Supervisors' Use of Influence Tactics for Extra-Role Tasks: Perceptions by Ingroup versus Outgroup Members in Organizations in Hong Kong

Vivian C SHEER*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

With a survey sample of 208 full-time employees of organizations in Hong Kong, this study examined whether ingroup membership made a difference in superiors' use and subordinates' reactions to influence tactics. Results indicated that ingroup membership exerted impact predominantly on supervisors' use and subordinates' perceptions of soft and neutral tactics but not on hard, negative tactics. Ingroup members, compared to outgroup employees, generally perceived soft, neutral tactics (consistent with group interaction norms) as more appropriate and exhibited greater attitude-behavior consistency in complying with these influence attempts. Supervisors used hard, negative tactics more frequently on outgroup subordinates than on ingroup employees. Ingroup members disliked the antinormative, negative tactics as much as did the outgroup members. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)143-162
Number of pages20
JournalThe Southern Communication Journal
Volume77
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2012

Scopus Subject Areas

  • Communication

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Supervisors' Use of Influence Tactics for Extra-Role Tasks: Perceptions by Ingroup versus Outgroup Members in Organizations in Hong Kong'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this