Last week I had lunch with four managers, “Larry,” “Mandy,” “Paul” and “Ashish.” At one point the conversation turned to how the ability to influence people affected the ability to lead.
It was a lively conversation, but I stayed on the sidelines; noticing my silence, Ashish asked me what I thought.
Instead of responding I asked all of them what the difference was between influence, persuasion and manipulation.
This provoked another active discussion, with the upshot that while it was acceptable to influence people it was wrong to manipulate them. This time it was Mandy who asked what I thought.
I responded that I didn’t see a lot of difference between the three.
That shocked them all, but really upset Larry.
So I explained my thinking, which formed the basis of this post in 2011.
Influence = Manipulation
Every conversation about leadership talks about ‘influence’ and how to increase yours.
In a post at Forbes, Howard Scharlatt defines influence this way,
Influence is, simply put, the power and ability to personally affect others’ actions, decisions, opinions or thinking. At one level, it is about compliance, about getting someone to go along with what you want them to do.
He goes on to describe three kinds of influencing tactics: logical, emotional and cooperative, or influencing with head, heart and hands and talks about ‘personal influence’ and its importance in persuading people when authority is lacking.
A couple of years ago I wrote The Power of Words and said, “Personally, other than socially acceptable definitions, I don’t see a lot of difference between influence and manipulation,” and I still don’t.
I realize most people consider manipulation negative and influence positive, but they are just words.
I often hear that leaders are good people, while manipulators are bad people. But as I pointed out in another post,
- leaders are not by definition “good;”
- they aren’t always positive role models; and
- one person’s “good” leader is another person’s demon.
Everyone believes they use their influence in a positive way, but when you persuade people to do [whatever] who are you to say that both the short and long-term outcome is positive for them?
Influence, persuasion, manipulation; call it what you will, just remember that it is power and be cautious when you wield it.
In spite of the heated disagreement I saw no reason to change my thinking.
I was surprised at the end of the discussion when even Larry commented that while it made sense that the words didn’t actually signal intent he still didn’t like it and wasn’t about to use them interchangeably, which made sense to me, because language carries the meaning (and the baggage) of the time and place in which it’s used.
Image credit: Anne Adrian