who's in charge "In a superior-subordinate relationship, the person with the most authority is not necessarily the person in command. Personality factors often carry more weight than official positions. Understanding how various personality types interact with one another will help you assess your own situation"
Joseph Yeager, Ph.D.
Many managers believe that the power to direct others is conferred by a person's official position in an organization. In reality, a strong personality will often prevail over assigned authority. Determining who is really in charge in a specific situation or how effective a particular superior-subordinate relationship will be requires an analysis of the types of personalities involved.
Types of Personalities
The power-related behavior of every manager and subordinate can be characterized as passive, assertive, or aggressive. How a superior and subordinate match up on this passive-aggressive continuum provides a useful index for predicting how a superior-subordinate pair will behave toward each other -- whether they will have a successful working relationship or one that is marked by conflict and dissension.
Passiveness is displayed by someone who is typically withdrawn, tries to be a nice guy, wants to be liked, doesn't like to compete, and feels inadequate when responding to power challenges. Charlie Brown of cartoon fame is a good example of this type of person.
Assertiveness can be defined as standing up for oneself. The assertive person usually gets what he wants without either running roughshod over others or waiting for permission to pursue his rightful objectives. Assertiveness is a competitive attitude. Assertive people like to win, and they know that the main ingredient in an organizational environment is power, whether it involves implementing a change or gaining acceptance of a new idea.
Aggressiveness refers to the chronic use and abuse of others for one's own ends, with little or no concern for the harm inflicted on their careers or lives. It is a no-holds-barred attitude that is usually less a case of competition than of destructiveness. The aggressive person isn't so much interested in winning as he is in seeing his adversary lose.
Patterns of Power
In using the passive-aggressive scale, it should be understood that no one is purely passive, assertive, or aggressive; everyone is a mixture of all three. However, one of these personality tendencies almost always dominates. Determining the dominant personality tendencies of the people involved in a specific organizational situation is the key of assessing the relationship of power that exists between them.
The three basic personality types yield nine patterns of power in superior subordinate relationships.
Passive superior and passive subordinate: This pair might well be characterized as the losers in the world of organizations. In an environment where competition is the rule, these people - if they have a friendly relationship will usually complain about the inconsiderate and blatant "political" behavior of those who are more assertive and aggressive than they. In their feeling of powerlessness, they are apt to have many excuses for efforts that don't pan out. Most of their ideas and suggestions are never implemented because of their inability to transcend organizational constraints and to take charge of situations where power-oriented actions are called for. Ignoring or bypassing difficult problems is much easier for them than tackling them head-on. This defeatist posture protects their limited interpersonal capacities from the confusion that would be created by failing to succeed in matters with which they are not equipped to cope.
If they are less than friendly with each other, they are apt to complain to their associates about the other's persistent inaction. Often the superior will make the passive subordinate the scapegoat for his own limitations. Their relationship with each other is often either alienated or hostile, or fearful and guilt-ridden. In essence, neither of these two types will be in charge of his work situation: Thus someone else will determine their goals and outcomes.
Passive superior and assertive subordinate: This relationship usually defined by the subordinate who, if he is a loyal type of person, will cover up for the superior and accomplish the things the superior should be doing on his own. For example, it is often found that a loyal, assertive staff member will carry the load for a weak, passive manager, and be able to prop him up for years by making many of his decisions for him in a subtle way. If the subordinate is ambitious, he will look for away to get out of the situation and find a new superior who is likely to do more for his career aspirations.
Passive superior and aggressive subordinate: This combination is usually disastrous for the superior, irrespective of whether the subordinate tends to be overt or covert in his aggressive behavior. If the subordinate has no qualms about expressing himself, he is likely to show open disdain for his superior. He is apt to be angry, testy, and vocal in complaining about a great many of the things the superior says or does. On the other hand, he could be very sly, gossiping behind the superior's back and planting doubt about his capabilities in the minds of others, thereby undermining what little authority the superior may enjoy because of his position.
The power relationship between superior and subordinate plays a pivotal role in determining how effective a manager can be. Once examined for their basic power patterns, the various personality combinations can help to predict whether a superior-subordinate relationship will be good or poor, as well as how competitive or cooperative they will be toward each other.
When the relationship between superior and subordinate is best (for example, both are assertive), the work progresses well and the results desired are achieved. When the relationship is worst (for example, the superior is passive and the subordinate is aggressive), difficulties will mount and results will be poor.
The ideal manager or subordinate is a flexible, almost chameleon-like individual who can be passive, assertive, or aggressive, depending on the situation. This individual knows when it is proper to back down, when it is propitious to move ahead with vigor and determination, and when there is no other choice but to thoroughly trounce an opponent. This type of manager is the one who is really in charge, and this type of subordinate is, as a rule, the most effective and promo table.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
What's your dominance rating?
To determine who will likely dominate in a particular work situation, identify the main personality tendencies (passive, assertive or aggressive) of the people involved. Then, form the chart, pick out and compare the numbers representing the personality types. Great disparities in number values indicate extreme dominance or submission. Closeness in number values indicates an extremely effective relationship (as in the case when both the superior and the subordinate are assertive), the likelihood of great conflict (as in the case when both are aggressive), or an extremely ineffective relationship (as in the case where both are passive).
