By Dick Mooney

One of the problems support group leaders experience (and, for that matter, everyone else who supervises other people) is how to get those within the organization--in our case, volunteers--to do what they need to do to uphold their responsibilities. Sometimes we feel powerless to do so and tend to take whatever comes along as the best work we can get from them. But we aren't entirely powerless, provided that we understand power and influence and know how to use those tools effectively.

If the practice of leadership involves (at least in part) accomplishing organizational goals through others, then the ability to get others to do what is necessary to reach those goals is an extremely important leadership skill. There are a wide variety of ways to get others to do our bidding, ranging from persuasion to coercion--from the soft sell to the hard sell--as illustrated by the two quotations above. The hard sell involves primarily force, and the soft sell involves what we'll call "influence." Clearly, the hard sell is one of the tools not available to us and we probably wouldn't want to use it even if it were. The hard sell is a tool chiefly available to managers in a conventional business setting and it involves the ability to punish or reward subordinates in ways that motivate them to do the boss's bidding; something like, "You are free to do any job you want but I have to make clear to you that the only one that pays any money is the one I want you to do."

So, since we have no formal, direct authority and no ability to "control" subordinates by exercising the right to command, including the right to impose painful sanctions for non-compliance, we must look to "influence" as our principal tool to get others within the group to do what we need them to do.

In Chapter 10 of his book, Social Psychology, Professor Bertram Raven discusses interpersonal influence, and identifies six basic kinds of social power, which he defines as the potential ability to change another person's beliefs, attitudes, behaviors, or emotions (i.e., to influence them). These power bases are Informational, Reward, Coercion, Expert, Referent, and Legitimate.

Before we examine and evaluate each of these, a few definitions are in order:

Influencing Agent - the person doing the influencing

Target - the person being influenced

Dependent Influence - influence that depends on continued intervention by the influencing agent

Independent Influence - influence that continues without further intervention by the influencing agent

Surveillance - the supervision that the influencing agent exerts on the target

In the examples I use in the following paragraphs, the support group leader is the influencing agent and the peer visitation coordinator is the target.

Informational Power - For its strength, informational power relies on learning, which in turn, results in a change in understanding or viewpoint on the part of the target. What's more, the change is independent of the influencing agent and requires no surveillance. In communications designed to exert informational power, then, it's the persuasive content of the message that's important. To be persuasive, a message requires not only information, but it must be presented in a logical, believable, and compelling way. An example of the use of informational power is when a support group leader explains in clear detail to the coordinator of the peer visitation program who has a habit of using untrained people as visitors exactly why this is not a good practice. The explanation is even more persuasive if it is made clear, for example, that an untrained visitor once got the group in hot water by "selling" her own prosthetist to the new amputee. As it turned out, the prosthetist didn't do a satisfactory job and the amputee held the visitor and the group responsible. Once the visitation coordinator understands this, and understands the correct way that visitors should be selected, his or her behavior changes without further intervention by the support group leader.

Reward Power - For its power, reward relies on the promise of, and ability to deliver a reward in return for desired behavior. Rewards that are institutional, like raises, days off, perquisites, or promotions aren't available to us. That leaves us with personal rewards, like approval, attention, or agreement.

An example of reward power is when a support group leader tells the peer visitation coordinator who has a habit of using untrained people as visitors that some valuable right or advantage, like the ability to attend the Amputee Coalition annual meeting at group expense, will be granted when it can be demonstrated that the coordinator is consistently using only trained visitors.

Coercive Power - Conversely, coercive power relies on the threat of punishment (plus the target's understanding that the influencing agent can, and if necessary will, deliver it). Again, punishments that are institutional in nature, like disciplinary action, loss of support, or removal of perquisites; are not available to us. That leaves us with personal coercive power, like disapproval or disagreement.

An example of personal coercive power is when the support group leader explains to the peer visitation coordinator that some valuable right or advantage will be taken away if he or she persists in using untrained visitors. I can't imagine what valuable right or advantage could be taken away from the visitation coordinator for non-compliance but I can visualize that the leader could "counsel" the visitation coordinator in strong terms and express "extreme disappointment" in his or her performance. These could be considered milder forms of coercion.

There are a couple of important limitations to reward and coercion, the most important being that they're both highly dependent on the influencing agent. Also, surveillance is absolutely necessary with each, because the influencing agent must keep tabs on the target and apply rewards and punishments as needed to keep the target's behavior "in line." With reward power, surveillance is easier because targets are usually motivated to make sure that the influencing agent knows they've complied. With coercion, on the other hand, use of surveillance is made more difficult because coercion tends to force the target away from the influencing agent and drive the target's behavior underground. Coercion also tends to make the target feel negatively about the situation and the influencing agent. Likewise, the negative motivational aspects of surveillance are troublesome.

Expert Power - To be effective, expert power does not involve rewards, punishments, or surveillance; but instead, it's highly dependent on the influencing agent having specialized knowledge, training, and/or experience which the target recognizes, respects, and is willing to be influenced by. The target must also respect the influencing agent's motives, for if they're seen as selfish or purely manipulative, they'll lose their power to influence.

An example of expert power is where a support group leader explains to the visitation coordinator that she has been an amputee support group leader for 25 years, is a member of the Amputee Coalition, has attended six Amputee Coalition support group leaders' workshops, has attended Amputee Coalition's peer visitation training twice, and is certified by the Amputee Coalition as a visitor and can assure the visitation coordinator unequivocally that using untrained visitors is a poor strategy. That's not quite the same kind of expert power a doctor uses when he tells you to stop smoking or you're going to die, but it's probably the best we can do in the support group setting.

Referent Power - Referent power relies on the target's personal identification with the influencing agent and wanting to follow his or her example. The target typically admires and respects the influencing agent. The potential for personal satisfaction or gratification motivates the target to be influenced in this case. This method is highly dependent on the influencing agent, but surveillance isn't required. The multitudes of famous people (carefully chosen because they're thought to be highly admired by the targets) who are seen on television endorsing consumer products is dramatic testimony of the potential power of this technique.

Legitimate Power - Legitimate power is like the formal authority that we've already observed flows down the chain of command to specific positions in business organization . Those who are influenced by legitimate power reason, "Well, she is the leader and has a right to ask me to use only trained visitors, so I think I'll go along with her request." As with referent power, legitimate power is highly dependent on the influencing agent, but surveillance isn't required.

Now that we have a nodding acquaintance with these power classifications, we're tempted to ask the question, which is best? The right answer probably is that each has its own strengths and there are situations in which it would be more effective to use one than another. As with most alternative methods of dealing with people, the best bet is to have the widest possible repertoire and be able to use the right tools in the right places.

It can be correctly said, however, that some of these influence bases have fewer inherent problems than others, and that, therefore, those may tend to be generally more effective. Earlier, when we defined terms, we observed that we could qualify each influence type according to two factors; surveillance and dependence. We observed that, with each, effective influence either did or did not require continued intervention (surveillance), and it was either dependent or independent of the influencing agent. If we can agree that it's much better if we don't have to continually intervene, and when influence can be effective without being dependent on the unique identity and qualifications of the influencing agent, then we can see that there's only one power base that is independent and requires no surveillance; informational power. The following chart will illustrate this.

For us as support group leaders, if there's any important lesson to be learned from this brief survey of social power and influence, it's that facts, information, and knowledge presented in the right way are persuasive; and the best way to influence the behavior of our colleagues, especially when we have no direct authority over them in our setting, is to convince them through appealing to their intellectual values and to their need to understand the logic and rationale behind our requests.