Taking charge of something others regularly need, such as a shared data platform or a major vendor relationship, and running it well on fair terms gives a manager's requests more weight.
Borderline: whether this move is justified depends on the situation, and only the person in it can judge.
An example
When a private-equity-backed home services company bought its fourth regional brand, nobody owned the customer data. Each brand had its own systems, and corporate marketing kept asking for reports that took weeks. The head of analytics proposed to build and run a shared customer data platform, and the chief executive agreed. Over a year she built it, set clear rules for who could see what, answered requests in the order they arrived, and published response times. Every brand and corporate function came to depend on it. When the next year's operating plan came up, she proposed a pricing analytics program the brand presidents had resisted. The presidents, who relied on the platform and on her team's even treatment of their requests, agreed to a pilot in two brands, and her budget request was approved.
Why it works
Power follows control of resources others depend on. A manager who takes charge of a shared resource and runs it well gains standing, because others rely on both the resource and the manager's fairness. That manager's proposals look better because they come from someone others trust and need, and agreeing is easier, since colleagues want to stay on good terms with someone whose service they use. The resource has to matter, the running has to be even-handed, and others have to be free to look elsewhere if service slips. Using the resource to reward or punish turns dependence into coercion.
The thinking behind it
Gerald R. Salancik Salancik and Pfeffer's Who Gets Power, and How They Hold On to It: A Strategic-Contingency Model of Power (1977) argues that power inside an organization goes to the subunits and people who can cope with its critical problems. Unowned customer data across four brands was such a problem, and the head of analytics gained standing by solving it. The paper adds that holders tend to entrench power in rules that outlast the problem, the drift that published, even-handed rules guard against.
Jeffrey Pfeffer In The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective (1978), Pfeffer and Salancik argue that whoever controls a critical, scarce resource gains power over those who depend on it, and that people act to manage such dependencies. A platform every brand relies on creates that dependence, and the brand presidents' readiness to pilot a program they had resisted reflects it.
Richard M. Emerson Emerson's Power-Dependence Relations (1962) holds that one party's power over another rests on the other's dependence, which grows with how much the other values what is provided and how few alternative sources it has. He also described balancing operations, such as finding alternative sources, that reduce dependence. That is why the clean form keeps service even-handed: a resource used to punish invites colleagues to build their way out.
When it fits
Managers who can take on a shared resource, such as a data platform, a vendor relationship, specialized expertise, or a common service, are the ones placed to do it. They need the competence to run it well, the authority to take it on, and patience, since the standing builds over a year or more.
How to use it well
Look for a resource others need and nobody owns well. Propose to take it on, on clear terms.
- Run it well: fast, reliable, and fair.
- Publish the rules: who gets what, in what order, at what cost.
- Treat every requester the same, rivals included.
- Report performance openly.
Let the standing build. Over time, colleagues who depend on the resource and trust the way it is run will give your proposals a better hearing. Keep the service even-handed at exactly the moments you need something from them, because the standing goes the moment it bends.
What it costs and where it backfires
Running a shared resource is work, and it draws complaints. Others may see your control as empire-building, and if service slips, the standing you built turns into resentment. The line is fairness. Once the resource is withheld, slowed, or rationed to reward allies or punish opponents, it has become cultivated dependency and coercion, and the people who rely on it will look for a way out from under you.
When it is used on you
Ask for the rules in writing when a peer controls a resource you depend on, and watch whether they are applied evenly. If your requests slow down whenever you disagree with the peer, document it and raise it with whoever oversees the resource. Build an alternative if one is possible.