Fit for Purpose: Reimagining Workplace Influence for the 21st Century
Business leaders today are navigating an unprecedented array of interconnected challenges; geopolitical tensions, climate risk, digital technology, AI and cybersecurity. Disruption and opportunity abound, underscoring the importance of resilience and agility.
Yet, with terms such as ‘The Great Resignation’, ‘The Great Disconnect’ and ‘Revenge Quitting’ signifying important changes in the employer/employee dynamic, perhaps today’s most impactful challenges are being driven by generational shifts and changes in workforce expectations.
With Millennials (born between 1981-96) and Gen Z (1997-2012) now making up most of the workforce globally and in New Zealand, leaders and managers are facing new challenges; to their authority, how they manage and lead, and their values. The vertical line is tilting, losing its stick. Defaulting to positional power to quieten perceived dissent does not cut the mustard anymore. Now more than ever, employees are challenging employers to walk their talk, and are prepared to quit if they believe they do not.
Yet the values Gen Z in particular are challenging employers to model are not new - meaningful work, inclusion, collaboration, empowerment, wellbeing - each and every one good for business. Good for culture, wellbeing, resilience, innovation, agility, psychological safety, teamwork. Good for everyone.
This is a lot of common ground for a solution to an important problem.
As I reflected on my own career for ideas, one word stood out - influence. Whether frontline practitioner, manager or CEO, influence has defined my experiences and achievements, positive and negative.
As Barbara Kellerman (2024), global leadership and followership expert, recently observed:
“People are relieved, eager to hear about their own possibilities for exercising influence.”
It is easy to understand why:
- Positive interpersonal dynamics reduce employee burnout by 25% and increase wellbeing by 50% (American Psychological Association, 2023).
- Organisations emphasising positive peer influence report a 50% increase in employee retention (LinkedIn, 2023).
- Employees with inspiring peers are 50% more likely to describe their workplace as motivating (Deloitte, 2021).
- Inspiring and empowering team behaviours increase psychological safety by 30% (Google, 2018).
- A sense of belonging can increase job performance by 56%, reduce turnover risk by 50% and decrease sick days by 75% (Forbes, 2024).
These striking insights got me thinking - how could we harness and channel the power of positive workplace influence to co-create healthy, mutually accountable workplaces and optimise business performance?
Enter RISE: a new and innovative conceptual model for developing positive workplace influence.
I introduce the RISE model of influence in more detail towards the end of this paper. First though, I would like to explain my rationale for a new perspective on workplace influence in more detail.
Why RISE?
Two drivers stand out:
- The imperative for leaders to adapt to embrace Gen Z
- The systemic impact of workplace toxicity
With Gen Z projected to make up one-third of the workforce by 2026 and outnumber Boomers this year (Work Life, 2025), no generation has more clearly expressed its eagerness to exercise influence.
Gen Z highly value meaningful work; diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI); mental health; and empowerment. As powerful emotional drivers, these values integrate the personal and professional, making eagerness to influence at work inevitable and the relationship between Gen Z employees and managers pivotal.
Although one-third of Gen Z are motivated to work harder and stay longer with the right support, 37% say they would not tolerate an unsupportive manager (National Society of Leadership and Success, 2024). Recognising the impact of Covid 19 on their social and relational skills, Gen Z are ready and willing to work on improving them. However, responsibility must be shared between employee and employer alike. With empowerment and inclusion so highly valued, engagement strategies based on top-down persuasive influence are unlikely to succeed.
Neither will inclusive leadership alone. Inclusive behaviours at team level, such as collaboration, transparency, trust and mutual respect, amplify the positive effects of inclusive leadership; negative influencing behaviours such as peer exclusion and gossip have the opposite effect (Wang, Gong, Song, 2023 and Rodriguez, Chatman).
Toxic behaviour is the biggest driver of negative workplace outcomes (Brassey, Coe, Dewhurst, Enomoto, Giarola, Herbig and Jeffery, 2022). Incivility costs US organisations collectively more than $1.2 billion daily in reduced productivity and $828 million in absenteeism (Mayer, 2024). Including disputes, complaints and employee attrition, managers in toxic work environments spend up to 50% more time on toxicity-related issues than managers in non-toxic environments (Society for Human Resource Management, 2022). With employees increasingly sharing their workplace experiences on social media platforms such as Glassdoor, the implications for business reputation, customer choice and recruitment are significant.
Notably, humans drive the leading causes of workplace toxicity - failure to promote DEI; disrespect; and unethical, cut-throat and abusive behaviour (Sull, Sull, Cipolli and Brighenti, 2022). While there are interventions to stop the spread of toxic behaviours, they are characteristically reactive and problem-focused. By the time these are engaged, employees and employers are probably already paying the price.
From Vertical to Distributed Influence
The RISE model of influence is also informed by three important insights from my time as a CEO.
Firstly, proximity matters. Influence expands like ripples; the further we are from the energy source, the less powerful the influencer becomes. Just one exposure to the perspective of a peer can be more influential than multiple exposures to a manager (Griskevicius, Cialdini and Goldstein, 2008). While it was important for me to consider why, how, who, where and when I chose to influence, I would have been naive to expect my impact on employees who did not report directly to me to be as significant as my influence on those who did.
Secondly, effective influence is adaptive influence (figure 1). We each have our own unique styles and strengths when it comes to influencing and being influenced ourselves. Added to this, distinct roles and positions bring their own relationships, levers and resources. This meant that, to achieve a particular purpose or goal, a colleague’s influencing style, strengths, role and position were sometimes more relevant and effective than my own. More often than not we were better together.
Figure 1: Adaptive Influence
Persuasive influence has been reported as the most predominant style of influence in the workplace (Hughes, Wadd and Hetrick, 2025). The ability to compel others to follow and, where appropriate, comply is a valuable leadership skill. However, influence in the workplace is far more diverse and complex than persuasion alone.
Which brings me to my third lesson. Whilst my influence as a senior leader was amplified by my positional profile, visibility and authority, influence was not limited to me or my leadership team. In the workplace, everyone exercises influence - without or without positional authority, positively and negatively, intentionally or unintentionally.
We have evolved to pay attention to what other human beings think, feel, say and do (Zao-Sanders, 2024). Influence, as a natural human behaviour, is deeply rooted in our fundamental need for connection, cooperation and survival.
This is why we see human influence in the workplace every day: in advocacy for and against change; peer support and gaslighting; talking up and talking down; inclusion and exclusion; civility and incivility; power-with versus power-over. At times of change and uncertainty, the most effective route to influence can be side-to-side rather than top down (Griskevicius, Cialdini and Goldstein, 2008). Social contagion and groupthink can spread negative behaviours and suppress positive ones, or vice versa (Ethics Resource Center Fellows Working Group, 2014;
Gonga, 2023).
The Māori whakatauki or proverb expresses it best:
“He aha te mea nui? He tāngata, he tāngata, he tāngata.
What is the most important thing in the world? It is people, it is people, it is people.”
Introducing RISE: An innovative model for developing positive workplace influence
Informed by neuroscience and brain-based coaching practice, the RISE model of influence provides a framework for understanding, developing and distributing positive human influence at work. Whilst persuasive influencers aim to convince others to buy into or comply with their own idea or perspective, the RISE mindset is proactive, adaptive, collaborative, inclusive and mutually accountable.
RISE aims to provide a framework:
- that offers a new and innovative way of looking at workplace influence
- that creates a common language for workplace influence
- for understanding the distinct types of workplace influence and their impact on working life and business performance
- for organisations to:
a) identify influencing strengths, challenges, constraints and enablers
b) strategically prioritise areas for improvement and growth - for structured learning to develop and distribute positive influencing skills for individuals, teams and organisations.
The RISE framework (figure 2) comprises four types of influence: Reacting; Inspiring; Sabotaging; Empowering. Together, these recognise influence as a natural human behaviour that can be positive or negative, intentional or unintentional.
Figure 2: The RISE Model of Influence™
Reacting: Spontaneous and unintentional, reactive influence can be instinctively triggered by feelings of fear, uncertainty, stress and overwhelm. Reactive influencing behaviours include abruptness, withdrawal and defensive body language.
Feeling overwhelmed by an impending deadline, Jane reacts abruptly when Hemi asks a question.
This reduces Hemi’s confidence to ask Jane questions in the future, elevating organisational risk.
Inspiring: Intentional or unintentional, inspiring influence motivates and energises, creating a sense of purpose, connection and collegiality. Inspiring influence behaviours include generosity, courage and authenticity.
Despite their own workload, Aroha gives time to help Mei. This inspires Mei to later do the same
for Aroha. From here their teamwork goes from strengths to strength.
Sabotaging: Sabotaging influence damages, disrupts or undermines another person’s self-confidence, trust and sense of belonging. Unlike reactive influence, sabotaging influence is not instinctive. Sabotaging influence includes intentionally disrespectful, isolating, cut-throat and unethical behaviours.
Ethan’s eye-rolling sabotages Andi’s self-confidence and flow during an important meeting.
This isn’t the first time. Andi resigns the following day.
Empowering: Empowering influence is intentional and embodied by the question “How can I help?” Empowering influence behaviours include providing employees with the resources, support and authority they need to succeed.
Dolan is empowered by Amy when her suggestion that he co-leads an important presentation is
supported by training, time to practise, and constructive feedback. This experience boosts Dolan’s
self-confidence and trust in Amy. He’s quietly looking forward to the next opportunity!
Reflection Questions
1. How frequently do you notice each of the four types of RISE influence at work?
| Reacting | Inspiring | Sabotaging | Empowering | |
| Frequently | ||||
| Occasionally | ||||
| Rarely | ||||
| Never |
2. What actions could you take over the next month to grow Inspiring or Empowering influence at work?
3. What actions could you take over the next month to reduce Reacting or Sabotaging influence at work?
Conclusion
Workplace influence, positive or negative, intentional or unintentional, co-creates culture, defines the quality of organisational life and drives business performance up or down. Businesses are more successful when employees are empowered to positively influence decisions affecting their working lives; less successful when they are not.
Persuasive influence has its place; inclusive leadership is important but not enough. Expanding our perspective on workplace influence from leader-centric to human-centric, from vertical to distributed, taps into a naturally abundant human resource. Left to its own devices, negative influence is a significant strategic and operational risk. On the other hand, proactively developed and intentionally channelled, positive human-centric influence can become a strategic strength to benefit the entire organisation. What is good for people, is good for business.
Authored by Nicola Woodward, experienced senior leader; ODI consultant, facilitator and coach.
If you would like to explore how we can help you to positively transform your influence culture at work, contact Nicky on 021 133 1201 or info@odi.org.nz.
NB: A full reference list can be provided on request.