Using threats or intimidation to persuade someone is which influence tactic?
A) legitimating
B) pressure
C) ingratiating
D) exchange
E) personal appeals
The Correct Answer is
B) pressure
Correct Answer Explanation: B) pressure
Among the influence tactics listed, using threats or intimidation to persuade someone falls under option B) pressure.
Pressure tactics involve using demands, threats, or intimidation to influence someone’s behavior or decisions. This approach relies on creating a sense of urgency or fear to compel compliance.
It could involve explicit warnings of negative consequences if the person doesn’t comply with the request or demand. This approach often leverages power dynamics or authority to push someone into taking a particular action.
Pressure tactics, unlike other influence strategies, exploit power dynamics by instilling fear or urgency. They often involve explicit warnings of negative consequences if compliance is not met. This approach creates a coercive environment, manipulating behavior through intimidation rather than building rapport or appealing to shared values.
These tactics might involve threats of job loss, reputation damage, or other punitive measures to compel immediate compliance.
The aim is to create discomfort or anxiety, pushing individuals to act in alignment with the influencer’s desires out of fear of repercussions, distinguishing it clearly from other more cooperative or relational tactics.
Let’s break down why the other options are not the correct answers:
A) Legitimating:
Legitimating tactics revolve around establishing the validity or appropriateness of a request by referring to authority, rules, or norms. This tactic emphasizes the legitimacy of a request based on established standards, policies, or norms. It does not involve coercion or intimidation to sway someone’s decision.
For instance, in a work setting, a manager might use legitimation by referring to company policies or industry regulations to justify a particular decision or request. This tactic relies on authority and rules rather than resorting to threats or intimidation to influence others.
C) Ingratiating:
Ingratiating tactics focus on building rapport, using flattery, praise, or friendliness to influence someone’s decision. This approach aims to create a positive impression or goodwill to gain compliance. It’s about fostering a positive relationship or impression rather than using fear or threats.
In a scenario where someone wants a favor from a colleague, they might use ingratiating tactics by being friendly, complimenting the colleague’s work, or expressing appreciation. This approach is different from using threats or intimidation to push for compliance.
D) Exchange:
Exchange tactics involve offering something of value in return for compliance. This tactic operates on the principle of reciprocity, where a favor or benefit is provided with the expectation of receiving something in return. It’s more transactional and mutually beneficial, without resorting to threats or intimidation.
For instance, in a negotiation, someone might use an exchange tactic by offering concessions or benefits to the other party in return for cooperation. This approach doesn’t involve coercive elements like threats but rather focuses on mutual gain.
E) Personal Appeals:
Personal appeals involve leveraging personal connections or emotions to influence someone’s decision. This tactic relies on appealing to feelings of loyalty, friendship, or goodwill. It emphasizes relationships and emotions rather than using threats or intimidation.
For example, a charity might use personal appeals by sharing personal stories or invoking emotions to encourage donations. This approach aims to connect on an emotional level but doesn’t involve coercive tactics.
In contrast to these tactics, pressure (option B) involves the use of threats, demands, or intimidation to push someone into compliance. It relies on creating a sense of fear or urgency to influence behavior or decisions.
Unlike legitimation, ingratiation, exchange, or personal appeals, pressure tactics don’t rely on building positive relationships or appealing to norms but rather on inducing fear or intimidation to achieve compliance.
Related Posts
- For which corporate strategy(ies) should supply chain inventory be minimized?
- This provides a blueprint for translating a business strategy into a plan for is.
MBA,BBA.
I am Smirti Bam, an enthusiastic edu blogger with a passion for sharing insights into the dynamic world of business and management through this website.
I hold a MBA degree from Presidential Business School, Kathmandu, and a BBA degree with a specialization in Finance from Apex College,
- As part of the consent process, the federal regulations require researchers to: - September 8, 2024
- Concept and Nature of Intellectual Property Rights – Explained in Detail | Business Law - January 30, 2024
- Management Information Systems Online Degree – Courses, Colleges, and Careers in MIS - January 16, 2024