Month: February 2011

The Power of Influence

/ nuleadership / 29 Comments

Introduction

In the 1990’s movie “Goodfellas,” we witness how individuals can rapidly move up the power chain through influence. In fact, it is an all-time classic gangster movie. Goodfellas grossed over $46.8 million domestically and received many national awards and reviews.

Here’s the synopsis. Henry Hill (Ray Liotte) grew up with a vision of a Mafia lifestyle. It was a dream that would garnish him wealth, power, and influence. Henry aggressively worked toward this ambition. He would become successful. Once a small time gangster, Henry became a major player; he participated in a major robbery with Jimmy Conway (Robert De Nero) and Tommy De Vito (Joe Pesci). His two partners managed to kill off everyone else involved in the robbery and slowly advance the hierarchy of the Mob. Henry had finally gotten the power and influence he craved along with other intended consequences.

Today, many managers tend to operate like gorillas in power.  People in organizations tend to follow the person in power, not necessarily the best thinkers. This is called the Alpha Principle.  Harry Beckwith, marketing author, states that most organizations operate like apes. He notes, “The alphas dictate what the group does and thinks. 

But are alphas better at decision making?  Not necessarily. Alphas are just better at getting and keeping power.”  Poorly skilled managers cause a lot of unnecessary stress to families because they don’t understand how to treat people.  Employees then bring it home to their families, thereby creating more problems. In this discussion, we will examine how individual workers can gain more influence in their organizations.

Levels of Power

There are a variety of ways influences can obtain influence in contemporary organizations.  In fact, leadership is a combination of power and influence.  Leader can be defined as the ability to influence, guide, and direct others.  Leaders get people to do things they wouldn’t normally do alone.  Power is a key component of leadership.  Power is the ability of a person in an organization to influence others to accomplish a desired outcome.  In most organizations power often evolves into the domination of others. 

Given this dynamic of organizations, managers need to understand their organizations. James Gibson, John Ivancevich, James Donelly, Jr., and Robert Konopaske, author of Organizations, argue that individuals need to understand how organizations operate.  In many organizations, there is a power struggle.  Power relates to the ability to get others to do what one wants them to do.  Given this framework, five interpersonal bases of power can be summarized as legitimate power, reward, coercive, referent, and expert power. 

In legitimate power, a person’s ability to influence others is given by being in a position of power. In fact, the person’s influence is authorized by his title in the organization.  There is little an individual can do if they do not possess this legitimate in changing the way things are done.  Coercive and reward power are based on the same premise; it is a person’s ability to reward or punish the behavior of others.

In fact, these sources of power are often used to support the use of legitimate power. Therefore, if you are not in a position to apply coercive or reward power, gaining influence in a contemporary organization may prove to be too difficult.  The above items are considered organizational power.

When individuals do not have title in an organization, they should be strategic in gaining more influence in the organization. The two major factors are referent and expert power. Referent power is based on a person’s charisma due to the personality or style of behavior.

Gibson, Ivancevich, Donelly, and Konopaske maintain that the strength of a person’s charisma is an indication of a person’s referent power. This power can be effective in leading others to make better decisions. People will at least listen to you because they instinctively trust you as a leader. Unfortunately, not everyone has that type of a magnetic personality.

Expert power is the power to influence others based on special expertise.  Even when an individual may have low rank in an organization, expert power makes the individual invaluable. Expert power can relate to administrative, technical, or other personal attributes. It goes to the Law of Scarcity.  Therefore, the most difficult a person is to replace, the greater the individual’s power in the organization. Individuals can gain this power in several ways.

First, a person can learn about the organization’s needs or deficiencies and seek to fill this knowledge gap.  For example, a small consulting firm may lacks the skills to promote itself. An employee with this ability could provide this additional service to this organization. Thus, the employee gains power. Second, employees can take additional training and obtain special certifications which can assist the organization in achieving its mission.

Third, individuals can become an authority in an area and become a hot commodity.  In fact, a person who can train, teach, lecture, and write on a particular subject can gain influence in his or her organization as well as outside of the organization. Finally, gaining expert power may not propel you into the next manager level. However, it will give you great influence in your organization as well as the community. Therefore, your influence becomes mobile and makes you more competitive in the marketplace.

 

Conclusion

As businesses fight to stay alive in the changing marketplace, there is an increasing need for effective leaders. Gaining influence becomes a premium for emerging leaders. Dale Carnegie, author of How to Win Friends Influence and Influence People, argued the importance of influencing others:

“You can make more friends in two months by becoming interested in other people than you can in two years by trying to get other people interested in you.”

The article demonstrated that there are a variety of power types in most organizations.  Unfortunately, some manager’s fear their losing power and are unwilling to share decision-making. Yet, entrusting good employees to make good decisions is a catalysis for creating high performance teams. Learning how to influence others is critical. Individuals do not have to be the boss in order to possess power in the organization.

However, not everyone has leadership persona. Referent power is derived from personal characteristics that employees admire.  But—empowerment increases employee morale.  Some people don’t understand the merits of satisfied employees on the bottom line.  Sadly, many people cannot distinguish a manager from a leader. Yet, leadership is all about gaining influence, regardless of the organizational level.

How can individuals gain influence with social media and other new technologies? Are there any ways to garnish more influence?

 © 2011 by Daryl D. Green

Creativity for Survival

/ nuleadership / 18 Comments

 

It is 2020. Knowledge management and information gathering dominate the world. Therefore, he who owns and controls information is king. Globalization has made labor cheaper and abundant. Yet, the critical assets are inno-thinkers. They are the lifeblood of society.

With the majority of engineers coming from China and India in 2020, American companies lose their innovative edge in the marketplace. Many historians point to 2008 when US engineering schools did nothing to wave off the international threat. Some hoped things would change. Yet, the future remains uncertain for engineering in America.

As America marches to a different drummer, it finds there is an impending danger ahead. While globalization has become a menacing threat to some businesses, the major challenge for traditional academic institutions is to produce engineers who are intelligent, creative, and internationally savvy to handle the challenges of the 21st century. However, only 2% of the general public associate engineering with creativity according to Harris Poll sponsored by the American Association of Engineering Societies and IEEE-USA. In managerial decision-making, creativity involves the ability of a manager to discover novel ideas as possible alternative courses of action for the organization to use in solving a particular problem.

The lack of creativity by today’s engineers becomes critical as more businesses look for technical workers for the future workforce. According to a survey conducted by Peter D. Hart Research Associates, 63% of American business leaders said college graduates are not prepared for the global environment. From a market-oriented perspective, organizational leaders must be concerned with the present downward trend of American engineering schools in producing innovative students.

 Academia must overcome several potential barriers that when transforming engineering schools to centers of innovation.  Currently, there are 346 universities approved by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET), the national organization that sets standards for engineering schools. Although scientists and engineers make up only 5% of the United States population, they generate up to 50% of the Gross Domestic Product.

Sadly, fewer American students are earning degrees in engineering and science. This situation is creating a national crisis for businesses looking for innovation and creativity from the nation’s finest.

In 2004, the United States graduated roughly 70,000 undergraduate engineers while other countries such as China (600,000) and India (350,000) were graduating more engineers. Traditionally, educators attribute the high attrition rate of individuals leaving engineering majors to their inability to cope with the intrinsic hardness of technical majors and do not view it as a major problem.

However, criticism of faculty pedagogy, together with those of curriculum design and student practices, constitutes the largest group of problems for students leaving technical majors.

Demographic changes also continue to shape the realities of engineering schools. Non-traditional universities are leveraging diversity as a competitive advantage while many traditional schools are not.

Thus, the demographic changes of more women, minorities, and low income students have created social pressure on engineering schools to find other pipeline sources than the traditional sources.

In order to the fierce realities of globalization, engineering schools need to shift their strategy toward a creativity focus. Technological and cultural influences are demanding new creative solutions. Many institutional leaders operate engineering schools in a manner that suggests that innovation happens by chance. Michael Michalko, author of Thinkertoys, argues that creativity is not an accident. In fact, it must be an organization intention to foster creative-thinking strategies.

Many times engineering students lose sight of creativity and focus solely on the technical aspects of engineering. A liberal arts education provides an exchange of fresh ideas and an expansion of the creative mind.

Researcher Gary Berg argues that higher education needs to balance applied and liberal arts curricula in order to be effective. Therefore, a new approach to learning is needed in engineering schools. In tomorrow’s universities, collaborative building will be in high demand.

Unfortunately, many times faculty members discourage engineering students from acquiring a broader educational experience. Therefore, engineering schools become a place where students are inhibited from growing creatively.

Twenty-first century leaders in engineering departments must address the needs of students in becoming creative if they hope to take advantage of future opportunities in hypercompetitive environments. Some people wonder if these schools can change.

What challenges and obstacles prevent traditional institutions from producing creative engineers? How do domestic universities transition themselves into incubators of multinational innovation?

© 2011 by Daryl D. Green

Guest Blogger: Importance of motivating employees in development of organization

/ nuleadership / 22 Comments

Motivation is important for employees in business development because it inspires and encourages people to achieve success. Moreover, in today’s economy and competitive world, especially for the knowledge and finance based companies like a debt management company, motivation is of great importance. People go to a debt management company for debt settlement programs. In dealing with debt a person loses all his confidence and motivation. Now, if he talks to a motivated person he will gain optimism and start living is life cheerfully. The business will be a successful one too.

Motivation – It helps in development of a company

Motivation can have a positive effect on the output of your business and concerns both quantity and quality of your performance. Quality which is related to efficiency increases with motivation. So, if your business relies heavily on efficiency, increase motivation among your staffs. If your employees lack the motivation to produce completed products or efficient services to meet the demand of the customers, then you may face problems.

No matter how efficient your technology and equipments may be, still your staffs are more important in running your business. Rather with the growth in importance of technology, the importance of employees has increased too.

Advantages of motivating your staff

Some of the advantages of motivating your staff are:

  1. Higher level of staff retention, thereby leading to reduction in the recruitment costs
  2. Increasing the levels of productivity for your company
  3. Increase in innovativeness and creativity
  4. Increase in profits
  5. Reputation will grow amongst your potential employees, suppliers and customers

How to motivate your staff

In order to motivate your staff and increase their efficiency:

  1. Provide a clear vision of what your business stands for and where you want it to see
  2. Communicate the values and priorities across the organization
  3. Make sure that the work is challenging, with variation sin the tasks
  4. Build work specific teams and see that the team members co-operate with each other
  5. Provide for high-quality training and development like encouragement to study further to achieve professional qualifications
  6. Try to establish a friendly and collaborative work environment – an open door culture where managers are easily approachable. Also, make sure to communicate with your employees on a regular basis as and when needed
  7. Incorporate flexible working practices and also maintain fairness at the workplace mainly in regards to promoting equality and diversity among the staff
  8. You should also ask for feedback either in person or through staff surveys, on what employees feel about their work, the support they get, and the improvements that they think will help the business
  9. Incorporate rewarding employees for their good work and competitive intelligence.

Employees may get more motivated to work if they perfectly understand how they are important to the organization and what their primary purpose is. Thus, providing clear vision on the organization’s purpose is important. You need to know if your employees really have a clear idea about your organization’s principles, priorities, and your company’s mission. However, not all people are motivated by the same thing. So, through the surveys try to find out the diversification among your employees. You can also introduce stress relief sessions for your employees.

All these together can work towards motivating the employees to work efficiently and thus you will be able to run a successful and profitable business. In addition, you will also have to remember that motivating your employees should start from motivating yourself first. If you love the job you are doing, you will be able to make your employees understand the importance of the work. Thus, you will be able to motivate your people and you will become a successful business leader.

About the Guest Blogger:  This article is contributed by Emily Jones, an IAPDA Certified Debt Arbitrator working with Oak View Law Group.

Please feel free to comment on this topic.

Globalization Upon Us

/ nuleadership / 27 Comments

American children sing “We are the world,” but the world does not listen. Children in Iran burn American flags. Children in Iraq throw stones at American soldiers. Children in China write hateful essays about the “evil” American ways. American politicians attempt to spin how third world countries embrace Western ways while the terrorist alert is heightened to acknowledge another international threat. Increased globalization has elevated the risk at the domestic and international levels for US government military and civilian personnel.

According to the Forrester Research, approximately 3.3 million U.S. jobs and $136 billion in wages could be moved overseas to countries like India and China by 2015. Therefore, many organizations will need to change their strategies in order to meet the international challenges ahead.

Let’s look into the future. Many developing countries will continue to grow strongly over the next decade. In fact, these countries steadily shift to consumer-led growth instead of export-led growth.  The dollar spirals downward and foreign currency goes upward.  China and India have added millions to their labor force creating products as well as outsourcing their services abroad at a fraction of what American workers can provide. 

These upstart countries are positioning themselves to become the next Super Power.  For example, China passed Japan as the world’s second-largest economy. According to the World Bank estimates, China could surpass the US by 2020. China’s gross domestic product (GDP) spreads across 1.3 billion people ($3,600 per person) while the US GDP covers a smaller population ($42,000 per person). Yet, China will continue to fuel the world’s economy due to its thirst for raw materials and products in order to meet its own demand.

Globalization continues to transform our organizations.  Today, many American businesses have a global focus.  The S&P 500 companies now generate 46% of their profits outside the US. In fact, some of the largest companies are higher.  For example, Coca-Cola has become a very successful brand abroad, with operations in 206 countries.  Over 80% of the company’s revenue comes from abroad.  Coca-Cola CEO Muhtar Kent explains, “We are a global company that happens to be headquartered in Atlanta. 

Do the math!  American businesses are headed offshore for increased profitability.  Companies gain from this foreign exodus the benefits of accessing more lucrative markets, new technologies, easy credit, and quality, cheap labor. When American businesses cut jobs, it has impacted the standard of living for today’s families.

Columnist Fareed Zakaria highlights the dilemma: “Capital and technology are mobile; labor isn’t….And this is a country with one of the highest wages in the world, because it is one of the richest countries in the world. That makes it difficult for the American middle-class worker to benefit from technology and global growth in the same way that countries do.” 

Economist pundits and political opportunists paint globalization as the best thing since sliced bread yet hide the realities of global competition from the general public. The forecasted outlook for the full-time worker is bleak. Clearly, technology and outsourcing are making the contingent (temporary) and other forms of flexible labor (independent contractors, on-call workers, temporary help agency, part-time, and contract workers) a reality for future employment opportunities.

As a matter of fact, Charles Handy theorized that unemployed or spare workers would create their own new work in the future. Business executives express little moral remorse as they keep American workers at bay.  Therefore, a different type of U.S. business model will need to be developed for global competition in the near future.

How do US organizations compete globally with the realities of outsourcing and create an American labor force that is clearly energized and motivated in the process?  What will happen to the quality of life for the middle class as global averages impact American wages?

 © 2011 by Daryl D. Green