gender differential paper IJCRB

ijcrb.webs.com
JUNE 2011
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS VOL 3, NO 2
tactics, they often get punished for contravening the norms instead they are rewarded for
adopting the successful tactics for men (Guadagno & Cialdini, 2007).
2.1. Intimidation
Intimidation is an IM tactic in which individuals try to make an impression that they can make
the things difficult for them if they are tried to be pushed too far. They deal toughly with the
individuals who interfere in their matters, or use forceful behaviour to get colleagues to behave
properly (Jones, 1990; Jones & Pittman, 1982). Jones (1990) pointed out that individual using
intimidation try to look stubborn and obstinate. However, these strategies have risk of being seen
unfavourable. The people involved in intimidation are likely to be viewed tenacious and forceful
persons. They are prone to the risk of getting an adverse reaction of their tough behaviour.
Women using intimidation are more likely to receive this adverse reaction. Employees
depending on intimidation strategies may get higher performance rating; they may also have less
favourable responses for doing so (Allen & Rush, 1998; Wayne & Ferris, 1990).
The inference of research studies of Jones & Pittman (1982); Wayne & Liden (1995) is that there
are both positive and negative repercussions of intimidation strategies of impression
management on performance evaluations. In their study Yukl and Tracey (1992) were of the
view that pressure tactics as part of Intimidation may result favourable outcomes for the actor
(person using the intimidation strategies). There are cases, where use of intimidation has
enhanced the ability of an employee to get his or her job done. This shows that being aggressive
may actually makes the employee more effective in his or her position for achievement of the
desired personal gains. It is added here that in general, employees who are practicing
intimidation strategies are using threat and hard tactics on their subordinates to get the assigned
jobs done are viewed highly by their respective superiors as they consider them job doer,
commanding and capable of dealing with the situation. This favourable perception on part of
superiors resulted to good performance rating.
2.2. Ingratiation
In this strategy the actors tries to adopt all the traits and behaviours which are likable by his
performance rater. The aim of Ingratiator is to be likeable. This strategy covers use of
complimenting another person or involvement in flattery with certain amount of credibility and
honesty. It also involves agreeing to another person’s view point. It is the human instinct and
nature that he likes people who think or acts like him. Thus presenting ourselves in the same way
can generate favourable response from others (Jones, 1964).
Many authors (Fandt & Ferris, 1985; Tedeschi & Melburg, 1984) have identified Ingratiation as
one of the effective impression management strategies. Tedeschi and Melburg (1984)
conceptualized four impression management techniques, and they defined Ingratiation as "a
collection of forceful tactics with the aim of gaining the admiration of an audience, who has the
authority to offer significant rewards for the actor".
In case of Ingratiation, the social interaction also plays an important role in respect of gaining
and maintaining persona power. It is a fact that in our social life especially in the cases of
interpersonal relationship, there is interdependence meaning to say that parties involved in
interpersonal relationship are either intentionally or un-intentionally using influence on each
other. One of the important aspect of ingratiation is that the same situational factors which
increase one person's desire to be found attractive by another alert the other (the "target" person)
to the likelihood of tactical behaviour. Thus, the dependent person will be strongly motivated to
COPY RIGHT © 2011 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 713