On gaining influence and authority — and retaining both
Something interesting happens when a single person accrues enough influence — They’re anointed ‘authoritative on X’. What does this tell us about leadership?
The relationship between influence, authority, and leadership is often confused.
People follow those with authority out of obligation, and those with influence out of conviction. But something interesting happens when a single person accrues enough influence — They’re anointed ‘authoritative on X’.
The typical eventuality of a person exerting strong influence, consistently, is them being granted some amount of elevated authority - whether they want it or not!
It is my belief that this marks the difference between an influencer, an authority figure, and a leader. Influencers and authority figures can both exist independently of each other, but a leader must be both.
But how do people gain influence, use influence to gain authority, and then as leaders, use the two appropriately as the situation calls for it?
Influence can be the outcome of personal conviction and extreme risk-taking.
Take Ken Kutaragi. The year was 1984. Ken was an engineer at Sony when he created a prototype for PlayStation in secret. He faced significant resistance from senior management once it came to light, but eventually, managed to gain the support of key Sony executives due to pressures such as the allure of the prototype and interest from Nintendo. PlayStation went on to become one of Sony’s most successful products, revolutionizing gaming in the process.
Ken influenced his superiors as a result of his own conviction. And then he acquired lots of authority as CEO of Sony’s brand new video game division.
This type of influence isn’t usually sustainable, without also building long-term trust and credibility.
Influence is more typically earned slowly, via social currencies.
Let’s look to Anne Mulcahy, whose rise to CEO of Xerox is a masterclass in building up these social currencies. Starting in sales in 1976 and moving through HR and marketing, she built a deep understanding of the company and cultivated strong relationships. When Xerox faced a financial crisis in 2000, Mulcahy, though not initially in top leadership, was unexpectedly appointed CEO. That’s because she had already been tackling tough challenges and building trust across the organization for years prior. Her decisive actions, including cost-cutting and strategic refocusing, saved Xerox from bankruptcy, solidifying her reputation as a leader who could guide a company through its most challenging times.
In short, Anne built up trust and credibility organically, over a very long period of time, and amassed power over that same time rather than all at once.
Once influence and authority are both in strong supply, a leader must continually inspire and guide colleagues in committing to decisions that stand the test of time.
This is the only way trust and credibility can grow over the course of a career. And if we’re keeping track, trust and credibility are the social currencies required to retain influence.
With waning influence, a person in a position of power increasingly becomes an authoritarian ruler. This works for a period of time, but doesn’t last. Continued trust and credibility prevent such a fate.
Of course…
Timeless decisions aren’t easy!
It can’t be overstated that for a series of decisions to be considered timeless, they must lead to successful outcomes for most stakeholders over the long-term. It is extremely difficult to make such well-considered, holistically balanced decisions.
Yet this is exactly what Satya Nadella did when he took over a stagnant, irrelevant Microsoft in 2014.
His most significant, timeless decision was to encourage employees at all ranks in the company to shift from a “know-it-all” culture to a “learn-it-all” culture. Simple, right? Except Microsoft’s prior dominance was a result of its accumulated knowledge and power. Would admitting it needed to completely unlearn its past actually serve it well?
In fact, yes. This growth mindset led to a series of strategically sound decisions for Microsoft such as acquiring LinkedIn, bolstering up Azure by integrating core products + GitHub into its ecosystem, making Windows compatible with Linux, and partnering with OpenAI.
So it all comes down to this…
Leadership is about balance.
It’s about demonstrating through actions when it’s prudent to move fast vs. slow. It’s about deciding — often quickly, and instinctively — when to acquiesce and when to push back with every fiber of one’s being.
Getting that balance right is what stands the test of time. It’s what grants a leader both the influence and authority to lead for decades.