3 Reasons Why Leadership by Coercion is More Effective than by Force or Consent

It’s often said that the most effective form of leadership is Leadership by Consent. That’s when devotees agree to follow their leader because they believe in them.

I agree that it’s a great way to organically get people to follow you. But respect takes time to earn with most people. Therefore, this is a good long-term strategy. Not usually very effective in the short term.

Most people understand that the least effective form of leadership is Leadership by Force. This is when people are forced to follow. Think of leaders like Hitler, Stalin, Mau, etc.

Because of its immediate (albeit short-term) effectiveness, leadership by force (usually by using fear) is a tactic that’s been used for thousands of years.

Although it’s quite effective in the short term, leadership by force is never a long-term solution. People will eventually revolt.

Then, there’s Leadership by Coercion. Though, I haven’t found anyone else who’s termed it this way. This is a combination of the two. It might not be the best or most ethical way, but it’s often the longest-lasting.

Here’s why.

People will follow someone through coercion because they have something (other than their lives) to lose. Leadership by force threatens either the individual’s life, the lives of their loved ones, or their livelihood in general.

Whereas leadership by coercion threatens a reputation through blackmail, provides an incentive using quid pro quo, or uses emotional manipulation.

Let’s look at the three reasons (though not limited to these) why leadership by coercion is so effective.

Blackmail

A great example of this can be found in the movie The Firm. It features a young up-and-comer attorney portrayed by Tom Cruise. He doesn’t realize it at first, but the firm he works for is very shady.

In the film, although he’s in a relationship, he goes on a business trip and spends the night on the beach with a young and pretty lady (having sex).

Unbeknownst to him, the entire event was videotaped.

 When the time comes for his company to require him to do something he didn’t agree with, they produce the videotape. They threatened to show the contents to his significant other if he didn’t do what they asked of him.

Of course, through coercion, he agrees to their demands. No one’s life was being threatened, but his relationship and reputation were in jeopardy if he didn’t agree.

This type of coercion continues because of its effectiveness. Both short-term and long-term. Many people throughout the world have fallen victim to blackmail.

Live in a way or do unethical things, and you could become a victim as well. Which leads to the second form of coercion.

Quid Pro Quo

There are instances where the “leader” doesn’t have dirt on another individual. However, they might know of something that the individual would want and therefore agree to follow along for said thing.

For those who don’t know, quid pro quo is a Latin team which means “this for that.” Dictionary.com defines it as, “Something that is given or taken in return for something else.”

The members in Washington D.C. use this a lot to get bills passed. If they need a certain number of votes, they might go to specific members and make an offer to get their votes.

It’s coercion because without providing something in return, the “leader” wouldn’t otherwise get what they’re after. In this example, the votes are needed to get something they want.

Quid pro quo is not like going to the store and purchasing something. Because you provided the funds you get the item. Rather, quid pro quo is coercing someone else through giving, or getting, something they want.

Although it walks the line of being unethical, quid pro quo is the reason why the political realm operates so well.

The problem with them is they have to be continually used. Unlike blackmail, quid pro quo might only be good for one agreement at a time.

Manipulation

And finally, a “leader” might use manipulation to get what they want. Manipulating a person’s decision using their emotions against them.

If you’re reading this, you’ve probably fallen victim to this by a family member, friend, loved one, or perhaps even a total stranger who used emotional manipulation on you to get what they wanted.

According to Psych Central, there are seven manipulative techniques to be aware of. The article explains that manipulations come in all shapes and sizes.

Though, the seven techniques the article focuses on are guilt-tripping, lying, flattery, projection, moving the goalpost, triangulation, and love bombing.

Outside of love bombing, all of these techniques “leaders” have implemented to coerce others to achieve their desired goal(s).

Similar to quid pro quo, manipulation is an ongoing coercive behavior. And the professionals may get so good at it that they don’t even realize they’re doing it.

As you can see, leadership by coercion is most effective because it either threatens a reputation through blackmail, provides an incentive using quid pro quo, or is downright manipulative.

In the long term, people are far more willing to be coerced than forced to follow. And, because they are providing their consent, they’ll follow much quicker than the traditional form of leadership by consent.

Please understand something. I’m not saying that I agree with this form of leadership. But, as many in the political or business realm could attest, it’s quite effective.

If you liked this, please read: Learn from the Mistakes of Others.