|
Items in cart [0] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
PAPERBACK Free Resources |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 463
PART V.
Social Processes
1
OCR for page 464
Influence Strategies
Dean G. Pruitt, Jennifer Crocker, and Deborah Hanes
State University of New York at Buffalo
OCR for page 465
1
Bandler and Grinder (1975), founders of the
neurolinguistic programming tradition, have argued that
therapists who match their clients' preferred
representational system (visual, auditory or kinesthetic)
will "create an atmosphere of rapport and understanding''
and, by implication, increase their influence over these
clients. This is only one kind of matching that has been
advocated as a means of achieving influence. Arguments can
be made for the efficacy of matching attitudes, making eye
contact, role reversal (in which one feeds back to the other
her perspective in a quarrel), and the like Furthermore,
there is a long tradition of research and practice on the
efficacy of reciprocity, that is, matching benefit for
benefit and harm for harm.
This paper presents an overview of theory and research
on all kinds of matching...its impact on behavior and its
origins. The paper contains two main sections. One deals
with substantive matching, that is, similarity in appearance
between one's behavior and characteristics and those of the
other party. The other deals with reciprocity.
SUBSTANTIVE MATCHING AS A SOCIAL INFLUENCE STRATEGY
In this section, we consider the role of substantive
matching in the social influence process. Included within
this rubric are similarity of attitudes, appearance, and
OCR for page 466
2
personality characteristics, as well as nonverbal and verbal
behaviors. The section will be divided into two
subsections, one on matching of personal characteristics and
the other on matching in communication. Part of the latter
discussion will consider the role of substantive matching as
a source of influence in psychotherapy.
In reviewing these literatures, we will discuss
research and theory that is mostly consistent with the
following assertions. First, matching produces positive
attitudes (by which we mean greater liking, rapport/ or
trust). Second, positive attitudes increase influence.
Third, matching increases influence, a point that can be
derived from the first two assertions.
Matching of Personal Characteristics
Similarity and Attraction
A voluminous body of research has examined the link
between similarity on dimensions such as attractiveness,
attitudes, and personality characteristics and liking.
Attitude Similarity Perceived similarity of attitudes
appears to be a particularly important source of attraction.
For example, in a field study, Newcomb (1961) found that the
OCR for page 467
3
extent of attitude similarity predicted the degree to which
people were attracted to each other after several months of
association. Laboratory experiments involving the
manipulation of perceived attitudes also provide consistent
support for the hypothesis that people tend to like others
whose attitudes seem similar to theirs (see Berscheid and
Walster, 1969; 1978; Byrne, 1971; for reviews).
Some, and perhaps virtually all, people seem to be
aware that similarity of attitudes increases liking, and use
this principle to increase their attractiveness to another.
In a study by Zanna and Pack (1975), female subjects learned
that they would meet an attractive or an unattractive male,
who held either traditional or liberal attitudes toward
women. When the male was attractive, but not when he was
unattractive, the subjects presented themselves as more
liberal to the liberal male, and more traditional to the
traditional male. Thus, the subjects deliberately matched
(or gave the appearance of matching) the attitudes of the
attractive male, presumably to increase their attractiveness
to him.
There are limitations to the strategy of attitude
matching. There is no increase in liking when one perceives
that another person is expressing similarity of attitudes
with manipulative intent, for the purpose of ingratiation
(Jones, 1964; Jones and Pittman, 1982; Jones and Wortman,
1973~. When one has a need for uniqueness (Snyder and
Fronkin, 1980), a highly similar other will threaten this
OCR for page 468
4
need, and one will tend not to like the other. In addition,
when similarity to another person has unpleasant
implications, the other will be disliked. For example,
attitudinal similarity leads to decreased willingness to
interact with another if the other is believed to have a
history of emotional disturbance (Novak and Lerner, 1968;
see also Cooper and Jones, 1969; Taylor and Mettee, 1971;
and see Berscheid, 1985 for a review).
The effect of attitude similarity on attraction appears
to be most important at the beginning of a relationship
(Berscheid, 1985~. In dating couples, similarity of
attitudes appears to decline as a determinant of the
progress of the relationship (Hillel al., 1976; Levinger,
1972), whereas similarity of age, intelligence and physical
appearance holds its own (Hill et al., 1976~. The reason
for the declining significance of attitudes in these
relationships is not clear. Conceivably, similarity of
attitudes is an initial "screening" criterion for
involvement in a relationship, and similarity along other
dimensions becomes more important once this criterion is
satisfied.
Similarity in Physical Attractiveness Couples in long-term
relationships tend to be similar in physical attractiveness.
This is true of same-sex friends (cf. Cash and Derlega,
1978) as well as of dating couples (Berscheid et al., 1971;
Murstein, 1972; Silverman, 1971) and married couples
OCR for page 469
(Murstein and Christy, 1976~. In contrast to attitude
similarity, this effect does not seem to be due to the
impact of similarity on attraction. In general, when
judging strangers, people report more liking for more
physically attractive others, regardless of how similar they
are in attractiveness (see Adams and Crossman, 1978;
Berscheid and Walster, 1974; Huston and Levinger, 1978, for
reviews). However, it is inevitable that compromises must
be made since the choice of a romantic partner must be
mutual. Hence, in the long run, people tend to choose
others who are similar in attractiveness because those
individuals are more likely to choose them in return than
are more attractive individuals.
Similarity in Personality Popular intuition to the
contrary, there is no convincing empirical support for
either the hypothesis that similarity of personalities will
increase liking or the hypothesis that dissimilarity (i.e.,
complementarily) of personalities will increase liking
(e.g., Ajzen, 1974; Hoffman and Mater, 1966; Meyer and
Pepper, 1977; Murstein, 1976~.
Theories of Similarity Effects on Attraction There are
several theoretical explanations for the effects of
similarity on liking. These tend to explain the effects of
similarity on some dimensions better than others. Byrne
(1971) has suggested a reinforcement interpretation, which
OCR for page 470
6
applies most clearly to attitude similarity. According to
Byrne (1971:338), attitude similarity is directly
reinforcing, because it satisfies the need to feel that one
is "logical, consistent, and accurate in interpreting the
stimulus world." Heider's (1958) balance theory also
accounts for the effects of similarity of attitudes on
liking. It suggests that if we share another person's
attitude toward some object, then the tendency toward a
balanced "P-O-X" (person-other-object) system will lead to a
tendency to feel positively about the other. Furthermore,
if we like another person, we will tend to assume that the
other shares our attitudes (cf. Granberg and King, 1980;
Levinger and Breedlove, 1966~.
Berscheid (1985) notes that attitude similarity may
have either positive or negative implications, although
positive implications are probably more common. For
example, attitude similarity may provide a person with
consensual validation for her opinions, imply that the other
will like her, permit greater prediction of the other's
behavior, and suggest that the person will enjoy interacting
with the other in mutually enjoyable activities. Hence,
Berscheid (1985:457) concludes that, "it is not so much
similarity itself that is rewarding or dissimilarity alone
that is punishing; rather it is the implications, presumed
or anticipated, of those facts that are responsible for
similarity-attraction effects and for their limitations and
exceptions."
OCR for page 471
7
Matching of attributes that define or create social
categories, such as religion or ethnicity, may increase
liking by creating a sense of shared group membership.
According to Heider (1958) "unit relations" lead to
"sentiment relations." That is, a sense of belonging
together leads to liking, and a sense of not belonging
together leads to disliking. For example, matching on
religious or ethnic group membership tends to produce a
perceived "unit relationship," which will tend to create
positive sentiments.
Research on "ingroup bias" effects has provided a
considerable amount of evidence that perceived unit
relations lead to greater liking for members of the unit (or
group) and possibly less liking for those who are not
members of the unit (cf. Brewer, 1979; Brewer and Kramer,
1985~. A striking finding of research on this "ingroup
bias" effect is that the group boundaries may be based on
trivial or even arbitrary criteria, and still lead to
ingroup bias. For example, an individual who has been
(arbitrarily) characterized as an overestimator of dots will
tend to rate other overestimators more positively than one
who has been characterized as an underestimator (Tajfel,
1970~. Even when the group membership is randomly
determined through a lottery procedure, individuals tend to
rate ingroup members more favorably (Billig, 1973; Billig
and Tajfel, 1973; Cracker et al., in press; Crocker and
Schwartz, 1985; Locksley et al., 1980; Rabble and Horwitz,
OCR for page 472
8
1969~. Thus, a sense of ingroup vs. outgroup, or "unit
relation," may be created by matching people on virtually
any attribute, however trivial.
In summary, many types of similarity, but especially
attitude similarity, lead to increased attraction under most
circumstances. The relationship between similarity and
attraction is probably multiply determined tHuston and
Levinger, 1976~.
Effects of Liking on Influence
We have just reviewed evidence that matching of
personal attributes, especially attitudes, leads to
increased attraction for the person doing the matching. We
now turn to the issue of whether this attraction increases
that person's influence. Several theories predict that
attractive others are more persuasive (McGuire, 1985~. For
example, Kelman's (1961) analysis of social influence
processes suggests two mechanisms. First, to the extent
that one party likes another, the other has the power to
punish the first by withdrawing from the relationship. Thi
power may induce compliance in the first party--that is, he
does what the other wants him to do (or what he thinks the
other wants him to do) because he sees this as a way to
elicit a desired response from the other. Second, to the
extent that a party likes another, that party may identify
s
OCR for page 473
9
with the other and accept influence because of this
identification. In other words, the individual may derive
some satisfying part of his self-concept through his
relationship with the other. This may lead him to accept
influence as a way of maintaining this desired relationship,
and consequently the desired self-concept. For example,
whereas I may comply with the law because it has the power
to punish me, I may accede to the influence of my mentor
because my relationship to her comprises an important, and
valued, part of my self-concept.
Heider's (1958) balance theory also suggests that liked
others will be more persuasive, because a system is balanced
if we share the attitudes of those we like.
Empirical evidence that liking increases influence has
been provided in several studies (Eagly and Chaiken, 1975;
Sampson and Insko, 1964; Schuler, 1982; Tannenbaum, 1956).
Attractive communicators are particularly influential when
they advocate undesirable positions (Eagly and Chaiken,
1975). Eagly and Chaiken have argued that this is because
attractive communicators are not expected to advocate
undesirable positions, giving them more credibility when
they do. Attractive communicators are also more influential
when the arguments in a message are weak (Brandstatter et
al., 1982~. In other words, the attractiveness of the
communicator matters more when the communicator's case is on
shaky ground or has a relatively low chance of persuading
the recipient.
OCR for page 590
CONCLUS I ON
In this essay we used Schein's (1985) model of organizational culture
to explore the relationship of cultural variables and military
cohesion. The focus on culture should not be interpreted as an
ignorance of other types of variables. in particular, we recognize
the centrality of structural and task (or functional) variables in
determining the relation of military cohesion and performance. These
variables, however, have received more than their fair share of
attention from scholars who have applied social theory to the
analysis of the military organization. The purpose of this paper was
to introduce and examine the contribution of the relatively neglected
dimension of organizational culture to the analysis of military
performance.
The paper challenges some of the structural-functionalist
assumptions that have guided much of the research on organizational
performance. We assert that the overemphasis on linear relations
between structure and function is an inadequate explanation of social
action. The concern with expected consequences typical of
structural-functional explanations, rather than with the causes of
social action that lie in the realm of culture, often leads to a
distorted view of organizations. Thus, an organizational design
based upon a strict functional and task analysis risks inadequacy by
ignoring cultural variables that mediate, limit, constrain, or
enhance performance. These variables are necessary to explain
organizational diversity under similar conditions. Overconcern with
the expected consequences or the organizational goals, at the expense
36
OCR for page 591
of the causes of a particular social action is analogous to designing
a military uni t for an environment characterized by a lack of
ambiguity, "plain,n nclean" and specific combat. Such an approach
suffers from an overdeterministic view of human behavior. In
addition, this approach also manifests an assumption of social
homogeneity, while not considering the diverse origins of the unit
groups and individuals.
To be fair, the structural-functionalist contains the seeds of
Schein's cultural perspective, manifested in Parsons attempt to
understand the social origins of the organization by proposing the
concept of a cultural value-system. In Parsons' view, an
Organization is tied to society by the value-system which it shares
and by its functional requirement which it can only meet through the
society and which must be satisfied if it is to survive.22 Bowever,
the notion of a semi-independent cultural sub-system is the least
explored one. Hence, by suggesting unidirectional culture diffusion
--from the top down-- the structural-functionalist's approach does
not explore the notion of sub-cultural development, and the reality
of diverse organizations performing within the same ~functional"
realm. Hence, a major question remains open: how and why do diverse
organizations arise and operate within the came functional
boundaries.23
22. Parsons Talcott (1965) "an Outline of the Social Systems,
In Parson ed. Theories of Societies, New York: Free Press, pp 30.
23. The counts r a rgument that each o rgani zati on has some unique
manifest or latent social function that explains its specific form
(Merton, 1949) is at best tautological.
37
OCR for page 592
Parsons' underutilized notion of a "cultural system" served as
the departure point for Schein's culture framework. Schein's model
is in fact an additional but necessary development of the structural-
functional model, in which cultural variables become endogenous to
the analysis. Thus, the organizational culture framework should be
considered as a theoretical extension which tries to connect the
structural-functional relations among the three basic analytical
levels -- societal, organizational, and group.
Schein's culture model adds two significant dimensions to
organizational analysis: first, a rigorous analysis of the internal
dynamics that account for the uniqueness of a given organizational
culture, rather then the external forces embodied in Parsons, value-
system that mold organizations into a specific societal function.
This enables us to examine sources and processes (rather then the
structure and function ~ that lead to organizational diversity, and
offers variables (such as leadership and socialization) that are
controllable by decision makers.
Second, Schein's model explains cultural constraints on
organizational performance in situations where pure structural and
functional considerations would suggest successful outcomes. In
Schein's view, basic assumptions --learned ways of viewing the
world-- often constrain or enhance organizational performance
independently of other variables. This perspective offers decision
makers a way of understanding the limits of structural design
38
OCR for page 593
decisions, as well as those of organizational strategies and
policies. For example, an analysis of the new COHORT MANNING system
that considers Schein's culture framework will provide both the
policy-maker and the military scholar with an important dimension
that is missing from the structural-functionalist perspective.
In sum, the organizational culture framework suggest that
organizational structure is not only a result of external forces, or
inherent in the nature of the organizational goals, function, task or
technology, but a consequence as well as a symbol of the most
fundamental cultural factors that develop within the organization.
Namely, while the structuralist argument emphasizes top down causal
links, and in fact presents a highly constrained and deterministic
image of individual choice and behavior, the cultural argument adds a
perspective that is derived from the bottom up and thus emphasizes
variables that are potentially controllable by individual decision
makers as well as other participants. Overall, it adds sets of
cultural variables that must be understood and taken into account by
anyone who would influence the nature of military life, and the
outcomes of military performance.
SOME COMMENTS WITH REGARD TO PROJECT ~ COHORT ~ HINGE
Our discussion of the relationship of culture~structure and cohesion
in military setting has a number of implications for project COHORT
MANNING. In essence we claimed that the impact of the structural
arrangements on attitudinal and performance outcomes in meditated by
culture variables that are at least partly independent and should be
39
OCR for page 594
taken into account in the planning stage. COHORT MANNING is
primarily program that defines the structure and the shifts of units.
What impact it will ultimately have on the performance of military
units under various conditions is --if we are right-- not a simple
question. These outcomes might very quite dramatically under the
same structural conditions as a result of culture variables. An
analysis of these variables might help in designing the project and
in practice its outcomes. As an example of hypotheses that are
derived from a cultural perspective, we offer the following:
1. The relations between structure and performance
COHORT is necessary but not sufficient condition for attaining
military horizontal-cohesion. Thus, cohesion might disrupted by
contradictory basic assumptions. The racial tension among peers in
the US army in Vietnam, as described by Moskos, is a point in case.
2. The Dynamics Factors:
A COHORT socialization can be destructive to vertical-cohesion, by
producing a subculture that rejects external intervention. For
example, John Van Maanen (1983) asserts that as a result of the
cohort structure in the Harvard Business School, its graduates
develop cooperative horizontal values, but are much less conformist
as subordinates. In contrast, at the MIT Sloan School of Management
the graduates are trained individually, and hence friendship among
peers is rare, but graduates are much more conformist as
subordinates. -
40
OCR for page 595
Socialization in a Cohort unit is designed in an attempt to
"breaks the individual as a private citizen, and remold him as a
member of a cohesive unit. A conflict between the values of a person
as a citizen and as a soldier could be developed.
A COHORT scheme blocks the ambitious individuals from promotion:
A soldier who desires to be an officer will find it much more
difficult, not only because of the structural determination, but also
as a consequence of the cohort culture that suppresses individualism
and demands loyalty to the group.
3. Demographic Element
A COHORT unit that consists of individuals who enlisted without any
other economic choice will develop low self-esteem and internal
distrust: instead of having an elite spirit, the second-class spirit
will be in force.
4. Ideological Element
The COHORT scheme can develop internal values that will contradict
civilian legal principles such as the military subordination to the
civil political regime, and the ethic and moral foundation of the
society.
41
OCR for page 596
APPENDIX A: SOME NOTES OF FURTHER METHODOLOGI CAL RESEARCH
An empirical application of Schein's model of organizational culture
poses a number of methodological problems. First, the research is
required to develop a systematic and comprehensive understanding of the
artifacts of the organization.24 Second, a fairly intimate
acquaintance with a number of members of the organization representing
its various subgroups is needed in order to understand their views
beliefs, and values. Finally, interpreting basic assumptions requires
that the researcher be in a position to interpret matters that are not
easily accessible to most member -- they are unconscious, tacit, or
unarticulated. All require context sensitive first hand involvement.
In other words, qualitative research is called for.
In our view, two types of qualitative research address the
methodological problems posed by the theoretical framework: clinical
and ethnographic study. The former is outlined in detail in Schein
(1985). In essence, the researchers engage in a form of action-
research where the problems and the research process are jointly
defined with "the client. n The purpose is to help the client solve
practical problems. In the course of such research the researchers
periodically visit the organization and may engage in extensive
individual and group interviews, as well as offer the client
organizational feedback. The feedback analysis process generates more
data for research. One possible tool for cultural diagnosis in the
context of such study is the "Cultural Diagnosis Questionnaires outline
24. In this short discussion of research methodology we will
refer all level of analysis (military, regimental, or cohort group
etc.) to a generic name -- organization.
q2
OCR for page 597
by Schein (1985~.
Ethnographic study has a different emphasis. In it, the researcher
takes a passive observational role that is typically more extended and
is often based on participant-observation. Ideally, the researcher
joins the organization for long period of time. The purpose it to
collect data in order to write a comprehensive description of the
culture, or aspects of it. Feedback and intervention do not typically
occur in the course of the study, and the outcome from the
organization's point of view is a final report. Comparative study is
possible: for example, two units might be studied simultaneously.
The two approaches have different advantages. Clinical research
is usually less "labor intensive." It is suited to a managerial or a
command perspective, and allows a focus on specific managerial
practical dilemmas. When properly done, it is often experienced as
helpful by members of the organization. Ethnographic research requires
heavier time commitments. A period of at last eight months of
observation is recommended. This type of research tend to focus on the
lower levels of organization, with an emphasis on description and
analysis of the everyday life of members. It allows the researcher to
witness events that might be crucial in understanding "what is really
going on. Some combination of both types of research might be
possible.
43
OCR for page 598
Select Bibliography
Argyris Chris, and Schon Donald A. (1978) Organizational Learning,
Reading Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, Boston: John Allyn,
lB73, II.
Freud S. (1936) Citizen and its Discontent, New York: Norton.
Gabriel Richard A. and Savage Paul L. (1978) , Crisis in Command
Management in the Army, McGraw-Hill, and Wang.
Henderson Darryl Wm. (1985) Cohesion, The human Element in Combat,
Washington D.C.: National De fence University Press.
Reegan John (1976) The Face of Battle: A Study of Agincourt,
Waterloo, and the Somme, Penguin Books.
Feegan John (1982) Six Armies In Normandy, Penguin Backs.
Retz de Vries, M. F. R., and Miller, D. The Neurotic Organization:
Diagnosing and Changing Counterproductive Stvies of Manaqement, San
Franc~sco: Jossey-Bass, 1984.
Merton Robert K. ~ 1949 ~ Social Theory and Social Structure, Free
Press .
Moskos, Charles C. Jr., (1970) The American Enlisted Man, New York:
Russell Sage Foundation.
Moskos Charles Jr. ~1975 ~ The American Combat Soldier in Vietnam, n
The Journal of Social Issues, Vol 3l, #4 .
Parsons Talcott ~ 1949 ~ The Structure of Social Action, Glencoe,
Ill.: Free Press.
Schein Edgar M. (1971) The Individual, the Organization and the
Career: A Conceptual Scheme, Journal of Applied Behavioral
Science, #7.
Schein Edgar M. (1985) Organizational Culture and Leadership,
Jossey-8ass Publication.
Van Masnen John (1983} "Golden Passports: Managerial Socialization
and Graduate Education" The Review of Higher Education Summer 1983,
Vol. 6, #4, Pages 435-455.
Van Maanen John and Edgar H. Schein (1979) "Toward A Theory of
Organizational Socialization," from Stw, B. M. Ed. Research in
Organizational behavior, Vol I. Greenwich, Connecticut: JAI Press.
44
OCR for page 599
Van Maanen John J. (1977) "Toward a Theory of Career" in Van
Maanen, ed. Organizational Career: Some New perspectives, New York
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
-
45
OCR for page 600
I
Table ~ Insert in p. :,0
Table 1. Basic Underlying Assumptions Around Which
Cultural Paradigms Form.
1. Humanity's Relatsonsnip to Haters. At talc o~atioD~1 lam, to
the Rely mcmbcn anew the relationship of the organization to its ~.
sortmcut as one of dolce, submission, harmo~in& ~d~g
~propuatc niche, or what?
2. Thc Nature of Reality and Troth. Thc linguistic "d behamoml ndes
that define what ~ real and what is not, what is ~ "fact," how truth
is ul~atcly to be deed, and w~cthcz truth is '4rc~rcalcd" or
"disco~c~cd"; basic concepts of time and space.
Tic Nature of Human .Vats~rc. Unseat does it mc:~n to be 'human" ant
what attributes arc considered intns~sic or ultimate? Is }human noetic
good, evil, or ncutsal? Arc human brinks perfcc~le or not?
4. Thc Natz`rc of Human .4ctsvity. What is the "flight" Dins for hump
bergs to do, on the basis of the above assumption about rcaliry, We
cn~nrons~cnt, ant human nantre: to be BCtI~C, passive, sdf~dc~dop"
mental, fatalistic, or what? What is work and what is play?
5. Thc Satyrs of Human Relationships. What is considered to be the
"nght" way for pcopic to relate to each other, to distribute power
and logic? Is life cooperative or compciiu~c;indi~ndu~stic, group col-
laborau~rc, or communal; based on t~diiiona] linc31 authon~law,
charisma, or what?
