BMA eBook - Manual / Resource - Page 100
Feser / When Execution Isn’t Enough / 12
Simple, clear tasks—When there is little ambiguity about a simple task, a
straightforward requesting approach is very effective and efficient.
Urgency—When there is time pressure and actions have to happen swiftly,
requesting and legitimating approaches may again be superior to soft approaches
that tend to take more time to unfold.
Leader’s relevant knowledge—When the leader knows exactly what needs to be
done, either because of knowledge or previous experience, requesting approaches
may work best. For example, a leader who is spearheading a company turnaround,
and who has a good understanding of the industry and the organization, and knows
exactly what needs to be done (and has, for example, led a similar turnaround
before) may want to use requesting, i.e., command and control approaches.
Compared to hard influence approaches, soft ones are more effective for gaining
commitment. But they are less efficient. That means they take more time and effort.
Rational persuasion requires arguments and facts, which may not be readily available.
Socializing and personal appeal require trust, which may take time to build. And,
exchanging, consultation, and inspirational appeals require an understanding of the
people the leader is targeting. A leader needs time to think through a situation and put
him- or herself in someone else's shoes.
The leader may need to answer several questions in order to decide to deploy
exchanging, consultation, or inspirational appeals: what situational context faces the
other people involved? What are they trying to achieve? What background, knowledge,
and experiences do they bring to the situation? What do they value? What type of
emotions may they be experiencing? Answering these questions takes time and skill.
Furthermore, some of the soft approaches may be hard to apply at scale. You can ask
one person or a group of people for a favor, but asking an entire company may not be
feasible. The same is true for socializing and exchanging. Consultation is also timeconsuming and hard to scale. It works only when the leader can empower the right
employee representatives to agree on a set of actions, and they have the followership to
ensure that employees implement those actions.
However, soft tactics are the most effective in these situations:
Dynamic environment—When decisions need to be taken across the organization,
not just by a handful of leaders, soft approaches work well since they create
widespread commitment and energy in the organization.
Complexity—Soft approaches are more effective for complex tasks, which require
extra effort, initiative, and persistence to carry out effectively.
Ambiguity—In situations of ambiguity, when it isn’t totally clear to the leader what
actions may be needed for success, soft approaches empower people to make
