Dear Madeleine,

I am about four months into a new job as a senior executive in a large global infrastructure company. I report directly to the EVP of Operations, who is the person who brought me into the company. I manage a huge team of fellow engineers, and so far, so good. (I’m an engineer also.)

The problem is that my boss and I are being bullied by my boss’s peers on the executive team. It’s true that my boss was brought in by the CEO to implement change, but the response from the rest of the executive team has been unreasonably negative. We are interrupted and challenged on every assertion we make—all of which is supported by data.

This situation has grown worse over time. After a recent meeting, one of the other EVPs actually cornered me and said my boss and I don’t belong in the organization; the CEO doesn’t know what he is doing; and the rest of the executive team is going to set him straight.

I feel threatened and confused. My boss and I are used to producing results that contribute directly to the bottom line and shareholder value, and I can’t understand what is going on here. What would you recommend?

Lost and Confused

_____________________________________________________________________

Dear Lost and Confused,

I’m sorry. Your situation sounds rough. You’ve had the great good fortune of spending most of your career working with reasonable people—which, in my experience, makes you an anomaly.

In my world view, human beings behaving reasonably is a rare and precious thing. But listen—can you blame anyone for exercising their God-given right to withhold cooperation in the face of what feels like a mortal threat? Think about it. Anyone who has made it to the senior executive ranks of a billion-dollar global company has a number of things to lose when change comes: power, money, status, influence—and that’s just for starters.

This is a straight-up political situation. You can examine it using John Eldred’s Model for Organizational Politics. Eldred, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Wharton School of Business, says that any political situation will have two dynamics: power balance and goal confluence.

Power balance describes the degree to which each person possesses position or personal power. When the power balance is high, power is shared or is relatively equal. When the power balance is low, one person has significantly more power than the other. Goal confluence measures the degree to which each person’s individual goals are in alignment with those of the other person.

These two dynamics form a quadrant of contingencies.

• When power balance and goal confluence are both high, a dynamic of collaboration is created. Relationships are naturally easy to develop and maintain.
• When power balance is high but goal confluence is low, there is equal footing but each foot is going in a different direction. Negotiation is possible.
• When power balance is low but goal confluence is high, power is irrelevant because both parties are going in the same direction. Each person can influence the other.

It looks like this:

The most dangerous quadrant is when power balance and goal confluence are both low.

The party without the power feels dominated and oppressed by the other.

Because oppression and domination are extremely uncomfortable conditions, the individual who is dominated will respond in one of four ways: they will submit, submerge, engage in open conflict, or sabotage.

I suggest you meet with your boss and use this model to analyze your situation. The EVP who attacked you has some power, for sure, but your boss has the backing of the CEO.

Questions to ask:

• Does the CEO have the backing of the rest of the executive team?
• Does he have position and personal power? If so, is it enough to protect your boss and you?
• What are the goals of the bully in question? Is it at all possible that you can achieve some goal confluence?

It is awfully tricky to adapt to political situations when you aren’t used to them. No one wants to think of themselves as a political person, but when the sharks are circling you have to rise to the occasion or end up on the losing end of a battle you never really understood.

The good news is that you have the analytical skills to think this through and to plan smart and measured action to protect yourself and eventually achieve your mandate.

Welcome to the boardroom! It is not a place for the faint of heart.

Love, Madeleine

About the author

Madeleine Homan Blanchard is a master certified coach, author, speaker, and cofounder of Blanchard Coaching Services. Madeleine’s Advice for the Well Intentioned Manager is a regular Saturday feature for a very select group: well intentioned managers. Leadership is hard—and the more you care, the harder it gets. Join us here each week for insight, resources, and conversation.

Got a question for Madeleine? Email Madeleine and look for your response here next week!

Photo by Wilson Vitorino on Pexels.com

Power. The word itself evokes a reaction. What thoughts or feelings do you have when you think of power? Perhaps you picture an organizational chart where the boxes at the top are imbued with more power than those below. Maybe you imagine an iron fist, representative of a person who rules over others with absolute authority. Or perhaps the word power conjures up feelings of nervousness, anxiety, or fear, based on negative experiences you’ve had in the past. On the flip side, maybe the word power emboldens you with excitement, energy, or drive to exert your influence on people and circumstances in your life.

Power is a dynamic present in all of our relationships and it’s one we need to properly manage to help our relationships develop to their fullest potential. In and of itself, power is amoral; it’s neither good or bad. The way we use power is what determines its value.

But what is power? How do we get it? And once we have it, how do we keep it?

In his book, The Power Paradox: How we gain and lose influence, author and U.C. Berkeley professor of psychology Dacher Keltner, shares twenty “power principles” that range from how we earn power, how to retain it, why power can be a good thing, when we’re likely to abuse it, and the dangerous consequences of powerlessness.

Keltner defines power as the capacity to make a difference in the world, particularly by stirring others in our social networks. Focusing on the needs and desires of others is key, and four specific social practices—empathizing, giving, expressing gratitude, and telling stories—are ways we develop power and sustain it over time.

Enduring Power Comes from a Focus on Others

1. Enduring power comes from empathy—We express empathy when we focus on what other people are feeling. We attune ourselves to their mannerisms, language, expressions, and tone of voice to gain a sense of their emotions. This promotes a sense of connection and trust with others that allows them to be vulnerable and authentic in their behavior. We can promote empathy in several practical ways: asking open-ended questions, listening actively, asking others what they would do in a given situation before offering advice, and soliciting the opinions of those in less powerful positions.

2. Enduring power comes from giving—Giving, without the expectation of receiving something in return, is a tremendous trust builder and leads to people being willing to grant you power in relationships. Keltner focuses on a particular form of giving: touch. Whether it’s politicians shaking hands, athletes high-fiving each other, or a boss giving an affirmative pat on the back, there is tremendous power in the human touch. A reassuring touch on the shoulder or warm embrace causes the release of oxytocin in the brain, a neurochemical that promotes trust, cooperation, and sharing, and also lowers blood pressure and fights the negative effects of the stress-inducing hormone cortisol. The overarching principle of giving is that it’s a way of providing reward and recognition to others that promotes goodwill.

The key to enduring power is simple: Stay focused on other people. Prioritize others’ interests as much as your own. Bring the good in others to completion, and do not bring the bad in others to completion. Take delight in the delights of others, as they make a difference in the world. — Dacher Keltner

3. Enduring power comes from expressing gratitude—Gratitude is the feeling of appreciation we have for things that are given us, whether it’s an experience, a person, an opportunity, or a thing. Importantly, it’s something that has been given to us, not something we’ve attained on our own. Expressing gratitude is a way to confer esteem on others and we can do that in a number of ways: acknowledging people in public, notes or emails of affirmation, and spending time with others. Expression of gratitude spreads goodwill within a team and causes social bonding.

4. Enduring power comes from telling stories that unite—Abraham Lincoln is an excellent example of a leader who used the power of storytelling to communicate important truths and unite people in working toward a common goal. Families, sports teams, businesses, and organizations of all kinds have a history that is communicated through story. Members of these groups establish their identities and understand their role in the group based on those stories. Stories enhance the interests of others and reduces the stress of working in a group. They also help us interpret the events going on around us and shape the way we deal with the challenges we encounter. Stories bring us together and foster the sharing of power that is necessary in organizational life.

Power is often perceived in a negative light. The natural reaction of many is to associate power with Machiavellian attempts at preserving self-interest and exerting dominance over others. It doesn’t have to be that way. The best use of power is in service to others, and the four principles Keltner advocates are an excellent way to develop and sustain power in a way that allows you to influence others to make a positive difference in the world.

Randy Conley is the Vice President of Client Services and Trust Practice Leader at The Ken Blanchard Companies. His LeaderChat posts appear the fourth or last Thursday of every month. For more insights on trust and leadership, visit Randy at his Leading with Trust blog or follow him on Twitter @RandyConley.

If you’ve ever wondered why so many negative and critical leaders seem to rise to power, recent research sheds a little light on the cause. It turns out that even though we say we want compassionate and empathetic leaders, we perceive naysayers as being more powerful than their non-critical colleagues.

In one of a series of studies, 518 participants were shown four pairs of statements made by former U.S. presidential candidates during nationally televised debates. They were not told the candidates’ names or when the debate took place. The pair of statements included one that was positive and supportive of America’s future, while the other was negative and critical. Participants were asked to rate how powerful each candidate appeared to be, how effective they thought the person would be in office, and whether or not they would vote for the person.

Compared to the presidential candidates who made positive statements, participants rated the negative candidates as more powerful, more likely to be effective in office, and likely to earn their vote. In additional studies across different contexts such as art reviews and opinions on social issues, participants consistently rated the naysayer as more powerful, albeit less likable, than their neutral or positive counterpart.

Why is this the case? Researcher Eileen Y. Chou theorizes the cause is human psychology. We perceive naysayers as being more independent, willing to speak their mind, and willing to “tell it like it is.” This fuels a perception of the naysayer being powerful enough to not be bound by normal constraints or resources. This perception of power was strongest among those who felt the most disadvantaged. The disadvantaged perceive the naysayer as being willing to speak truth to power and disrupt the status quo.

So, should you incorporate more negativity into your leadership style in order to become more powerful? Let’s see…how can I put this in a sensitive, thoughtful, diplomatic way?

NO!

There is certainly a time and place for candid realism in a leader’s communications. Leader’s who sugarcoat the truth and try to get their people to believe everything is rainbows and unicorns are perceived as out of touch, fake, and incompetent. Leaders have an obligation to “keep it real” with their followers, but also need to inspire people with hope for a better future. Constant negativity and criticism causes people to view the leader as a malcontent and they eventually remove their support.

The more fundamental issue for me beyond the role of being a naysayer is a leader’s relationship with power. Power accompanies leadership and it can be used in healthy and unhealthy ways. The greatest use of power is in service to others and there are noble and altruistic ways of developing and sustaining power that benefits others.

One only needs to listen to the political rhetoric these days to see the harmful effects of naysaying leadership. Constant criticism, negativity, and fault-finding appeals to the most base instincts of humanity. The most successful and enduring leaders call to the “better angels of our nature,” as Abraham Lincoln said, and unite people through a shared vision of a more promising tomorrow.

Randy Conley is the Vice President of Client Services and Trust Practice Leader at The Ken Blanchard Companies. His LeaderChat posts appear the fourth or last Thursday of every month. For more insights on trust and leadership, visit Randy at his Leading with Trust blog or follow him on Twitter @RandyConley.

I am a VP at a global real estate development company. About a year ago there was a big reorganization. One of my peers was made an EVP and is now my boss. As peers we had a friendly, if competitive, relationship.

We did okay together in the new relationship for awhile—until I had some big successes. I feel like that’s when things started going downhill. He has been shutting me out of big decision making meetings regarding projects I am running. He has skipped our last two reviews. I now get news updates from his administrative assistant.

The latest project he assigned me is a failing one and my job is to turn it around. I have had no say in who my team is, or any timelines. I have tried to talk to him but essentially he said, “I am the EVP and this is how I want things done.” It is becoming really clear to me that I am being set up to fail.

I have been considering going to his boss, with whom I have a really good relationship. What do you think?

Pushed Out

Dear Pushed Out,

Wow. It is so stressful when you feel like your boss doesn’t have your back. I am sorry. They say people don’t leave companies, they leave bosses—and it certainly sounds as if that might be true for you!

So here’s the deal. If you are absolutely clear that this is a hostile political situation—your boss has all of the power and your goals are not aligned—read on.

One of the finest thinkers on power and politics in organizations is John Eldred, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania. Eldred says that any political situation will have two power dynamics: power balance and goal confluence. Power balance describes the degree to which each person of a pair possesses position or personal power. When the power balance is high, power is shared or is relatively equal; and when power balance is low, one person has significantly more power than the other. Goal confluence measures the degree to which each person’s individual goals are in alignment with those of the other person. These two dynamics form a quadrant of contingencies:

• When power balance and goal confluence are both high, a dynamic of collaboration is created. Relationships are naturally easy to develop and maintain.
• When power balance is high but goal confluence is low, there is equal footing but each foot is going in a different direction. Negotiation is possible.
• When power balance is low but goal confluence is high, power is irrelevant because both parties are going in the same direction. Each person can influence the other.
• The most dangerous quadrant is when power balance and goal confluence are both low. The party without the power feels dominated and oppressed by the other. Because oppression and domination are extremely uncomfortable conditions, the individual who is dominated will respond in one of four ways: they will submit, submerge, engage in open conflict, or sabotage.

So, if you’re certain the last quadrant is where you are living right now, you have four choices.

1. You can submit: Put your head down, be good, get the job done, and hope for the best.
2. You can submerge: Act as if you are submitting but start working your relationships with others in the organization, making sure they see the situation and building support for your position. It would also be smart to start looking for a new organization to gift your talent to.
3. You can engage in open conflict: To pursue this option, you really need to be prepared to leave the organization. The minute you go to your boss’s boss, you are declaring war. That’s okay—but be ready to fight hard and possibly lose. It wouldn’t hurt to brush up your LinkedIn profile and resume first. Yes, it’s possible your boss’s boss may take your side when he sees what a snake your boss is, but I wouldn’t count on it.
4. You can plot to sabotage: It is hard to move into sabotage territory without compromising your integrity. Plus, in your business, goodness knows how many others you might impact. I think this option is reserved for when you have absolutely no other choice. You aren’t there.

You have already taken the hardest step, which is recognizing you are in an untenable political situation and you have to do something. You always have a choice about how you respond. Stay clear, make a choice, get as much support in your personal life as you possibly can, and take extremely good care of yourself so you can be strong.

Good luck to you.

Love, Madeleine

About the author

Madeleine Homan-Blanchard is a master certified coach, author, speaker, and cofounder of Blanchard Coaching Services. Madeleine’s Advice for the Well Intentioned Manager is a regular Saturday feature for a very select group: well intentioned managers. Leadership is hard—and the more you care, the harder it gets. Join us here each week for insight, resources, and conversation.

Got a question for Madeleine? Email Madeleine and look for your response here next week!

Consider this story shared by a woman in a workshop I was teaching on motivation.

While taking her normal elevator ride up to her office she found herself alone with the CEO of her company, whom she had never met. As she explained, “My heart raced. Should I introduce myself? When will I ever have another chance like this? But what if I make a bad impression?”

By the time the woman could gather her thoughts and decide what to do, the elevator stopped, the CEO stepped out, and the moment was lost. As she rode up the final few floors she was flooded with emotion.

“I was shaking. I was sad—disappointed—mad—frustrated—angry. I couldn’t believe how one person entering the elevator and not saying a word could generate so much negative emotion in me.” The woman said it had been a horrible way to start the day.

What caused all of the mental anguish? Real and perceived power. Without the woman’s perception of the CEO’s power, the dynamic in the elevator would have been far less tense for the woman. Research bears this out.

Dr. Drea Zigarmi, Dr. Taylor Peyton Roberts, and I recently completed research on how a leader’s power affects people’s motivation. We found that leaders at all levels need to be mindful and clear about the types of power they have and use. Our findings showed that the use—or the perceived use—of leader power usually results in people experiencing suboptimal motivation. Let’s take a closer look.

In 1959, social psychologists John R. P. French and Bertram Raven described five bases of power that are typically in play in the workplace.

• Reward power: A leader’s power to promise monetary or nonmonetary compensation or incentives.
• Coercive power: A leader’s power to use threats and punishment.
• Referent power: A leader’s power that causes followers to want to identify with, be associated with, or to believe in the leader.
• Legitimate power: A leader’s power of position or title that gives the leader the right to request compliance from another individual.
• Expert power: A leader’s power that comes through depth and breadth of knowledge.

Why are perceptions of power so important to understand? Because of their impact on motivation. A leader’s use of power can undermine people’s need for autonomy, relatedness, and competence (ARC)—the three psychological needs required for people to thrive, produce, and sustain high performance. Because people can potentially perceive their leader as having power over them in any of these five areas, you could be undermining people’s motivation and not realize it.

Here are insights on how to use your five bases of power more wisely:

• There are two types of reward power—impersonal and personal. Consider how you are using impersonal reward power to grant special benefits, promotions, or favorable considerations. Think about how you might be using personal reward power to influence employees’ feelings of being accepted, valued, and liked by you. Misuse of either leads to suboptimal motivation.
• Understandably, the use of coercive power usually results in a negative relationship—and suboptimal motivation in those you lead. Coercive power creates a workplace where people waste emotional energy to avoid suboptimal motivation.
• If referent power becomes too important, it can result in people who are afraid to disagree with you. It might surprise you to discover that when employees report managers exhibiting referent power, they also report experiencing suboptimal motivation because of their dependence on that leader for their internal state of well-being.
• Even legitimate power—often referred to as position power—can be misused when it is perceived as “Do this because I tell you to.”
• Finally, while expert power won’t necessarily result in people’s optimal motivation, withholding it can put them into suboptimal motivation.

As my colleague Dr. Drea Zigarmi so aptly puts it: “Power is very precious stuff. It entices the leader into flights of self-delusion and separateness from those they lead.”

Over 125 years ago, Lord Acton wrote the famous line, “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” and the less famous line, “The sole advantage of power is the ability to do more good.” Based on our research, we might follow with this advice: Let go of your dependence on power to get work done. Instead, consider your power as an opportunity to do more good by developing ARC-supportive skills to understand, appreciate, and respond to people’s psychological needs. You will create a workplace where people are optimally motivated to achieve results and have the energy, vitality, and well-being needed to sustain those results. Powerful!

About the Author

Susan Fowler is a senior consulting partner with The Ken Blanchard Companies, co-creator of the company’s Optimal Motivation and Situational Self Leadership training programs, and the author of the bestselling book, Why Motivating People Doesn’t Work … And What Does: The New Science of Leading, Engaging, and Energizing.

“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Power accompanies leadership. No matter how lofty or humble your title, whether you manage 3 people or 3,000, if you lead a girl scout troop or you’re the CEO of a multi-million dollar company, you will be faced with choices on how to use your power.

You’re probably familiar with the above quote from Lord Acton. Unfortunately, there is much truth in his quote and one only has to look at the news headlines for the latest example of a leader who has misused power for his/her own personal gain.

A good friend of mine who has spent his entire career developing other leaders once shared a keen observation with me. He said that people who need to be in power probably shouldn’t be. His learning was that those people who craved power, who had an inordinate desire to be in control, were the ones most likely to use power in unhealthy ways.

Of course my friend’s statement caused me to wrestle with the concept of power. Do I need to be in power? If so, why? Is it because of ego, status, or enjoyment of the privileges it affords? Is it a bad thing to want to be in power? Would I be unhappy or unfulfilled if I wasn’t in power? One question begets the next.

As I’ve pondered this question, the following ideas have become clearer to me:

1. The best use of power is in service to others. Being a servant leader, rather than a self-serving leader, means giving away my power to help other people achieve their personal goals, the objectives of the organization, and to allow them to reach their full expression and potential as individuals. I love the servant leadership example of Jesus. When two of his disciples came to him seeking positions of power and authority, he chastised them and challenged them to remember that “Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first among you must become your slave.” (Mt. 20:26-27) One of the paradoxes of leadership is that by placing others before ourselves, and using our power to serve, rather than dominate, actually brings us more power, respect, commitment and loyalty.

2. Followership is just as important, if not more so, than leadership. Learning to be a good follower is an essential component of being a wise leader who uses power appropriately. A person who learns to submit to the authority of others, collaborate with teammates, and sees first-hand the good and bad effects of the use of power, will have a greater appreciation for how power should be used in relationships. We can all probably think of examples of people who were bestowed leadership positions without ever being a follower, who then went on a “power trip” and showed just how ill-prepared they were to handle the power given them. Followership is the training ground for leadership.

3. The ego craves power. My leadership experiences have taught me that I need to be on guard to keep my ego in check. The ego views power as the nectar of the gods, and if leaders aren’t careful, their ego will intoxicate itself with power. In Ken Blanchard’s Servant Leadership program, he does an “Egos Anonymous” exercise that helps leaders come to grips with the power of the ego to make them self-serving leaders rather than servant leaders. Effective leadership starts on the inside and that means putting the ego in its proper place.

4. Power is held in trust. The power I have as a leader is something entrusted to me, both from my boss who put me in this position and by my followers who have consented to follow my lead. This power is not mine to keep. I’m a temporary steward of this power as long as I’m in my leadership role and it could be taken away at anytime should something drastic change in the relationship with my boss or followers. We’re all familiar with “consent of the governed,” the phrase that describes the political theory that a government’s legitimate and moral right to use state power over citizens can only be granted by the consent of the citizens themselves. The same concept applies to organizational leadership, and the minute our people no longer support our leadership, we have a serious problem.

So, do I need to be in power? I don’t think I need it to be fulfilled in my work, but it’s a question I haven’t yet fully answered. Do I like having power? Yes, I do. It allows me to help others in significant and positive ways. But if I’m being honest, I have to admit that I struggle with the shadow side of power and the temptation to use it to feed my ego.

Let me ask you the question: Do you need to be in power? Feel free to leave a comment and share your thoughts.

Randy Conley is the Vice President of Client Services and Trust Practice Leader at The Ken Blanchard Companies. His LeaderChat posts appear the fourth or last Thursday of every month. For more insights on trust and leadership, visit Randy at his Leading with Trust blog or follow him on Twitter @RandyConley.