certain to communicate your logic when possible to
make certain others remain engaged and productive.
● Seek integrative solutions when your objective is to learn, when you want
to merge insights from people with different perspectives, when you
need to gain commitment by incorporating concerns into a consensus,
and when you need to work through feelings that have interfered with a
relationship.
● You can build trust by accommodating others when you find you’re
wrong, when you need to demonstrate reasonableness, when other posi-
tions need to be heard, when issues are more important to others than to
yourself, when you want to satisfy others and maintain cooperation, when
you can build social credits for later issues, to minimize loss when you are
outmatched and losing, and when others should learn from their own
mistakes.
● Consider compromising when goals are important but not worth poten-
tial disruption, when opponents with equal power are committed to
mutually exclusive goals, and when you need temporary settlements to
complex issues.
● Distributive bargaining can resolve disputes, but it often reduces the sat-
isfaction of one or more negotiators because it is confrontational and
focused on the short term. Integrative bargaining, in contrast, tends to
provide outcomes that satisfy all parties and build lasting relationships.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 497 29/09/17 4:26 pm
498 PART 3 The Group
Sources: Based on A. Nunes, “Unions Are Hurting Public Safety,” Forbes, April 10, 2017, https://www.forbes.com/sites/ashleynunes/2017/04/10/
unions-are-hurting-public-safety/2/#396682da516e; Rasmussen Polling, “Most Say Union Leaders Out of Touch with Members,” Rasmussen
Reports, August 10, 2016, http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/august_2016/most_say_union_leaders_
out_of_touch_with_members; D. DeMay, “Driver Union, for Lyft, Uber, Forces Seattle to Ask Tough Questions about ‘Gig’ Economy,” Seattle Post-
Intelligencer, December 19, 2016, http://www.seattlepi.com/local/transportation/article/Driver-union-for-Lyft-Uber-forces-Seattle-to-10797019.
php; M. Murro, “The Gig Economy: Complement or Cannibal?,” Brookings, November 17, 2016, https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/
2016/11/17/the-gig-economy-complement-or-cannibal/; Reuters, “Unions and the Gig Economy Are Gearing Up for Battle in This State,” Fortune,
November 28, 2016, http://fortune.com/2016/11/28/unions-gig-economy-new-york/; and K. Kokalitcheva, “Uber Lost Hundreds of Millions in the
Most Recent Quarter,” Fortune, December 19, 2016, http://fortune.com/2016/12/19/uber-financials-2016/.
Nonunion Positions and the Gig Economy
Are Bad for Workers
POINT
W hat do Uber, Etsy, and Amazon Turk all have in common? All of these platforms are fuel for short-term freelance work, and a reflection of what economists have dubbed
the gig economy. Fifty years ago, employers expected workers to
stay with a company for 30 years. In exchange for their loyalty,
employees were given more opportunities and a pension. Unlike
the labor market of today, companies promoted from within. As this
practice fell by the wayside, employers hired employees for shorter
and shorter periods. Now, many new jobs are not long-term or even
short-term positions: They’re gigs. Employees work as indepen-
dent contractors, using third-party platforms to connect to clients.
Because these employees do not have a traditional employment
contract, they have complete flexibility: They can work as much or
as little as they want.
Unfortunately, many of these platforms have a dirty secret. Unlike
regular employment, people who are employed primarily through gigs
do not have the benefits of a traditional job. Because they’re consid-
ered self-employed, they do not get paid for overtime, do not receive
benefits, and have no collective bargaining power. There’s also evi-
dence that they’re replacing rather than supplementing more stable
employment. For example, Uber and Lyft drivers tripled in Silicon Val-
ley from 2012 to 2014, while payrolled cab and limo jobs decreased
by 31 percent in the same time period.
Without the ability to collectively bargain, the labor market is akin
to the Wild West. That’s why many freelancers on these platforms are
trying to unionize. In New York and Seattle, labor unions are trying
to allow gig employees that work as rideshare drivers, house clean-
ers, and delivery persons the ability to create collective bargaining
units. Doing so will allow employees to demand health benefits and
overtime. It will also ensure that these employees make a living hourly
wage, which is rare for gig employees based on recent research. Many
employees, despite working 60 hours a week, still do not make as
much as a traditional employee.
Yes, it’s great for employers to sell younger generations on the flex-
ibility of these positions. But in exchange for flexibility, they are also
losing the power to negotiate for fair working conditions. Let’s stop
pretending that freelance work platforms like Uber are good for the
economy, and leave the gig economy trend at the curb.
COUNTERPOINT
W hile the gig economy has its drawbacks, these platforms exist for a reason. Employers and employees alike are fed up with traditional employment. Yes, some people who work
through freelance apps use it as a primary source of income. But there
are just as many, if not more, who just want a flexible second job to
get a little extra cash. If these positions were like the services they are
replacing (e.g., cab companies), then gig employees would have to
agree to specific policies regarding sick days and work a set schedule.
I’m also skeptical of this idea that freelancers are replacing tra-
ditional employment. Yes, some city-level data shows that gig-based
jobs increased while payroll jobs decreased. But there are also more
data from 2010 to 2014 that suggest that contractor and payroll jobs
have increased in most sectors that support freelance platforms. For
example, while use of freelance platforms like Airbnb increased over
four years, payroll jobs in hospitality also increased. The same is true
for the transportation industry over the same time period. If anything,
the reason these freelance platforms have been so successful is
because these industries are growing. It’s not that they’re replacing
traditional services—they’re meeting the demand that traditional ser-
vices cannot fulfill.
The benefits of having a collective bargaining agreement may also
be exaggerated. Whenever a group tries to create a collective bar-
gaining agreement, it causes conflict. A 2016 poll indicates that most
employees (80 percent) believe leaders will not protect the interests
of the group as a whole. Instead, leaders usually use their power in
numbers to protect their own self-interests in negotiations.
Collective bargaining doesn’t just hurt businesses—it also hurts
the public. For example, the International Civil Aviation Organization
has been trying to put cameras in commercial airline cockpits. These
cameras would allow authorities and employers to monitor pilots
on the job. These videos can help piece together why plane crashes
occur. Yet pilots have been using collective bargaining techniques to
fight the initiative on grounds that it violates airline pilots’ privacy.
They also insist that it could be used to “lead investigators away from
accurate conclusions” regarding employees’ performance.
Yes, traditional employment allows employees to bargain for rights
as a group. But this also leads to concessions and conflict that do not
benefit employees or their employers.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 498 29/09/17 4:26 pm
Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 499
CHAPTER REVIEW
QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW
14-1 What are the three types of conflict and the
three loci of conflict?
14-2 What are the steps in the conflict process?
14-3 What are the differences between distributive
and integrative bargaining?
14-4 What are the five steps in the negotiation
process?
14-5 How do individual differences influence
negotiations?
14-6 What are the roles and functions of third-party
negotiations?
APPLICATION AND EMPLOYABILITY
Conflict is an inevitable part of every workplace. As
you learned in this chapter, conflict is also beneficial
in certain contexts. You also learned about negotia-
tion, and how and when certain negotiation and con-
flict resolution strategies may be used. While exploring
these topics, you used many skills that can help you
be more employable. You learned collaboration while
exploring why collectivist teams are not better negotia-
tors, learned how to use concepts from the chapter to
move forward in your career, and assessed how to be
a more empathetic negotiator. You also applied your
knowledge of bargaining to America’s growing gig
economy. In the next section, you will develop these
skills further while also using your critical thinking
skills to evaluate the pros and cons of unions, resolve a
conflict between coworkers, assess how to deal with an
overly assertive employee, and take part in a negotia-
tion role play.
MyLab Management Discussion Questions
Go to www.pearson.com/mylab/management to complete the problems marked with this icon .
EXPERIENTIAL EXERCISE A Negotiation Role Play
You will consider two scenarios for this case: One is more
distributive, the other more integrative. Form pairs, with
one of you taking the role of the engineering director,
and the other taking the role of the marketing director.
Read only your own side’s specific information for the two
negotiation processes. The overall situation is the same
for both scenarios, but the priorities and outlook for the
parties change depending on whether you are negotiat-
ing the “contested resources” scenario or the “combined
future” scenario.
The Case
Cytrix develops integrated bicycle and running per-
formance systems. Runners and bikers wear the Cytrix
watch, which uses GPS signals to identify their location
and the distance they’ve covered. This information can
then be uploaded to the Cytrix Challenge website, where
users record their performance over time. Social media
tools also allow them to compare their performance rela-
tive to that of friends. The majority of users are either
amateur student athletes or committed adult hobbyists
like marathon runners.
The organization needs to determine how to allo-
cate a fixed pool of resources for future development
between the marketing and engineering groups. Rather
than making an executive decision about resource allo-
cation, the top management team has asked the respec-
tive teams to allocate $30 million for planned future
development and decide who will run different parts of
the project.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 499 29/09/17 4:26 pm
500 PART 3 The Group
Specific Information for the Marketing Group
Only the marketing manager should read this section.
The marketing group has been tracking the major areas
of sales and has come to the conclusion that Cytrix has
saturated the market. New sources of customers, especially
general consumers who are interested in health but are
not committed athletes, will need to be considered for fu-
ture growth. Research into sales of competitive products
and areas where competitors are failing to meet consumer
demands is needed. The marketing group’s primary goal is
to allocate sufficient resources to finance the research. The
group also wants to retain control over which new products
will be developed. Marketing would prefer to see engineer-
ing act in a consulting role, determining how best to manu-
facture the devices that fit the needs identified above.
Specific Information for the Engineering Group
Only the engineering manager should read this section.
The engineering group has recently been tracking the de-
velopment of new hardware that will improve the accuracy
of distance and speed estimates in remote areas. Several
other companies are already experimenting with similar
designs. To realize this improvement fully, engineering be-
lieves it will be necessary to develop the technology further
so it is both lightweight and inexpensive to produce. The
engineering group’s primary goal is to allocate sufficient re-
sources to develop these new technologies. The engineers
would prefer to see marketing act in a consulting role, de-
termining how best to advertise and deliver the new devices.
Contested Resources Scenario
The marketing and engineering departments are locked
in a struggle for power. Your side (either marketing or
engineering) should try to direct the largest possible pro-
portion of both money and authority toward your pro-
posed program. You still need to think of a solution in
which the other side ultimately agrees to assist you in im-
plementing the program. If you can’t reach an agreement
for shared resources, the CEO will appoint new directors
for both groups.
Combined Future Scenario
The marketing and engineering departments are eager to
find a positive solution. Both sides should try to see that
the company’s future needs are met. You know that to
achieve success everyone needs to work together, so you’d
like to find a way to divide the money and resources that
benefits both marketing and engineering. Plans can incor-
porate multiple techniques for sharing and collaborating
with resources.
The Negotiation
At the start of the negotiation, the instructor randomly as-
signs half the groups to the contested resources scenario
and the other half to the combined future scenario. Begin
the process by outlining the goals and resources for your
side of the negotiation. Then negotiate over the terms de-
scribed in your scenario, attempting to advocate for a solu-
tion that matches your perspective.
Debriefing
Afterward, you will get together with the other students to
discuss the processes used. Especially consider the differ-
ences in outcomes between the contested resources and
combined future scenarios. Either scenario could arise in
a real work environment, so think about how different ne-
gotiation situations give rise to different strategies, tactics,
and outcomes.
ETHICAL DILEMMA The Case of the Overly Assertive Employee
In this chapter, we learned about several conflict-han-
dling intentions. Each of these intentions involved two
dimension—assertiveness (the degree to which one party
attempts to satisfy his or her own concerns) and coop-
erativeness (the degree to which one party attempts to
satisfy the other party’s concerns). Consider these dimen-
sions, and then put yourself in the shoes of the manager
described below.
Tom is a manager at a small copy supply firm. Their
marketing team consists mainly of two employees: Janna
and Kim. Kim is incredibly assertive, while Janna is incred-
ibly cooperative. Though you are their manager, they
sometimes have the discretion to negotiate with each
other over who is responsible for which task in a project.
You notice that Janna seems always to do the most tedious,
unpleasant tasks. When you’ve asked Janna in the past
if she is happy with what she contributes to projects, she
meekly replies, “I don’t mind. I don’t want to make any
waves.”
You sense that Janna is unhappy but also scared of a
confrontation with Kim. Kim is getting more recognition
and compliments from the CEO because she does high-
profile work. You know this puts Janna at a disadvantage
in her career. On the other hand, Kim is overly assertive.
You know that if you ask her to be more cooperative, it
could cause more conflict in the office.
As we learned about relationship conflict, it’s almost
never beneficial. Yes, it may be unfair to Janna, but you
don’t want to disrupt the team by bringing conflict into
the office. You also know that conflict tends to spread in
the office—if Kim and Janna are at odds with each other,
it may distract people on other teams.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 500 29/09/17 4:26 pm
Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 501
Questions
14-7. If Tom does nothing, is that ethical? Does he have
a responsibility to Janna to make sure her concerns
are addressed?
14-8. In this chapter, you learned about mediators, arbi-
trators, and conciliators. Is it possible for Tom to
act in one of these roles? Why or why not?
14-9. If Tom does nothing in this situation, how do you
think the situation between Janna and Kim will
play out? Do you think there will be problems with
conflict?
CASE INCIDENT 1 Disorderly Conduct
The sound of Matt and Peter’s arguing is familiar to every-
one in the office by now. In an effort to make the best use
of space and ensure a free flow of discussion and ideas,
the founder of Markay Design had decided to convert
the one-floor office of the company to an open plan with
no walls between workers. The goal of such a layout is to
eliminate boundaries and enhance creativity. But for Matt
and Peter, the new arrangement creates a growing sense
of tension.
The argument boils down to the question of work-
space order and organization. Peter prefers to keep his
desk completely clean and clear, and he keeps a stack of
cleaning wipes in a drawer to eliminate any dust or dirt.
Matt, on the other hand, likes to keep all his work visible
on his desk, so sketches, plans, magazines, and photos are
scattered everywhere, alongside boxes of crackers and
coffee cups. Peter finds it hard to concentrate when he
sees Matt’s piles of materials everywhere, while Matt feels
he can be more creative and free flowing when he’s not
forced to clean and organize constantly. Many of Matt and
Peter’s coworkers wish they’d just let the issue drop. The
men enjoyed a good working relationship in the past, with
Peter’s attention to detail and thorough planning serv-
ing to rein in some of Matt’s wild inspirations. But of late,
their collaborations have been derailed in disputes.
Everyone knows it’s not productive to engage in con-
flicts over every small irritant in the workplace. However,
completely avoiding conflict can be equally negative.
An emerging body of research has examined so-called
conflict cultures in organizations. The findings suggest
having a culture that actively avoids and suppresses con-
flicts is associated with lower levels of creativity. Cultures
that push conflict underground but do not succeed in
reducing the underlying tensions can become passive-
aggressive, marked by underhanded behavior against
other coworkers.
Ultimately, finding a way through the clutter dispute is
probably going to be an ongoing process to find a balance
between perspectives. Both Matt and Peter worry that if
they can’t find a solution, their usually positive work rela-
tionship will be too contentious to bear. And that would
be a real mess.
Questions
14-10. Describe some of the factors that led this situation
to become an open conflict.
14-11. Do you think this is an issue worth generating con-
flict over? What are the potential costs and benefits
of Matt and Peter having an open discussion of the
issues?
14-12. How can Matt and Peter develop an active prob-
lem-solving discussion to resolve this conflict? What
could effectively be changed, and what is probably
going to remain a problem?
Sources: Based on S. Shellenbarger, “Clashing over Office Clutter,” Wall Street Journal, March 19, 2014,
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304747404579447331212245004; S. Shellenbarger,
“To Fight or Not to Fight? When to Pick Workplace Battles,” Wall Street Journal, December 17, 2014,
http://www.wsj.com/articles/picking-your-workplace-battles-1418772621; and M. J. Gelfand, J. R.
Harrington, and L. M. Leslie, “Conflict Cultures: A New Frontier for Conflict Management Research
and Practice,” in N. M. Ashkanasy, O. B. Ayoko, and K. A. Jehn (eds.), Handbook of Conflict Manage-
ment Research (Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar, 2014): 109–35.
CASE INCIDENT 2 Rubber Rooms and Collective Bargaining
U.S. labor unions have seen a dramatic decline in mem-
bership in the private sector, where only 6.5 percent of the
employees are unionized. The situation is very different
in the public sector, however, where 40 percent of govern-
ment employees are unionized. These numbers are the
result of very different trends—in the 1950s, the situation
was approximately reversed, with roughly 35 percent of
private-sector workers and 12 percent of public-sector
employees belonging to unions.
Research suggests two core reasons public-sector
unions have grown. First, changes in state and national
labor laws have made it easier for public-sector unions
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 501 29/09/17 4:26 pm
502 PART 3 The Group
to organize. Some also argue that enforcement agencies
have tolerated antiunion actions in the private sector.
Second, the location of private-sector jobs has changed;
high-paying union jobs in the manufacturing sector, the
steel industry, and other former bastions of private-sector
unionization have mostly gone overseas or to the South,
where it’s harder to organize workers. On the other hand,
it’s difficult to move government jobs away from the com-
munities they serve. A Philadelphia school, for example,
couldn’t just decide it was going to relocate its teachers to
Atlanta. Also, public-sector labor forces tend to be more
static than in the private sector. More plants than post
offices have closed.
Are these trends problems? Though this is partly a
political question, let’s look at it objectively in terms of
pluses and minuses.
On the positive side, by negotiating as a collective,
unionized workers are able to earn, on average, roughly 15
percent more than their nonunion counterparts. Unions
can also protect the rights of workers against capricious
actions by employers. Consider the following example:
Lydia criticized the work of five of her coworkers. They
were not amused and posted angry messages on a Face-
book page. Lydia complained to her supervisor that the
postings violated the employer’s zero tolerance policy
against bullying and harassment. The employer investigat-
ed and, agreeing that its policy had been violated, fired the
five. However, the National Labor Relations Board ruled
this an unfair labor practice and ordered them reinstated.
Most of us would probably prefer not to be fired for
Facebook posts. This is a protection unions can provide.
On the negative side, public-sector unions at times have
been able to negotiate employment arrangements that are
hard to sustain. For more than 25 years, the union that
represents California’s prison guards—the California Cor-
rectional Peace Officers Association (CCPOA)—has lob-
bied to increase the number of prisons and to increase
sentences (through primarily the three-strikes initiatives).
The lobbying has worked; additional prisons have been
built, the prison population has exploded, and thousands
of new prison personnel have been hired. With its mem-
bership at almost 30,000 and with millions of dollars for
skillful lobbying, the power of the CCPOA would now be
difficult to overestimate. As a result, an entry-level correc-
tions officer can earn up to $65,000 in base salary with
generous benefits, plus over $100,000 in overtime and
bonuses, after just 4 months of free training. All this is at
the expense of taxpayers in a state where the budget is
“precariously balanced and faces the prospect of deficits
in succeeding years.”
It is often extremely difficult to fire a member of a
public-sector union, even if performance is exception-
ally poor. Aryeh Eller, a former music teacher at Hillcrest
High School in Queens, New York, was pulled from the
classroom for repeated sexual harassment of female stu-
dents, a charge to which he admitted. While in the so-
called rubber room, where union members unfit to work
are paid their full wage just to sit, Eller’s salary increased
to $85,000 due to automatic seniority increases under the
teachers’ union contract. Such protections exist for teach-
ers in nearly every state, sheltering even those arrested for
having sex with minors and giving minors drugs. Teachers
are not alone. There are rubber rooms for many types of
union jobs.
Reasonable people can disagree about the pros and
cons of unions and whether they help or hinder an orga-
nization’s ability to be successful. There isn’t any dispute,
however, that they often figure prominently in the study
of workplace conflict and negotiation strategies.
Questions
14-13. Labor–management negotiations might be char-
acterized as more distributive than integrative. Do
you agree? Why do you think this is the case? What,
if anything, would you do about it?
14-14. If unions have negotiated unreasonable agree-
ments, what responsibility does management or
the administration bear for agreeing to these
terms? Why do you think they do agree to such
terms?
14-15. Assume that you are advising union and man-
agement representatives about how to negotiate
an agreement. Drawing on the concepts in this
chapter, what would you tell them?
Sources: Based on L. Apple, “Spoiled California Prison Guards Have It Easy,” Gawker Media, April 30,
2011, http://gawker.com/5797381/spoiled-california-prison-guards-have-it-easy; “Aryeh Eller, New
York Teacher Removed from Classroom for Sexual Harassment, Paid Nearly $1 Million to Do Noth-
ing,” Huffington Post, January 28, 2013, downloaded May 20, 2013, from www.huffingtonpost.com;
“Hispanics United of Buffalo, Inc. and Carlos Ortiz,” Case 03–CA–027872, National Labor Relations
Board, December 14, 2012, www.nlrb.gov/cases-decisions/board-decisions; E. G. Brown, “2015–16
May Revision to the California State Budget,” http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/2015-16/pdf/Revised/
Budget Summary/Introduction ; S. Soriano, “CCPOA’s Clout High, but Profile Low,” Capitol
Weekly, November 19, 2014, http://capitolweekly.net/ccpoa-transition-powerful-low-profile-
campaign-spending/; and J. Weissmann, “Who’s to Blame for the Hostess Bankruptcy: Wall
Street, Unions, or Carbs? The Atlantic, November 16, 2012, downloaded May 29, 2013, from www
.theatlantic.com/.
M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 502 29/09/17 4:26 pm