- 1 “Why Won’t People Act on What Is Obviously the Right Thing to Do?”
- 2 Why Study “Power and Influence” in an MBA?
- 3 Defining Power and Influence — “Potential” vs. “Process”
- 4 Why Do People Act? The Three-Layer Mechanism
- 5 Cialdini’s “Weapons of Influence” — The Principles Behind Unconscious Behavior
- 6 The Three Sources of Power — It Is Not Just About Your Title
- 7 Case Discussion — What Can a Junior Employee Without Position Power Actually Do?
- 8 The 5-Step Framework — From Intuition to Systematic Thinking
- 9 The Biggest Lesson from the Case — When “Dependence” Flips
- 10 The Role-Play — Feeling the Gap Between “Understanding” and “Doing”
- 11 The Core Message from Day 1
- 12 Connecting 28 Years of IT Experience to the Framework
- 13 Looking Ahead — What Day 2 and Beyond Will Bring
- 14 Books Referenced in This Article
“Why Won’t People Act on What Is Obviously the Right Thing to Do?”
If you have ever held a leadership or management role, you have almost certainly hit this wall.
Your logic is airtight. The data backs you up. Your proposal is clearly in the best interest of the organization. And yet — your team members do not move. Other departments refuse to cooperate. Your boss will not sign off.
Over my 28 years in the IT industry, I have faced this situation more times than I can count. As an IT delivery manager, my job constantly requires me to align stakeholders across teams, departments, and even companies. And I have learned the hard way that being right, on its own, gets you almost nowhere.
That is exactly why I was drawn to the Globis MBA elective called “Power and Influence.” I just completed Day 1 of the online sessions, and already I feel this may be the most practically relevant course in the entire MBA program.
In this article, I want to share what I learned on Day 1, layered with reflections from my own career.
Why Study “Power and Influence” in an MBA?
The instructor opened with a deceptively simple question:
“Is knowing what is right enough?”
The answer, of course, is no. Leaders have visions and ambitions. But to make them real, they need the ability to actually move people. There is a critical gap between “the person who can design the right strategy” and “the person who can make it happen.” Power and influence are the skills that bridge that gap.
On top of that, today’s business environment is defined by growing diversity and interdependence. No single leader’s formal authority is sufficient anymore. Cross-functional projects, partnerships with external organizations, multinational teams — the complexity of “getting people to act” keeps rising.
That is why we cannot rely on gut feeling and experience alone. We need a systematic understanding of power and influence — one that enables repeatable, intentional action.
Hearing this introduction, I immediately thought of all the times I had tried to push through initiatives armed with nothing but the strength of my argument. My logic was not wrong. But my approach to moving people was woefully insufficient.
Defining Power and Influence — “Potential” vs. “Process”
The first conceptual distinction Day 1 established was between power and influence.
Power is the potential to affect behavior, alter the course of events, overcome resistance, and get people to do things they would not otherwise do. The key word here is “potential.” Power can have an effect even when it is not actively exercised.
Consider a CEO who sits silently through a meeting. The mere fact of their presence changes how everyone else speaks. That is the latent effect of power.
Influence, on the other hand, is the process, act, or behavior of using power to move people toward action. In short: power is what you have; influence is what you do.
The class expressed the relationship with a formula:
Your Power x The Other Party’s Dependence / Needs / Emotions toward You = Your Influence over Them
This formula was an eye-opener for me. Influence is not determined by your power alone. The other party’s factors — their dependence on you, their needs, their emotions — act as a multiplier.
This means that no matter how capable you are, if the other party does not depend on you, your influence is small. Conversely, even if your power is modest, if you happen to address exactly what someone needs, you can wield outsized influence.
Understanding this structure fundamentally changes how you approach the challenge of moving people.
Why Do People Act? The Three-Layer Mechanism
So what actually makes people move? The course presented a three-layer model of human motivation.
Layer 1: Rational Judgment. People weigh costs and benefits, and act based on logic. In business, this is where most of us instinctively focus — presenting ROI, sharing data, laying out pros and cons. This matters, but it is never enough on its own.
Layer 2: Emotions and Values. People act based on love, will, fear, pride, and personal conviction — not always rationally, but consciously. “I will go the extra mile for this person.” “This is a hill I am willing to die on.” “I cannot afford to fail.” These emotional drivers shape decisions more than we usually admit.
Layer 3: Biological Instinct (Unconscious). Deep psychological triggers cause people to react without even realizing it. This layer connects directly to the next topic — Cialdini’s “weapons of influence.”
Most business professionals fight their battles on Layer 1 (logic). But Layers 2 and 3 often have a far greater impact on actual behavior. When you push through with logic alone and ignore emotions, you may get surface-level agreement — but execution falls apart. The three-layer model explains why.
Cialdini’s “Weapons of Influence” — The Principles Behind Unconscious Behavior
One of the most fascinating parts of Day 1 was the discussion of Robert B. Cialdini’s six principles of influence.
1. Reciprocity
When someone does something for us, we feel compelled to return the favor. In practice, this means that helping a colleague with their problem before asking for their support on yours dramatically increases cooperation. I had always sensed this intuitively, but knowing the psychological basis makes it something I can deploy more deliberately.
2. Social Proof
People look to the behavior of others as a guide. “Three of the top five companies in our industry have already adopted this approach.” “The other departments are already on board.” These statements carry weight because of social proof.
3. Liking
We are more likely to say yes to people we like. And what drives liking? Similarity (shared interests or background), proximity (frequent contact), and reciprocity (they showed goodwill first).
The “proximity” factor is particularly interesting in the age of remote work. Physical encounters are rarer, which makes it all the more important to create intentional touchpoints — casual chats in video calls, regular check-ins over messaging, brief non-work interactions that build rapport.
4. Authority
People tend to defer to experts. Simply prefacing data with “According to research by [respected institution]…” increases its persuasive power, sometimes dramatically.
5. Scarcity
People want what is hard to get. “You are the only person who can handle this project.” “I can only share this information today.” These statements tap into the scarcity principle.
6. Commitment and Consistency
Once people commit to something — especially publicly — they strive to act consistently with that commitment. Someone who says “I agree” in a meeting is far more likely to follow through. This is why securing a small initial commitment can be so powerful.
These principles can be used as techniques, but the course emphasized a crucial caveat: always be aware of the line between ethical persuasion and manipulation. The purpose is not to control people, but to move them effectively toward the right outcomes. Ethics must remain the foundation.
The Three Sources of Power — It Is Not Just About Your Title
Another key framework from Day 1 was the three-source classification of power.
1. Position Power (Formal Power)
This is the power that comes with your role: authority, budget control, performance review rights, access to information. When a manager assigns a task, they are drawing on position power.
2. Personal Power
This belongs to the individual, independent of title: expertise, track record, credibility, charisma, communication skills. When people say “If she says it, I trust it,” that is personal power at work.
3. Relational Power
This comes from your network of relationships — the ability to access diverse information, resources, and emotional support. The person everyone thinks of as “the one who can connect you with the right people” holds significant relational power.
The most important takeaway here: even without position power, personal power and relational power are always available to you.
A junior employee, a newcomer, someone with no title at all — they can still wield influence through expertise and connections. Conversely, a leader who relies solely on position power risks becoming powerless the moment they lose that title.
Reflecting on my own situation, my 28 years in IT and my MBA knowledge represent personal power. The network I have built inside and outside my organization represents relational power. But my position power as an IT manager, while effective within my project teams, carries almost no weight with stakeholders in other departments. This realization underscored how important it is to consciously build personal and relational power.
Case Discussion — What Can a Junior Employee Without Position Power Actually Do?
Day 1 included a case discussion about a junior employee navigating a difficult interpersonal landscape at a new workplace.
The junior employee lacked adequate support from their boss and faced outright hostility from a senior colleague. Just a few months in, they were on the verge of being isolated. In that situation, with almost no position power, what options are available?
The class was presented with several approaches, and most students — myself included — chose “Improve the situation while respecting the other party, so that both sides benefit.” But choosing that direction is easy. Figuring out the concrete actions is an entirely different challenge.
This is where the Day 1 frameworks come alive.
The 5-Step Framework — From Intuition to Systematic Thinking
The course introduced a five-step process for exercising power and influence.
Step 1: Define your desired outcome. Start with a clear goal. Do you want to build your career at this organization, or move on? If the goal is fuzzy, every subsequent action will be, too.
Step 2: Analyze the situation. Who are the players? What are their circumstances, your circumstances, the relationship dynamics, the environmental constraints? In the case, the key was understanding what the hostile senior colleague actually feared and needed.
The class introduced a tool called the “Counterpart World Understanding Checklist” — a structured inventory covering the other party’s role, responsibilities, priorities, evaluation criteria, career aspirations, working style, and core values. Rating your own understanding on each dimension reveals blind spots.
When applied to the case, this checklist uncovered something important. Behind the senior colleague’s seemingly hostile behavior lay anxiety about their own position being threatened and a desire for their experience to be properly recognized.
Step 3: Choose your basic stance. Fight, flee, collaborate, or accommodate? The course framed this through the lens of conflict styles, mapped on two axes: assertiveness (high/low) and cooperativeness (high/low). This produces four styles — Competing, Avoiding, Accommodating, Collaborating — plus a middle ground of Compromising. Choosing a stance is a strategic decision that depends on the specific context.
Step 4: Design your approach. What specifically will you do? Which power source will you draw on? Which of Cialdini’s principles might be effective? How will you manage impressions? For example, creating a casual setting with a hostile colleague and leveraging “liking” and “similarity” to rebuild the relationship.
Step 5: Execute and observe. Take action and watch the response. If it does not work, loop back to an earlier step and try again. Exercising influence is not a one-shot gamble — it is a continuous cycle, much like PDCA.
Knowing this framework transforms vague assessments of “it worked” or “it didn’t” into structured analysis: why did it work, why didn’t it, and what should I do differently next time? It creates repeatability.
The Biggest Lesson from the Case — When “Dependence” Flips
In the later part of the case, the situation changes dramatically. After the difficult boss and hostile senior colleague leave the organization, the protagonist’s accumulated knowledge and experience suddenly become a scarce resource.
The new boss depends heavily on the protagonist to keep operations running. The protagonist’s dependence value skyrockets overnight. And because the protagonist understands the new boss’s needs and provides thorough support, the principle of reciprocity kicks in — leading to new opportunities and strong recognition.
The influence formula maps perfectly onto this outcome:
Your Power (domain knowledge, expertise, track record) x Their Dependence (cannot operate without you) = Significant Influence
The biggest lesson from this case: do not take the easy way out when things are hard. Keep building your power, and when the environment shifts, you will be positioned to wield real influence. The course also noted that the ability to read organizational power dynamics and political contexts enables you to anticipate changes and act more strategically.
The Role-Play — Feeling the Gap Between “Understanding” and “Doing”
Day 1 also included role-play exercises. Students practiced scenarios like attempting to repair a relationship with a hostile colleague and navigating a difficult conversation with a superior.
For the conversation with a superior, several response patterns were analyzed: the model-student approach, the confrontational approach, the cooperative approach — each carrying different risks and potential payoffs. There is no single right answer.
What the role-play drove home was this: there is a significant gap between understanding a framework intellectually and actually using it under pressure.
“Understand the other party’s needs and leverage the liking principle to build rapport” — easy to say. But actually proposing a casual meeting with someone who has been hostile toward you, and then leading a relaxed conversation in that setting? That takes serious emotional energy.
This is precisely why the course emphasizes hands-on practice alongside theory.
The Core Message from Day 1
The session ended with a core message that I will paraphrase in my own words:
Exercising influence means identifying the other party’s needs, finding the right power to address those needs, and taking action to make them recognize that you hold that power.
And doing this not intuitively, but systematically — with a deliberate strategy — is what creates repeatability.
The four key messages from Day 1:
- Formal power alone is no longer enough to get things done. Leaders must learn to use power and influence wisely.
- Build the habit of thinking in processes and frameworks. Do not rely solely on gut feeling and experience.
- Social psychology-based techniques are surprisingly effective. Cialdini’s principles work in everyday business situations.
- Never lose sight of the purpose behind your use of power and influence. The means must not become the end.
Connecting 28 Years of IT Experience to the Framework
Mapping Day 1’s content against my own career surfaced one “aha” moment after another.
For instance, I once proposed adopting a new tool on a project. The technical advantages and cost savings were clear. But the veteran engineers on the team pushed back hard. Looking back through the power and influence lens, I realize that what they feared was not “the tool change” itself — it was “the possibility that skills they had spent years honing would become worthless.” Their real need was to have their experience respected. I should have approached them through that lens.
Or consider a cross-departmental collaboration project that stalled. I tried to push through using position power — my authority as project manager. But to the other department, my title meant nothing. What I actually needed was relational power: building trust through mutual connections, and framing my proposal in terms of how it would contribute to their KPIs.
Being able to articulate these past experiences through the power and influence framework is itself one of the biggest gains from Day 1.
Looking Ahead — What Day 2 and Beyond Will Bring
Day 1 covered “the fundamental concepts and perspectives of power and influence.” Going forward, Day 2 will address “moving your direct reports and your boss,” Day 3 will tackle “moving other departments,” and Day 4 will explore “moving organizations with different cultures.” The scenarios get progressively more complex.
I am especially looking forward to Day 2’s topic on “managing up.” The case will focus on a junior manager struggling with their relationship with a superior — a situation that resonates with managers at every level, including my own.
The real test is whether I can approach the next case with Day 1’s frameworks already internalized, and more importantly, whether I can start applying power and influence more consciously in my actual work starting tomorrow.
Power and influence is not about Machiavellian scheming or political gamesmanship. It is the discipline of moving people and organizations toward the right outcomes, in service of a worthy purpose. Day 1 was a stronger start than I expected, and I am eager for what comes next.
Books Referenced in This Article
