Leaders’ Influence Tactics for Safety: An Exploratory Study in the Maritime Context

Abstract

A growing body of research has pointed out effective leadership as an important influencing factor for safety performance in various high-risk industrial contexts. However, limited systematic knowledge is available about how leaders can effectively persuade rule compliance, and stimulate actions and participation. Recognizing effective means of influence is of value for safety leadership development and evaluation. This study seeks to empirically investigate leaders’ influence tactics for safety in a maritime context. Qualitative exploration is performed with data being collected through focus group discussions and individual interviews with 41 experienced shipboard leaders from various shipping sectors. Five core influence tactics—coaching, role modeling, pressure, consultation and exchange tactics—appeared to be the shipboard leaders’ effective tactics to influence subordinates’ safety compliance and participation behaviors in ship operations. Safety leadership influences flow from exemplification, expert and personal sources of power, and being pursued through soft and rational influence tactics rather than coercion or constructive inducements. The results indicate that the more relationship-oriented the leaders are, the more effective their safety leadership would be in influencing safety behaviors. The implication of the results for maritime safety leadership research, maritime education and training are discussed.

Untitled

“…Since individuals' response depends on their supervisors' stimulus, supervisors need to choose an effective stimulus. In addition, competent subordinates may require certain tactics from their supervisors (Kim & Gausdal, 2020). In sum, referring to the two theories, the supervisors' treatment could determine whether subordinates want to commit to the organization and the supervisor.…”

“…The important targets of influence for managers are their subordinates, because the effectiveness of managers is shown by how they influence their subordinates to do what they are asked for (Yukl & Michel, 2007). The choice of tactics that must be used may depend on the competence level (Kim & Gausdal, 2020). The current study considers three types of tactics, namely consultation, ingratiation, and exchange tactics.…”

“…In regard to high subordinate competence, supervisors may use downward influence tactics such as consultation (Lee & Salleh, 2009;Deniz et al, 2018). Since consultation and exchange tactics allow supervisors and subordinates to communicate and share information (Kim & Gausdal, 2020), this tactic may be suitable for competent subordinates. Moreover, in their study in Malaysia, Lee and Low (2012) found that subordinate competence positively correlates with downward influence tactics in the form of consultation and ingratiation tactics.…”

“…Downward influence tactics such as exchange, ingratiation, and consultation may shape the subordinates' perceptions of their supervisors' goodness. Rational tactics such as exchange tactics; and soft tactics such as ingratiation and consultation tactics are very effective in increasing employee commitment (Kim & Gausdal, 2020). Empirically, previous studies found that downward influence tactics are correlated with organizational commitment (e.g., Chaturvedi et al, 2019;Chong et al, 2013).…”

“…Second, this present study provides the mechanism of how employee competency influences employees' commitment considering downward influence tactics as the mediating role. Kim and Gausdal (2020) suggested that competent employees may need certain influence tactics. In addition, influence tactics may drive employees' commitment (Chaturvedi et al, 2019), and previous studies showed that downward influence tactics have a mediator role in increasing work outcomes (e.g., Chaturvedi et al, 2019;Lee & Low, 2012).…”