MAN 3760 Module 3 Application Paper: Power and Influence in a Push for New Loading Procedures Example

From Compliance to Commitment: Power and Influence in Changing How a Ramp Crew Loads Bags

Student Name

Bachelor of Science in Organizational Leadership, Thomas Edison State University

MAN-3760: Leadership Communication

Mentor Name

Month Day, Year

From Compliance to Commitment: Power and Influence in Changing How a Ramp Crew Loads Bags

The Situation

Our station receives transfer bags on a belt and sorts them by flight onto carts. A new sorting sequence, grouping bags by connecting gate rather than by arrival, could cut misconnected bags. I was asked to introduce it on my shift.

First Attempt: Position and Pressure

I announced the new sequence at a pre-shift briefing, said it was required by management and warned that anyone who reverted to the old way would be written up. French and Raven (1959) described five bases of power: legitimate, from a formal position; reward, from the ability to give benefits; coercive, from the ability to punish; expert, from knowledge; and referent, from being liked and respected. I used legitimate and coercive power. The crew complied while I watched and reverted when I left. Misconnects did not fall.

Why It Failed

Hackman and Johnson (2013) distinguish compliance, doing what is asked to gain a reward or avoid punishment, from internalization and commitment, doing it because one accepts its value. Yukl and Falbe (1990) studied influence tactics and found that rational persuasion was used frequently in every direction and that consultation and inspirational appeals were common in downward influence; later work by Yukl and colleagues linked these tactics, more than pressure, to commitment. Pressure, which I used, tends to produce compliance at best and resistance at worst.

Second Attempt: Knowledge and Consultation

I started over. I drew on expert power by showing the crew the misconnect numbers for the past month and walking through how the new sequence would have prevented specific misconnects. That was rational persuasion. I then used consultation: I asked the two most experienced sorters to try the sequence for a week and suggest changes. They proposed one adjustment, sorting by gate within each concourse, which made the sequence easier to follow. Finally, I used referent power indirectly: the experienced sorters, whom the crew respects, explained the sequence to their teammates.

Results

Within three weeks the crew used the new sequence without supervision, and misconnects on my shift fell by about a third compared with the previous month. What separated the two attempts was how I tried to win people over, not the order of steps. The two experienced sorters now help train new hires in the sequence.

Lessons

Legitimate and coercive power can get people to act while I am watching. Expert power, rational persuasion and consultation get them to act because they understand and helped shape the change. For a supervisor with limited rewards to offer, those tactics are also the ones most within reach.

Conclusion

My first attempt relied on position and threats and produced compliance that disappeared when I looked away. My second relied on knowledge, evidence and consultation and produced commitment. The bases of power and influence tactics explain the difference.

References

French, J. R. P., Jr., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150-167). University of Michigan.

Hackman, M. Z., & Johnson, C. E. (2013). Leadership: A communication perspective (6th ed.). Waveland Press.

Yukl, G., & Falbe, C. M. (1990). Influence tactics and objectives in upward, downward, and lateral influence attempts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(2), 132-140. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.75.2.132