Power, competitiveness, and advice taking: Why the powerful don’t listen

Abstract

Four experiments test the prediction that feelings of power lead individuals to discount advice received from both experts and novices. Experiment 1 documents a negative relationship between subjective feelings of power and use of advice. Experiments 2 and 3 further show that individuals experiencing neutral and low levels of power weigh advice from experts and experienced advisors more heavily than advice from novices, but individuals experiencing high levels of power discount both novice and expert advice. Experiments 3 and 4 demonstrate that this tendency of individuals experiencing high levels of power to discount advice from experts and novices equally is mediated by feelings of competitiveness (Experiment 3) and confidence (Experiments 3 and 4). Finally, Experiment 4 shows that inducing high power individuals to feel cooperative with their advisors can mitigate this tendency, leading them to weigh expert advice more heavily than advice from novices. Theoretical and practical contributions are discussed.

Witnessing wrongdoing: The effects of observer power on incivility intervention in the workplace

“…They are prone to action, and act without the same considerations others might give to constraints, norms, or limits to their behavior (Anderson & Berdahl, 2002;Galinsky et al, 2003;Keltner et al, 2003). Power enhances one's sense of confidence and competence (Fast, Sivanathan, Mayer, & Galinsky, 2012;Tost, Gino, & Larrick, 2012), which in turn lowers one's hesitation to follow impulses toward action. The powerful tend to simplify decisions, and are less likely to weigh the pros and cons.…”

“…We begin with the observation that the powerful seek to preserve their power and maintain it against rivals and challengers (Anderson & Brion, 2014;Williams, 2014). The powerful tend to be competitive (Magee, Galinsky, & Gruenfeld, 2007;Tost, Gino, & Larrick, 2012), and they respond aggressively to those who might supplant them (Georgesen & Harris, 1998). Those in positions of power seek to remain there, and defend the systems and status-quo arrangements that provide them with power .…”

“…High power is associated with heightened competitiveness (Magee, Galinsky, & Gruenfeld, 2007;Tost, Gino, & Larrick, 2012), and the powerful often respond aggressively to those who might seek to supplant their place (see, for instance, Georgesen & Harris, 1998, on power and evaluation of subordinates). We therefore expect the powerful to take action in response to potential status competitions.…”

Demystifying the Link between Social Media Addiction and Sharing without Verification: The Role of Absentmindedness and Wellbeing

“…Individual responses to structures of domination (i.e., power and resources) may be driven more by personality or power gains and losses than by job experience per se (Markus 1983), although novices usually have little power (Tost, Gino, & Larrick, 2012). We focus not on how the KMS alters power relationships, although it can be important (Markus, 1983).…”

“…Instead, we focus on how the structures of domination, the ability to command resources to support the KMS, enable or constrain use of the KMS. Novices have less power than experts (Tost et al, 2012), so they tend to be less attentive to and influenced to adopt a system by the provision of resources to support system implementations than experts (Venkatesh et al 2003). Therefore, structures of domination will have less effect on use than structures of legitimation.…”