Decomposing influence strategies: Argument structure and dependence as determinants of the effectiveness of influence strategies in gaining channel member compliance

Although there is considerable research examining the effects of influence strategies on relational outcomes, research has been silent on the effectiveness of influence strategies in achieving the primary objective: channel member compliance. The authors develop a theoretical model that predicts that noncoercive influence strategies (Rationality, Recommendations, Information Exchange, and Requests) with an argument structure that contains more thorough content result in relatively greater levels of compliance. The model further predicts that coercive influence strategies (Promises and Threats) result in compliance only when target dependence levels are high. The authors develop a new influence strategy, Rationality, which represents a noncoercive strategy with a full argument structure. In general, empirical findings support the theoretical model. However, in contrast to expectations, the use of Recommendations had a negative effect on compliance. Post hoc analysis revealed a significant interaction between trust and Recommendations on compliance, thus providing an explanation for this unexpected result. When trust is low, Recommendation strategies are counterproductive. The authors discuss implications of the findings and directions for further research.