presented with particular attention to its applicability to the analysis of confrontation between major political figures. The analysis follows a series of steps, both from the perspective of the influencing agent and the target: First, it examines the motivations to influence and to resist influence, motivations which are often much more complex than the immediate extrinsic goals. These, in turn, determine the choices of influence strategies, the selection of the bases of power (reward, coercion, legitimate, expert, referent, or information) or more complex strategies, the manner or mode in which the power is exercised or resisted, and the stage-setting or preparatory devices to influence or resist influence. The degree and form of compliance are determined by all of these factors. Following the influence attempt, successful or unsuccessful, there is a reassessment of the interpersonal relationship by both the target and the agent, with the stage set for different strategies of influence and resistance in the next go-round. For illustration, the model is applied to the analysis of confrontations between Hitler and von Schuschnigg and between Truman and MacArthur.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bertram H. Raven (1990) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: