Indian Journal of Industrial Relations: Economics & Social Dev.

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Effect of Employee’s Upward Influence Tactics on Managerial Decision Making


Affiliations
1 Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


There is a need to develop the upward influence (UI) theory further by understanding the individual effects of soft, hard, and rational tactics on managerial decision making. Agents or subordinates employ UI to fulfill their goals. The target either commits, or complies, or resists the agent's request. Target's responses are dependent on certain mediating variables which represent his/her feelings and perceptions mainly formed on the basis of UI tactics. Agents usually employ UI tactics in combination, and the decision maker's response depends on the interplay of mediating variables. The model developed in this paper integrates the past research and presents an interactive model which explains the combined effect as well.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Arvey, R. D. & Ivancevich, J.M. (1980), “Punishment in Organizations: A Review, Propositions and Research Suggestions”, Academy of Management Review, 5 (1): 123-32.

  • Baron, R.A. (1986), “Self Presentation in Interviews: When There Can Be ‘Too Much of the Good Thing”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16(1): 16-28.

  • Bartol, K.M. & Martin, D.C. (1990a), “Influences on Managerial Pay Allocations: a Dependency Perspective”, Personnel Psychology, 41(2):361-78.

  • Bartol, K.M. & Martin, D.C. (1990b), “When Politics Pays: Factors Influencing Managerial Compensation Decisions”, Personnel Psychology, 43 (4): 599-614.

  • Bhatnagar, D. (1993), “Evaluation of Managerial Influence Tactics”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 8(1): 3-9.

  • Burgelman, R. A. (1983), “A Process Model of Internal Corporate Venturing in the Diversified Firm”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 28: 223-44

  • Deluga, R. J. (1991), “The Relationship of UpwardInfluencing Behavior with subordinate - Impression Management Characteristics”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21(4): 1145-60.

  • Deshpande, S. P., Schoderbek, P. P. & Joseph, J. (1994), “Promotion Decisions by Managers: A Dependency Perspective”, Human Relations, 47(2):223-32.

  • Fagenson, E.A. (1989), “The Mentor Advantage: Perceived Career / Job Experiences of protégés versus Non- protégés”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 10(4):309-20.

  • Falbe, C. M. & Yukl, G. (1992), “Consequences for Managers of Using Single Influence Tactics and Combination Tactics”, Academy of Management Journal, 35(3): 638-52.

  • Ferris, G. R. & Judge, T.A. (1991), Personnel/ Human Resource Management: a Political Influence Perspective”, Journal of Management, 17(2): 447-88.

  • Ferris, G.R., Judge, T.A., Rowland, K.M. & Fitzgibbons, D.E. (1994), “Subordinate Influence and Performance Evaluation Process”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 58(1): 101-35.

  • Gould, S. & Penley, L.E. (1984), “Career Strategies and Salary Progression: A Study of Their Relationships in a Municipal Bureaucracy”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 34(3):244-65.

  • Grote, D. (1995), Discipline without Punishment, American Management Association.

  • Higgins, C.A., Judge, T.A. & Ferris, G.R. (2003), “Influence Tactics and Work Outcomes: a Meta-analysis”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24 (1): 89-106.

  • Kipnis, D. & Schmidt, S.M. (1983), “An Influence Perspective on Bargaining within Organizations”, in M.H. Bazerman & J.L. Roy (eds), Negotiations in Organizations, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

  • Kipnis, D. & Schmidt, S.M. (1985, April), “The Language of Persuasion”, Psychology Today: 40-46.

  • Kipnis, D. & Schmidt, S.M. (1988), “Upward Influence Styles: Relationship with Performance Evaluation, Salary and Stress”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 33 (3): 528-42.

  • Liden, R.C., Wayne, S.J. & Stilwell, D. (1993), “Longitudinal Study on Early Development of LMX”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(4): 662-74.

  • Pulakos, E.D. & Wexley, K.N. (1983), “The Relationship among Perceptual Similarity, Sex and Performance Ratings in Manager–subordinate Dyads”, Academy of Management Journal, 26(1): 129-39.

  • Schriesheim, C.A. & Hinkin, T.R. (1990), “Influence Tactics Used by Subordinates: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis and Refinement of the Kipnis, Schmidt and Wilkinson Scale”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(3): 246-57.

  • Somech, A., & Drach-Zahavy, A. (2002), “Relative Power and Influence Strategy: the Effects of Agent/Target Organizational Power on Superiors’ Choices of Influence Strategies”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23 (2): 167-79.

  • Wayne, S. J., Liden, R. C., Graf, I. K. & Ferris, G. R. (1997), “The Role of Upward Influence Tactics in Human Resource Decisions”, Personnel Psychology, 50 (4): 979-1006.

  • Wayne,J. & Liden, R.C. (1995), “Effects of Impression Management on Performance Ratings: A Longitudinal Study”, Academy of Management Journal, 38(1): 232-60.

  • Yukl, G., Chavez, C. & Seifert, C.F. (2005), “Assessing the Construct Validity and Utility of Two New Influence Tactics”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26: 705-25.

  • Yukl, G. & Falbe, C.M. (1990), “Influence Tactics and Objectives of Upward, Downward and Lateral Influence Attempts”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(2):132-40.

  • Yukl, G., Falbe, C.M. & Youn, J.Y. (1993), “Patterns of Influence Behavior for Managers”, Group and Organizational Management, 18(1): 5-28.

  • Yukl, G. & Tracey, B.J. (1992), “Consequences of Influence Tactics Used with Boss, Subordinate and Peer”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(4): 525-35.


Abstract Views: 229

PDF Views: 0




  • Effect of Employee’s Upward Influence Tactics on Managerial Decision Making

Abstract Views: 229  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Amit Dhiman
Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, India

Abstract


There is a need to develop the upward influence (UI) theory further by understanding the individual effects of soft, hard, and rational tactics on managerial decision making. Agents or subordinates employ UI to fulfill their goals. The target either commits, or complies, or resists the agent's request. Target's responses are dependent on certain mediating variables which represent his/her feelings and perceptions mainly formed on the basis of UI tactics. Agents usually employ UI tactics in combination, and the decision maker's response depends on the interplay of mediating variables. The model developed in this paper integrates the past research and presents an interactive model which explains the combined effect as well.

References