How do I get my way? A meta-analytic review of research on influence tactics |
| |
Authors: | Soojin Lee Soojung Han Minyoung Cheong Seckyoung Loretta Kim Seokwha Yun |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. Chonnam National University, College of Business Administration, 77, Yongbong-ro, Buk-gu, Gwangju 61186, Republic of Korea;2. Temple University, Fox School of Business, 1801 Liacouras Walk, Alter Hall, Philadelphia, PA 19122, United States;3. Binghamton University, State University of New York (SUNY), School of Management and Center for Leadership Studies, Binghamton, NY 13902-6000, United States;4. Incheon National University, College of Business Administration, 119 Academy-ro, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon 22012, Republic of Korea;5. Seoul National University, College of Business Administration, Gwanakno 1, Gwanak-gu, Seoul 151-916, Republic of Korea |
| |
Abstract: | Despite considerable research investigating the role of influence tactics on work-related outcomes in organizations, consensus on the effectiveness of influence tactics has been elusive. Specifically, there is a lack of integration concerning the relationships between proactive influence tactics and their outcomes. We investigate the effectiveness of 11 influence tactics from a comprehensive perspective using meta-analytic techniques. In particular, the current study focuses on relationships between each of the 11 influence tactics (i.e., rational persuasion, exchange, inspirational appeal, legitimating, apprising, pressure, collaboration, ingratiation, consultation, personal appeals, and coalition) and task- and relations-oriented outcomes. In addition, we investigate the moderating effects of the direction of influence tactics, measurement of influence tactics, singular influence tactic (versus use of a combination of influence tactics), independence of data sources, and study setting involved in the study. Regardless of task- and relations-oriented outcomes, based on 49 independent samples (N = 8987), our results show positive relationships between outcomes and rational persuasion, inspirational appeal, apprising, collaboration, ingratiation, consultation, and a negative relationship between pressure and outcomes. Rational persuasion is the only tactic which held stable positive relationships with both categories of outcomes regardless of moderating factors. Implications and directions for future research in the area of influence tactics are discussed. |
| |
Keywords: | Influence tactics Meta-analysis Task- and relations-oriented work outcomes |
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录! |
|