The Boss: Shades of Napoleon?

Predicting who will use or abuse authority is not as easy as you
think.

You may see shades of Napoleon in your boss, even if his behavior
is more docile than despotic. Greg J. Gold, Ph.D., an assistant
psychology professor at Humboldt State University in California, found
that subordinates over-predict supervisors use of "harsh" power tactics,
such as coercion, as opposed to "soft" or rewarding incentives.

Gold randomly assigned 133 subjects to high- or low-status
positions, then asked them whether they'd employ harsh or soft tactics to
influence those at the opposite end of the spectrum. He also asked 141
college freshmen and seniors which tactics they'd use and which tactics
freshmen expected seniors to use, to persuade the opposite group to lend
them class notes. Gold's results were presented at an American
Psychological Association meeting.

"Common wisdom has taught us that people self-select into
leadership or subordinate roles based on their personality style," says
Gold. "The belief is that those who seek higher status positions also
favor harsh influence tactics."

But his findings belie these long-held assumptions. People selected
tactics based more on their role as either high or low status rather than
on their personality style. In fact, college freshmen significantly
over-predicted the use of harsh tactics on the part of seniors. Both
groups favored either the "soft" strategy of supplying information or
convincing others by the strength of argument. And while high status
individuals did use coercion, for example threatening, "You won't get a
raise or promotion," they offered personal rewards just as
frequently.

So why does everyone complain about their superiors? Gold
attributes this to the "confirmation bias" theory, or a preconceived
notion of what will happen, thus biasing employees against even the most
benevolent boss.