| Course | LDR 300 Innovative Leadership (LDR/300) |
|---|---|
| Week | 3 |
| Paper type | Power and influence analysis |
| Length | about 1,037 words, 4 double-spaced pages plus title page and references |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | University of Phoenix |
| Program | BS in Business |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for LDR 300 Week 3
Authority Without Pushing: Power and Influence Tactics for a New President Leading Long-Serving Funeral Directors
[Student Name]
University of Phoenix
LDR/300: Innovative Leadership
Week 3 Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Hartwell Family Funeral Homes, its staff and its decisions are composites written for a model paper.
Weeks 1 and 2 left the invented Hartwell funeral group with a clear diagnosis: dependable operations, too little direction and managers whose habits with staff vary widely. President Claire Hartwell, 38, now faces two decisions. She wants to launch a cremation memorial program, offering meaningful ceremonies for families choosing cremation, and to introduce an online arrangement tool so families can begin planning from home. Several senior directors oppose both. One, Frank Delaney, has worked at Hartwell for 31 years and trained Claire when she was a teenager washing cars after services. This paper analyzes the power held by Claire and by the directors and recommends influence tactics for the two decisions.
Sources of Power
A classic framework describes five bases of power: power that comes with a title, power to hand out things people want, power to penalize, power held by people with special skill and power earned by being liked and looked up to. Leaders draw on several bases at once, and others in the organization hold power too.
Power and Status
Magee and Galinsky (2008) reviewed research on social hierarchy and distinguished power, control over valued resources, from status, the respect and admiration others give. They argued that hierarchies tend to reinforce themselves, since those with power and status gain more of both. At Hartwell, Claire holds power through ownership and position, but senior directors hold status built over decades. Families ask for Frank by name.
How Power Affects the Powerful
Keltner et al. (2003) proposed that power activates an approach orientation: people with power attend to rewards and opportunities, act more quickly and are less constrained, while people with less power attend more to threats and to others' reactions. Powerful people also tend to pay less attention to others' perspectives. This creates a risk for Claire. As owner, she may move faster than her staff can follow and underestimate their concerns.
Mapping Power at Hartwell
Claire holds legitimate power as president and owner, reward power over pay and promotion and coercive power in principle, though using it against respected directors would be costly. Her expert power is moderate; she is licensed but less experienced than the senior directors. Her referent power is growing among younger staff who admire her energy. The senior directors hold strong expert power, referent power with staff and families and informal power from the fact that families' loyalty often rests with them personally.
Influence Tactics
Yukl and Falbe (1990) studied influence tactics used by managers and found that the choice of tactic varied with the direction of influence, downward, lateral or upward, and the objective. Common tactics included rational persuasion, using facts and logic; consultation, asking for input; inspirational appeals, linking requests to values; ingratiation; exchange; coalition tactics; legitimating tactics; and pressure.
Which Tactics Build Commitment
Falbe and Yukl (1992) examined the outcomes of influence attempts and found that inspirational appeals and consultation were most likely to produce commitment, while pressure, legitimating and coalition tactics alone were most likely to produce resistance. Combinations of soft tactics, or soft tactics paired with rational persuasion, worked better than single tactics. The research suggests that Claire's position alone will not win genuine support.
Claire can order the change and get compliance, or she can share the reasons and the design and get commitment.
Decision 1: The Cremation Memorial Program
Frank and two other senior directors fear that promoting memorial services for cremation will cheapen the business and reduce revenue from traditional funerals. Claire should begin with consultation, asking the directors to design what a dignified cremation memorial at Hartwell should include. She should add rational persuasion with data: the share of Hartwell families choosing cremation has risen each year, and families who choose direct cremation from online competitors receive no ceremony at all. An inspirational appeal follows naturally, since the directors' deepest value is helping families grieve well, and a memorial program extends that care to families the business currently loses.
Decision 2: The Online Arrangement Tool
Resistance to the online tool comes from directors who believe arrangements require face-to-face conversation. Here, a coalition of younger staff and Angela Ruiz, the Springboro manager who piloted livestreaming, can show the tool working. Claire should frame the tool as a way to start conversations, not replace them, and ask directors to set rules for when families should still meet in person. Rational persuasion can draw on family feedback from the Springboro pilot.
Influencing Upward and Sideways
Claire also needs support from people she does not supervise. Her father, still a shareholder, is skeptical of cremation services, and the business's bank wants evidence that new services will pay. With her father, consultation and an appeal to the family's legacy are likely to work better than data alone. With the bank, rational persuasion is the right tactic: a short business case showing costs, expected families served and the revenue currently lost to online cremation providers. Influence in these directions follows the same research, which found that tactics vary with direction and objective.
What to Avoid
Claire should avoid pressure and legitimating tactics, such as announcing that the owner has decided. These would likely produce compliance at best and quiet resistance at worst, and could push experienced directors to leave, taking families with them.
Guarding Against Power's Effects
Research by Keltner et al. (2003) warns that power speeds people up and narrows their attention, Claire should deliberately slow down: hold listening sessions before final decisions, ask a trusted director to argue the opposing view and set timelines that allow staff to adjust.
Ethics of Influence
Influence should be honest. Claire should share real data, including risks, and not use ingratiation or selective information to manipulate directors.
Conclusion
Power comes from several sources, and in a family business the most experienced employees often hold as much practical power as the owner. Research shows that consultation, inspirational appeals and rational persuasion build commitment, while pressure breeds resistance, and that power can make leaders less attentive. By consulting directors, sharing evidence, connecting change to the business's values and guarding against her own haste, Claire can lead change with the people who make Hartwell what it is.
References
Falbe, C. M., & Yukl, G. (1992). Consequences for managers of using single influence tactics and combinations of tactics. Academy of Management Journal, 35(3), 638-652. https://doi.org/10.5465/256490
Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Anderson, C. (2003). Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review, 110(2), 265-284. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.110.2.265
Magee, J. C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 351-398. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520802211628
Yukl, G., & Falbe, C. M. (1990). Influence tactics and objectives in upward, downward, and lateral influence attempts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(2), 132-140. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.75.2.132
What the LDR 300 Week 3 instructions ask
The third LDR 300 assignment often asks students to examine power and influence in leadership. Expect to describe sources of power, such as legitimate, reward, coercive, expert and referent power, explain influence tactics, such as rational persuasion, consultation, inspirational appeals, ingratiation and pressure, and analyze how a leader uses or could use them in a real situation. Some versions ask about the ethics of power or about influencing peers and superiors. A strong paper applies research rather than general advice, recognizes that the same tactic works differently with different people, connects tactics to outcomes such as commitment, compliance or resistance and makes concrete recommendations. Use scholarly sources in APA format.
How this LDR 300 Week 3 example is built
Claire Hartwell has the legal authority to change how her family's funeral homes operate, but the directors who hold the business's expertise and reputation also hold much of its practical power. The paper first maps the sources of power on both sides. Research on social hierarchy explains why power and status tend to reinforce themselves and why they differ, and research on power's effect on behavior warns that powerful people act more quickly and notice others' views less. Studies of influence tactics show that rational persuasion, consultation and inspirational appeals produce more commitment than pressure, especially in combination. The paper applies these findings to two decisions, a cremation memorial program and an online arrangement tool, and plans who to influence, how and in what order.
LDR 300 Week 3 grading rubric: where the points go
Power and influence papers are graded on accurate use of concepts and thoughtful application. Strong papers identify sources of power correctly, including those held by people without formal authority, and analyze influence tactics using research on their effects. Graders reward recognition that tactics produce commitment, compliance or resistance depending on the target and situation, and attention to ethical use of power. Applying the analysis to a specific leader and decision, with a clear plan, shows practical skill. Scholarly sources, accurate APA citations, logical organization and readable prose complete the grade, along with a conclusion that ties tactics back to the organization's goals.
LDR 300 Week 3 help: mistakes to avoid
Students sometimes list the five bases of power with definitions and stop. Apply them: who holds which power in the situation you describe, and why does it matter? Another frequent mistake is assuming formal authority settles everything; experts and respected peers often hold more practical influence. Map their power too. Some papers recommend pressure or threats as efficient, ignoring research showing these produce compliance or resistance rather than commitment. Others recommend every tactic at once. Choose tactics that fit each person. Finally, consider ethics and the effects of power on the leader, since research shows power can make people less attentive to others, and say how the leader will guard against that.
Related LDR 300 sample papers
Other LDR 300 week samples
- LDR 300 Week 1: Leadership and Management
- LDR 300 Week 2: Effective Leadership Behavior
- LDR 300 Week 4: Leading Change and Intrapreneurship
- LDR 300 Week 5: Innovative Mindset in a Virtual World
More BS in Business sample papers
- HRM 420 Week 3: Security and Crisis Management
- HRM 498 Week 3: Managing Change
- MGT 312 Week 3: Groups and Teams in Organizations
- MGT 316 Week 3: Operational Processes
LDR 300 Week 3 questions, answered
What does LDR 300 Week 3 usually cover?
It usually covers power and influence in leadership, including sources of power, influence tactics, their effects on commitment and resistance and how leaders can use them ethically.
Where can I find a free LDR 300 Week 3 sample paper?
The power and influence analysis of a new president at a composite Ohio funeral home group can be read on this page with its references.
What are the five bases of power?
A classic framework identifies legitimate power from position, reward power, coercive power, expert power from knowledge and referent power from being admired or liked.
Which influence tactics work best?
Research finds that rational persuasion, consultation and inspirational appeals generally produce more commitment, while pressure and legitimating tactics tend to produce compliance or resistance.
How does power affect leaders?
Research suggests power makes people more action-oriented and less attentive to others' perspectives, so leaders benefit from deliberately seeking input.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official University of Phoenix document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
Request this one custom, free · All LDR 300 week samples · All courses