Transference and Persuasion: Leadership

Leadership: Transference and Persuasion Maccoby (2004) defines transference as "the often irrational tendency to relate to a leader as some important person from the past -- a parent, a sibling, a close friend, or even a nanny" (p. 119). Transference forms the basis of how employees perceive their leader, as well as what they expect from him/her.

I totally agree with the author's position that transference, if not properly checked, can lead to over-expectations and, subsequently, to unnecessary misunderstandings at the workplace, especially if the leader fails to meet the expectations and perceptions imposed upon them as the transferred pattern. To this end, leaders can better understand their employees by first understanding the effect of transference at the workplace. In a competitive marketplace, employee retention is key; employee motivation is a crucial retention tool, and transference can either be a source of motivation or discouragement.

Leaders can prevent employee walk-outs; or rather, they can avoid losing their good employees to competitors by identifying transference and helping employees deal with it effectively, so that both the employee and the organization get to benefit. Maccoby (2004) gives an example where an employee almost gets fired for going on a 'go-slow' after the CEO, whom she perceives as a father figure and does everything to please, selects someone other than her to a higher position.

Such situations can be avoided if the leader does identify transference, and hence help the employee to better understand why a certain decision has to be made. The author posits that it is crucial for leaders to understand that family dynamics are changing; Gen X and Gen Y individuals, who were mainly brought up by working Baby Boomer parents and spent most of their time with peers, make up a greater proportion of the current workforce. To be successful, a leader has to understand the dynamics of this group.

This is a group that prefers teamwork to individual effort; and an integrating style of leadership to an authoritative one. An effective leader understands these changing dynamics and puts them to perspective through his style of leadership. While not disputing the fact that transference at the workplace is more common than we all believe, or want to believe; I have reason to believe that it may not be a very significant factor.

We cannot really put forth transference as one of the reasons as to why people would follow a leader. Transference develops over time, and its growth depends upon a number of more significant factors such as compatibility and ethical standards. An employee who values ethics and morality would not follow a leader who doesn't, just because the leader reminds them of a favorite relative.

However, if such an employee finds a leader who values ethics like he/she does; they are likely to follow, not because the leader reminds them of someone, but because he/she admires their ethic, and feels that they are compatible. The above ideology perhaps explains the view advanced by Walker (2013), that people who are less educated (lower levels on the organizational hierarchy) are more likely to follow their leader than those who are more educated (higher levels).

I would argue that educated people are less likely to view their leader as this perfect figure, who is better than them, and deserving of their high position; rather they would look up to them, expecting them to behave like they themselves would have behaved in the same position (Walker, 2013). For this reason, more educated people would accord their leaders respect because of the work experience they possess, and not because they think they are doing things right (Walker, 2013).

Part Two Garvin and Roberto (2008), in the article 'Change through Persuasion' point out that change is a complex process that can neither be taken lightly nor executed hastily. Humans are naturally resistant to change. To this end, the authors outline a four-stage procedure that managers can adopt to ensure that their organizations accept, and respond effectively to change - i) setting the stage for acceptance; ii) presenting a framework for interpretation; iii) managing the mood; iv) and providing reinforcement to ensure permanency (Garvin and Roberto, 2008).

The same procedure can be used to convince an errant individual to change from their self-destructive behavior. This text will use the example of a habitually late coworker who risks losing their job. The first two steps involve convincing the subject that they need to change, whereas the last two focus on seeing them through a successful process of change. Stage-Setting: this would mainly entail convincing the individual that what they are doing is wrong; and illustrating that radical change is paramount if they are to survive and be successful.

The stage could be set using a simple argument that when you report for work early, you have a better chance of completing the day's tasks on time, and leaving early, especially since one would most likely be more tired during the afternoon session. Additionally, one could explain to the subject how their actions are affecting you, and other colleagues.

Specific situations such as when they were supposed to prepare a presentation, but missed the deadline, forcing you to stay up late and complete what was supposed to be their work, could be used to refresh their memory and make them see that the effects of their actions are stretching beyond the workplace. Creating the Frame: to show why change would be necessary, the counselor could make use of real life examples of people who got fired for the same behavior within the company, or elsewhere. To.