The Hart and Quinn (1998) typology for assessing variations in managerial

roles was used to explore managers' self-reported successful use of influence

tactics with subordinates. Data were obtained from 116 managers using ques-
tionnaires completed anonymously. The investigation found that the managers'
vision setter role was positively related to the use of the consultation tactic.
Managers' motivator role was positively related to the use of ingratiating and
inspirational appeals, and negatively related to the use of exchange and coali-
tion tactics. Managers' analyzer role was related to the use of pressure and
rationality tactics, and negatively related to the use of the coalition tactic.
Managers' task master role was positively related to the use of the exchange and
inspirational appeals tactics. Implications of these findings for research and
practice are discussed.
Relationship of Managerial VWbrk Roles to
Tactics Used to Influence Subordinates
Kevin G. Lamude
California State University, San Bernardino
Joseph Scudder
Indiana University
Tnterest in managerial work role activities has grown rapidly in recent
J. yeare (Martinko & Gardner, 1990), yet the bulk of research which has
been conducted has focused on typologies for classifying work roles
rather than the relationship between managerial roles and actual com-
munication behavior or behavioral intentions. The present study was
undertaken to explore the relationship between self-reported manage-
rial work roles and successM infiuence strategies with subordioat^JS. The
geBeral importance of this area of research results from the belief that
influence abilily is central to being effective in a variety of work roles
(Dreher, Dougherty, & Whitely, 1989).
Marmger Work Roles
The literature on managerial work has changed significantly ia the
past decade or so. Prev:iously, it was dominated by single case-oriented
accounts of specific companies or biographies of specific leaders that had
been subjected to minimal empirical study (Bowditch & Buono, 1985).
Early controveisies revolved around the participants' reasons for the
observable activities. For instance, Carroll and Ikyior (1968) pointed out
that since managerml work is mental, it is not directly observable. Sim-
ilarly, the worla of Stewart (1976) and Turner and Lombard (1969)
stress the limitations to using managers' descriptions of their jobs to
describe managerial work roles.
Recent literature have shifted in several directions. Multidimen-
sional measures of competing roles not identified in previous frameworks
are now more common (Kotter, 1982; Stewart, 1982). In addition, there
163
1 6 4 The Journai of Business Communication 32:2 ApriN995
is more emphasis on cognitive processes, as in Quinn's (1981, 1988)
Competing Values concept which suggest that effective manager per-
formance requires the simultaneous mastery of seemingly contradictory
capabilities. There is also more emphasis on integrating tjT)ologies for
describing managerial work activities (Carroll & Gillen, 1987).
More recently, Hart and Quinn (1993) proposed a useful integrative
way to distinguish managerial work roles. Tbis approach revolves around
the Competing Values concept as the organizing framework. Citing
empirical support, Quinn and his colleagues (Quinn & Rohrbaugh,
1983; Quinn, Spreitzer, & Hart, 1992) proposed that different value dimen-
sions (flexibility to predictability and internal to external focus) under-
He the conceptualizations of the four major perspectives of organizational
and management effectiveness hterature. For example, the human rela-
tions perspective (participation, openness, morale and commitment)
emphasizes fiexibility and internal focus. The open system perspective
(innovation, adaptation, growth, and resource acquisition) stresses flex-
ibihty and external focus. The rational goal perspective (direction, goal
clarity, productivity, and accomplishment) emphasizes predictability
and external focus. Finally, the internal process perspective (informa-
tion management, documentation, and control) stresses predictabihty
and internal focus. Evidence suggests that an effective manager may need
to perform well on all four conflicting demands (Quinn & Cameron, 1988;
Quinn, 1988).
An important extension of the Competing Values concept was made
by Hart and Quinn (1993), who classified managerial work roles found
in the literature into four competing role categories (Vision Setter, Moti-
vator, Analyzer, Task Master. See Table 1.) that correspond to Quinn's
value framework and examined how these roles are related to perfor-
mance. Using Q-type cluster analysis they found the four hypothesized
managerial reles could be grouped together on the basis of Quinn's
Competing Values framework. In addition, they found that managers who
focused on all fourworkroles achieved higher levels of performance. In
this study, we extend that type of research to learn how managers effec-
tively use different tactics to influence subordinates.
Influence Strategies
Much of the recent research on managerial infiuence with subordi-
nates has focused on factors that condition the tactics that are used (Del-
uga, 1988; Harper & Hirokawa, 1988; Lamude, 1993; Lamude, Scudder,
& Furno, 1993; Iittlepage, Nixon, & Gibson, 1992; Yukl & Falbe, 1990).
This research has emphasized both personal (such as status, leadership,
stress, ethnicity and gender) and situational factors (such as direction,
objectives, conflict modes, context, and formal structure) while ignoring
the potential relevance of specific managerial work activity to influence
Managerial Work Roles / Lamude, Scudder 165
Table 1
Definitions of Managerial Boles
Vision Setter Manager focuses on creating a sense of identity, mission, aind
agendas for organizational members.
Motivator Manager employs personal examples, metaphors, anecdotes,
ceremony and symbols to emphasize organizational values and
create a sense of excitement and challenge for oi^^anizational
members.
Analyzer Manager is concerned with the critical review of projects and
proposals, evaluating decisions, negotiating, and conflict solving.
Iksk Master Manager has a strong focus on "hands on" results, knowledge,
decision making, and resource options.
behavior. Yet, a growing body of literature (Kanter, 1982; Kotter, 1982;
fe.vett & Lau, 1983; YuM & Falbe, 1990) has argued that influencing sub-
ordinates is an important component of managerial work roles, land the
study of managerial roles may provide a more detailed analysis of the
influence process.
The spedfic influence strategies made available to respondents in the
present study were based on Yukl and Falbe's (1990) modification of Kip-
nis and Schmidt's (1985) "hawi" and "soft" influence tactics. The fouir
"hand" tactics "involve use of authority and position power, and they tend
to be used in an impersonal and manipulative way" (JPalhe &, Yukl,
1992, p.644). The "hard" tactics include pressure, upward appeal,
exchange, and coalition.
In turn, Falbe and Yukl (1992) propose the four "soft" influence tac-
tics "involve use of personal power and power sharing" (p. 644). Tb^e "soft"
tactics include ingratiating, rationality, inspirational appeals, and con-
sultation. Definitions of these tactics are shown in Table 2.
Since Hart and Quinn's managerial role typology makes no prediction
about influence strategy use, the present study was exploratory^?. How-
ever, several prior manager-to-subordinate tactics of influence studies
sur est that some speculation is possible. In particular, in a series of stud-
ies researchers report that "soft" tactics such as, rationality, inspirational
appeal, consultation, ingratiation and less pressure are more success-
ful in influencing subordinates' commitment to vrork-related outcomes
(Falbe & Yukl, 1992; Yukl & Fadbe, 1990; Yukl & Tracey, 1992).
While managers are likely to possess trans-role preferences for "soft"
types of tactics for influencing subordinates, several studies and indirect
evidence from research on leadership, motivation, conflict manage-
ment, and critical thinking skills, suggest that "hard" tactics ai-e more
likely than others to be significantly associated with specific manager-
ial roles.
166
The Journal of Business Communication 32:2 April 1995
Table 2
Definition of Influence Tactics
Rational persuasion
Inspirational appeals
Consultation
Ir^atiation
Exchange
Coalition tactics
Pressure
Upward appeals
The manager uses logical ai^uments and factual evidence
to persuade the tai^et subordinate that a proposal or
request is viable and likely to result in the attainment of
task objectives.
The manager makes a request or proposal that arouses
tai^et enthusiasm by appealit^ to the subordinate's
values, ideals, and aspirations, or by increasing the
subordinate's self-confidence.
The manager seeks the subordinate's participation in
planning a strategy, activity, or chaise for which tlie
subordinate's support and assistance are desired, or the
manager is willing to modify a proposal to deal with the
subordinate's concerns and su^estions.
Tlie manager uses praise, fiattery, friendly behavior, or
helpful behavior to get the target subordinate in a good
mood or to think favorably of him or her before asking for
something.
The manager offers an exchange of favour, indicates
willingness to reciprocate at a later time, or promises a
share of the benefits if the tai^et subordinate helps
accomplish a task.
The manager seeks the aid of others to persuade tiie
tai^et subordinate to do something or uses the support of
others as a reason for the target to agree also
The mamBger uses demands, threats, firequent checking,
or persistent reminders to influence the target subordi-
nate to do what he or she wants.
The manager seeks to establish the legitimacy of a request
by claiming the authority or right to make it or by verify
ing that it is consistent with organizational policies, rules,
practices, or traditions.
Other researchers have considered the impact of task activity on the
influence process. For example, task activity has been identified as a source
of "hard" infiuence tactic differentiation with subordinates. Kim and Yukl
(1989) reported the pressure tactic is used more often for influencing sub-
ordinates in work-related task than with peers or superiors. In turn,
Lamude, Scudder, and Furno (1993) found coahtion, exchange, rationahty,
and pressure tactics were successful in influencing subordinates to per-
form work-related task. This is supported by Hart and Quinn (1993) who
argued that in order to fulfill the task master role, the manager must
be results oriented and make expHcit trade-off decisions.
Tb fulfill the role of vision setter, managers must create a collective
purpose (Hart & Quinn, 1993). Bennis and Nanus (1985) noted that a
Managerial Work Roles / Lamude, Scudder 167
vision articulates an attractive ftiture, and managers should behave in
ways that reflect the viisioE. O'Hair and Friedrich (1992) concluded that
"if a vision becomes a rigid pattern of behavior instead of an inspii-ational
challenge, it may do more harm than good" (p.87). Such writings sug-
gest that "soft" tactics are more likely to be significantly associat3d with
the vision setter role than "hard" tactics. This finds support from
researchers who found inspirational appeals and consultation tactics are
used most often as a means to obtain subordinate commitment for new
objectives, strategies, and projects (Yukl & Falbe, 1990).
The analyzer role involves competing viewpoints, the recognition of
commonalities and contrasting viewpoints, and the ability to influence
the subordinate to adopt a common point of view (Hart & Quinn, 1993).
Because the analyzer manager assumes a Mghly active and control-ori-
ented role in communicating decisions, we expect tMs role to be signif-
icantly associated with "hard" tactics. TMs is supported by littlepage,
Nixon, and Gibson (1993) who provide evidence that the use of ingrati-
ating, and two "hard" tactics, coalition and rationality are the most
effective in negotiating, solvir^ problems and conflicts. Hart and Quinn
(1993) suggest the motivator role helps managers to link employees with
enduring oi^anizational values, develop and maintain Mgher levels of
perfonmance, and promote their own and employees' emotion and idea
expression. Researchers have noted the importance of infiuence behav-
ior in undeistanding how managers motivate suboitiinates commit-
ment and extra effort (Bass, 1985; Yukl, 1989). DeFleur, Kearney, and
Plax (1993) suggest the exercise of doseness, enthusiasm, and MMng behav-
iors are generally perceived as eflfective in motivating others. Results from.
prior research on downward influence of managers over suboniinates
found these motivating behaviors were positively associated with the use
of more ingratiating and less exchange tactics (Lamude, et ai., 1993). We
would expect, then, that these tactics are more likely to be employed in
the role of motivator.
Method
Sample
The present study employed volunteer sampling (O'Hair & Kieps, 1990)
in order to generate a sufficient number of participants to produce a power
estimate of .90 (Cohen, 1969) for the principle analysis of interest. Our
sample consists of 116 volunteer managers (66 males and 50 females)
participating in a one day business and management education program
sponsored by theNational Institute for Professional Development. TMs
program dealt with a variety of topics, including tmning and develop-
ment, communication, leadersMp, and recruitment. All managere were
required to attend tMs program as part of their compaMes' executive devel-
opment training programs. Respondents worked in a variety of organi-
zations in the western United States. Jobs ranged from supervisory to
?68 The Journal of Business Communication 32:2 Apn7f995
top level management. The respondents' ages ranged from 27 to 69, with
a mean age of 45. All of the respondents had at least a college degree.
Procedures
One-hundred twenty-seven questionnaires were administered at the
program site cafeteria during the lunch break. The self-report ques-
tionnaire was composed of measures of managerial roles and influence
tactics, and limited demographic information. A cover letter attached to
the questionnaire explained the purpose of the study and assured con-
fidentiality. Respondents were told that they were taking part in a sur-
vey to assess management communication issues. Similar to the procedure
of Falbe et al., (1993) respondents were asked to recall a recent conver-
sation in which they were successful in influencing a subordinate "to com-
mit to a work-related activity" and to describe on a 5-point, agree-disagree
scale which items, if any, represented their work role(s) and tactic(s) of
downward influence. Commitment was described as when "the employee
agrees with the request or decision, is enthusiastic about it, and is
likely to exercise initiative and demonstrate unusual effort and persis-
tence in order to carry out the request successfully." Participants were
asked to complete the questionnaire during lunch and deposit them in
abox as they left the cafeteria. If they were unable to complete them imme-
diately, they were allowed to place them in a box located at the infor-
mation center later in the day. The vast majority of the questionnaires
upon which the study results are based were completed at the time of
distribution.
Measures
Managerial roles
Managerial roles were measured by the 16 item Manager Role Item
scale (Hart & Quinn, 1993). Each of the four managerial roles were
assessed by a four-item questionnaire. The alpha coefficients of inter-
nal consistency for each subscale were as follows: Vision Setter = .80,
Motivator = .82, Analyzer = .83, and Tksk Master = .88 indicating con-
sistency within the scales.
Influence strategies
We assessed 8 sets of influence strategies via Yukl and Falbe's (1990)
modification of Kipnis et al's (1980; 1985), Intraorganizational Influence
Scale. These included: pressure, upward appeal, exchange, coalition, con-
sultation, ingratiation, rational persuasion, and inspirational appeals.
This measure is widely used in organizational and management research
and has demonstrated acceptable validity and reliability (Yukl & Falbe,
1990; Yukl, Falbe, & Youn, 1993; Yukl & Tracey, 1992). The internal reli-
ability coefficient for the present study was .86.
Managerial Work Roles / Lamude, Scudder
169
Results
The data were analyzed using a series of stepwise regression tech-
niques to identify influence tactics that were significantly related to the
four managerial work roles. As seen in Tkble 3, there was a different set
of predictors for each of the four roles. Vision setter had one signi.ficant
predictor. More use of consultation (Beta=.45) was related to the man-
ager's vision setter work role. Motivator had four significant predictors.
More use of inspirational appeal (Beta=.45) and ingratiating (Beta=.33)
tactics and less use of exchange (Beta=-.25) and coalition (Beta.16) tac-
tics were related to the manager's motivator role. Aiialyzer had three sig-
nificant predictors. More use of pressure (Beta=.56) and rationality
CBeta=.25) tactics and less use of the coalition (Beta=-.21) tactic were
related to the manager's analyzer role. Finally, task master had two sig-
nificant predictors. More use of inspirational appeals (Beta=.25) and
exchange (Beta=.47) tactics were related to the manager's task role. The
upward appeal tactic failed to exert any appreciable impact on the four
work roles.
Table 3
Stepwise Multiple Regression of Manager's Tactics on Work Roles
Tkctics
Pressiire
Upward Appeal
Exchange
Ingratiating
Rationality
Inspirational Appeal
Coalition
Consultation
Constant
RSQ (Adjusted)
Viision
Setter
B Beta
_, _
_
_ _
_
_
_ _
1.61 .45
5.813
.19
(8/107d0
Motivator
B Beta
_ _
-0. 81 - . 25
1.18 .33
_ _
1.40 .45
-0. 60 -.16
-
6.676
.36
{4/llldf)
Analyzer
B Beta
1.82 .56
_.
_
_
.76 .25
_ ._
-.72 -. 21
_
4492
.39
(3/112df)
Task
Master
B Beta
_ _
1.65 .47
_ _
_ _
.84 .25
_ _
-
3.558
.27
(2/113dQ
Discussion
We ejqjiored work roles as an important antecedent factor conditioning
managers' perceived effective tactics of influence with subordinates. The
major contributions of this study are the demonstration that inter-
pretable managerial roles exist and the findings that these work roles
are differentially related to influence tactics.
1 7 0 The Journal of Business Communication 32:2 April 1995
In recent years considerable attention has been given to the role of
vision setting in management attitudes and ieadersMp skill. The pre-
sent results suggest that the consultation tactic and visionary role are
positively related TMs is consistent with Bennis and Nanus's (198^ argu-
ment that the visions that managers have are based on communicating
shared values. TMs association is also consonant with that offered by
O'Hair and BHedrich (1992), who suggested that acting on visions often
requires managers to remain flexible and to strive to modify and improve
their original vision.
The present findings indicate that in the role of motivator, managers
can obtain more commitment and effort from subordinates by relying
less on coalition and exchange tactics and more on use of ingratiating
and inspirational appeals tactics. As others have ai^ued, the use of
exchange and coalition tactics result in being perceived as impersonal
and manipulative, and seldom result in subordinate commitment (Falbe
& Yukl, 1992).
Results related to the analyzer role were all "hard" tactics and resem-
bled those found by other researchers with problem solving managers
(Littlepage, et al., 1993). These results might be explained best by Hart
and Quiim's (1993) obseirvation that managers focusing on communica-
tion to seek information, to shape decisions regarding competing view-
points and to maintain control, or for managing superior-subordinate
relationsMps, typically ignore behaviors that enhance relationships and
participation.
Contrary to expectations, we found that the task master role was related
to effective use of "hard" and "soft" tactics. The most defensible conclusion
is the recent finding that the inspirational appeal tactic is much more
effective when used in combination with a "hard" tactic such as exchange
(Falbe & Yukl, 1992). These researchers also observed that it may not
be appropriate to regard the exchange tactic as a "hard" tactic except
when it is used in impersonal and manipulative ways. Future research
exploring wMch characteristics are most salient to managers in decid-
ing whether the exchange tactic is "hard" or "soft" would be of value.
Caution is suggested in the generalization of the present findings. The
present study was designed to be exploratory in nature. One primary
limitation is tiae feict that the sample was non-random and limited to man-
agers who self-selected into the respondent group. In addition, only self-
report data were used. WMle a recent review by Spector (1987) found
little evidence of common variance among self-report measures of affec-
tive and perceptual constructs such as were studied here, some caution
is prudent. Common method variance may partly explain some of the
results.
However, the management and business communication literature for
years has postulated the existence of tj^pologies of managerial work and
Managerial Work Roles / Lamude, Scudder 171
behavior. The instrument developed by Hart and Quinn (1993) to mea-
sure managers' propensity to engage in role behavior was shown to be
internally consistent and to differentiate among respondent managers.
It is also associated with an array of tactics used to influence subordi-
nates. The focus on influence tactics however begs the question of how
well the Hart and Quinn framework generalizes to managers across man-
agerial functions. Lamude, Scudder, and Furno (1993), for example
foxmd perceived differences of downward influence tactics across tech-
nical, middle-line, and support managerial functions and influence suc-
cess. Belatedly, future research should examine the relationship between
man^erial roles and effective upward and horizontal influence attempts.
Other researchers have suggested links between use of influence tac-
tics and other influence attempt outcome factors such as, unsuccessful,
resistance, and compliance (Falbe & Yukl, 1992; Yukl, 1989). Such rela-
tionships might be profitable future directions to more fully explore the
roles of managerial work activity and influence processes.
Although caution is needed in offering guidelines until follow-up
research verifies the present results, these findings also suggest inter-
vention work can be understood in the context of roles and effective use
of "hard" and "soft" tactics with subordinates.
NOTE
Kevia G. Lamude (Ph.D., University of Utah) is an Associate Professor of Com-
mimication Studies at California State University, San Bernardino. His research on
influence, stress, and relational dimensions has appeared in Communication
Research Reports, The Journal of Business Communication, Journal of Social
Behavior and Personality, Management Communication Quarterly, Perceptual and
Motor Skills, Psychological Reports, Western Journal of Speech Communication,
and Women Studies in Communication. Address correspondence to K. G. Lamude,
Ph.D., Department of Commimication Studies, California State University, San
Bernardino, 5500 University Parkway, San Bernardino, CA. 92407-2397.
Joseph Scudder (Ph. D., Indiana University) is an Assistant Professor of Speech
Communication at Indiana University. He has contributed articles to Communica-
tion Reports, Communication Research Reports, Communication Quarterly, The
Journal of Business Communication, Human Communication Research, Journal
of Social Behavior and Personality, Public Relations Review, Perceptual and
Motor Skills, and Psychological Reports. His research interests center on tlie study
of influence, small group communication, and information systems.
REFERENCES
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York:
Pfee Press.
Beimis, W., & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders: The strategies for taking charge. New York:
Harper & Eow.
Bowditch, J. L., & Buono, A. F. (1985). A primer on organizatiorKd behavior. New
York: Wiley
172 The Journai of Business Communication 32:2 April 1995
Carlson, S. (1951). Executive behavior: a study of the workload and the working meth-
ods of managing directors. Stockholm: Stromberg.
Carroll, S. J., & Gillen, D. J. (1987). Are the classical management functions useful
in describing managerial work? Academy of Management Review, 12, 38-51.
Carroll, S. J., & Taylor, W. H. (1968). A study of the validity of a self observational
central signalling method of work sampling. Personnel Psychology, 21,359-364.
Cohen, J. (1969). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York:
Academic Press.
Defleiff, M. L., Kearney, P., & Plax, T. G. (1993). Fundamentals of human commu-
nication. Mountain View, CA: Mayfleld.
Deluga, E. J. (1988). Relationship of transformational and transactional leadership
with employee influencing strategies. Group & Organizational Studies, 18,456-
467.
Dreher, G. E, Dougherty, T. W, & Whitely, W. (1989). Influence tactics and salary attain-
ment. Sex Roles, 20, 585-550.
Falbe, C. M., & Yukl, G. (1992). Consequences for managers of using single influence
tactics and combinations of tactics. Academy of Management Journal, 35,638-
652.
Hart, S. L., & Quinn, R. E. (1993). Roles executives play: CEOs, behavioral complexity,
and flrm performance. Human Relations, 46, 543-574.
Harper, N. L., & Hirokawa, R. Y. (1988). A comparison of persuasive strategies used
by female and male manners I: An examination of downward influence. Com-
munication Quarterly, 36,157-168.
Ksuiter, R. (1982). The middle manager as innovator. Harvard Business Review, 60,
95-105.
Kim, H., & Yukl, G. (1989). Theimportanceof different types of power for influenc-
ing subordinates, peers, and superiors. In W. A. Ward & E. G. Gomolka (Eds.), Man-
o-ging for performance: Proceedings of the 26th annual meeting (pp. 4-6).
Portland, ME: Eastern Academy of Management.
Kipnis, D., & Schmidt, S. (1985). The language of persuasion. Psychology Tbday, 4,
40-46.
Kipnis, D., Schmidt, S. M., & Wilkinson, J. (1980). Intra-organizational influence tac-
tics: Explorations in getting one's way. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 440-
452.
Kotter, J. (1982). The general managers. New York: Eree Press.
Lamude, K. G. (1993). Supervisors' influence tactics in same-sex and cross-sex
dyads. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 77,1067-1070.
Lamude, K. G., Scudder, J., & Rimo, D. (1993). Influence techniques by technical,
support staff and middle-line managers. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 76, 299-
304.
Lau, A.W., Newman, A. R., & Broedling, L. A. (1980). The nature of managerial work
in the public sector. Public Management Forum, 19, 513-521.
littlepage, G. E., Nixon, C. T, & Gibson, C. R. (1992). Influence strategies used in
meetings. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 7, 529-538.
Mahoney, T A., Jerdee, T. H., & Carroll, S. J. (1965). The jobs of management.
Industrial Relations, 4, 97-110.
Martinko, M. J., & Gardner, W. L. (1990). Structured observation of mans^erial work:
A replication and sjmthesis. Journal of Management Studies, 27, 329-357.
Managerial Work Roles / Lamude, Scudder 173
O'Hair, D., & Priedrich, G. W. (1998). Strategic communication: In business and the
professiom (pp. 86-87). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
O'Hair, D., & Kreps, G. L. (1990). Applied communication theory and research.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
ft.ett, C, & Lau, A. (1983). Managerial work: the influence of Merarchicai level and
functional spedalty. Academy of Management Journal, 26,170-177.
Qwiim, R. (1981). A competing values approach to organizational effectiveness. Pub-
lic Productivity Review, S, 1J2-140.
Quiiin, B. (1988). Beyond rational management. San Prancisco: Jossey-Bass.
Quiim, R., & Cameron, K. (1988). Paradox and transformation. Canibri%e, MA:
Ballinger.
, R., & Eohrbaugh, J. (1983). A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: Ibward
a competing values approach to organizational analysis. Management Science,
29, 363-377.
Quinn, R., Spreitzer, G., & Hart, S. (1992). Challenging the assumptions of bipolar-
ity: Interpenetration and man^erial effectiveness. In S. Srivastva (Ed.), Execu-
tive and organization continuity (pp. 57-89). San IVancisco: Jossey-Bass.
Spector, P. E. (1987). Method variance ss an artifact in self-reported affect sind per-
ceptions at work: Myth, or significant problem? Journal of Applied Psychology,
72, 438-443.
Stewart, R. (1976). Contrast in management: A study of different types of managers'
jobs, their demands and choices. Maidenhead, Bershire: McGraw-Hill
Stewart, E. (1982). A model for understanding managerial jobs and behavior. Acad-
emy of Managem,ent Review, 7, 7-13.
IWner, A. N., & Lombard, G. E E (1969). Interpersonal behavior and administra-
tion. New York: Free Press.
Yukl, G. (1989). Leadership in orgcmizations. Elnglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
YuM G., & Faibe, C. M. (1990). Influence tactics and objectives in upward, dovmward,
and lateral influence attempts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75,132-140.
Yukl, G., Faibe, C. M., & Yoxm, <J. Y. (1993). Patterns of influence behavior for man-
agers. Group & Organizational Management, 18, 5-28.
Yitkl, O., & Ttacey, C. (1992). Consequences of influence tactics used with subordi-
nates, peers, and the boss. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 525-535.