IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v35y2024i2p741-768.html

Do Lower-Power Individuals Really Compete Less? An Investigation of Covert Competition

Author

Listed:
  • Yufei Zhong

    (Scheller College of Business, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30308)

  • Huisi (Jessica) Li

    (Foster School of Business, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195)

Abstract

Competition is one of the defining features of organizational life. In this research, we identify a prevalent but overlooked type of competition—covert competition, which we define as behaviors with the intention to win (i.e., advancing one’s interest/position while disregarding or hurting the other party’s interest/position) that are unclear to or hidden from the other party. We argue that one’s relative power in dyadic social relationships influences covert competition. Based on the theory of power dependence, we expect that lower-power individuals are more likely than higher-power individuals to compete covertly. This is because lower-power individuals fear the potential negative repercussions of revealing their competitiveness, which motivates them to engage in more covert competition. Lower-power individuals’ ability to escape from the current relationship mitigates the effects of having lower power on such fear and on their subsequent covert competition. With five experiments and a three-wave longitudinal survey study, we find support for our hypotheses. This research calls attention to the understudied covert form of competition and emphasizes the nuanced relationships between power and competitive behaviors.

Suggested Citation

  • Yufei Zhong & Huisi (Jessica) Li, 2024. "Do Lower-Power Individuals Really Compete Less? An Investigation of Covert Competition," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(2), pages 741-768, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:35:y:2024:i:2:p:741-768
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.2023.1684
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2023.1684
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.2023.1684?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peterson, Erika & Thompson, Leigh, 1997. "Negotiation Teamwork: The Impact of Information Distribution and Accountability on Performance Depends on the Relationship among Team Members," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 72(3), pages 364-383, December.
    2. Proudfoot, Devon & Kay, Aaron C. & Mann, Heather, 2015. "Motivated employee blindness: The impact of labor market instability on judgment of organizational inefficiencies," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 108-122.
    3. Todd L. Cherry & Peter Frykblom & Jason F. Shogren, 2002. "Hardnose the Dictator," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1218-1221, September.
    4. Kevyn Yong & Nathan C. Pettit & Sandra E. Spataro, 2010. "Holding your place: Reactions to the prospect of status gains and losses," Post-Print hal-00528416, HAL.
    5. Pai, Jieun & Whitson, Jennifer & Kim, Junha & Lee, Sujin, 2021. "A relational account of low power: The role of the attachment system in reduced proactivity," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 28-41.
    6. Tjosvold, Dean, 1985. "Power and social context in superior-subordinate interaction," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 281-293, June.
    7. Eric M. Anicich & Nathanael J. Fast & Nir Halevy & Adam D. Galinsky, 2016. "When the Bases of Social Hierarchy Collide: Power Without Status Drives Interpersonal Conflict," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 123-140, February.
    8. Derek D. Rucker & Adam D. Galinsky & David Dubois, 2012. "Power and consumer behavior: How power shapes who and what consumers value," Post-Print hal-00724231, HAL.
    9. Vriend, Tim & Jordan, Jennifer & Janssen, Onne, 2016. "Reaching the top and avoiding the bottom: How ranking motivates unethical intentions and behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 142-155.
    10. Koning, Lukas & Steinel, Wolfgang & Beest, Ilja van & Dijk, Eric van, 2011. "Power and deception in ultimatum bargaining," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 35-42, May.
    11. Schaerer, Michael & du Plessis, Christilene & Yap, Andy J. & Thau, Stefan, 2018. "Low power individuals in social power research: A quantitative review, theoretical framework, and empirical test," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 73-96.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yekini, Mohammed & Idiko, Bomanaziba & Kulichyova, Anastasia & Rao-Nicholson, Rekha, 2025. "Losing my job and family? How power shapes the boundaries between work and family life," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Huisi (Jessica) Li & Ya-Ru Chen & John Angus D. Hildreth, 2023. "Powerlessness Also Corrupts: Lower Power Increases Self-Promotional Lying," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(4), pages 1422-1440, July.
    2. Yu, Andrew & Hays, Nicholas A. & Zhao, Emma Y., 2019. "Development of a bipartite measure of social hierarchy: The perceived power and perceived status scales," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 84-104.
    3. Maartje E. Schouten & Daan van Knippenberg & Lindred L. Greer, 2024. "Hierarchy Conflict: Causes, Expressions, and Consequences," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(4), pages 1535-1551, July.
    4. Güth, Werner & Kocher, Martin G., 2014. "More than thirty years of ultimatum bargaining experiments: Motives, variations, and a survey of the recent literature," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 396-409.
    5. Hoever, Inga J. & Betancourt, Nathan E. & Chen, Guoquan & Zhou, Jing, 2023. "How others light the creative spark: Low power accentuates the benefits of diversity for individual inspiration and creativity," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    6. Vijaya Venkataramani & Rellie Derfler-Rozin & Xin Liu & Jih-Yu Mao, 2024. "Keep Off My Turf! Low-Status Managers’ Territoriality as a Response to Employees’ Novel Ideas," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(4), pages 1224-1250, July.
    7. To, Christopher & Leslie, Lisa M. & Torelli, Carlos J. & Stoner, Jennifer L., 2020. "Culture and social hierarchy: Collectivism as a driver of the relationship between power and status," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 159-176.
    8. Schaerer, Michael & Foulk, Trevor & du Plessis, Christilene & Tu, Min-Hsuan & Krishnan, Satish, 2021. "Just because you're powerless doesn't mean they aren't out to get you: Low power, paranoia, and aggression," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-20.
    9. Jamel Khenfer & Steven Shepherd & Olivier Trendel, 2020. "Customer empowerment in the face of perceived Incompetence: Effect on preference for anthropomorphized brands," Post-Print hal-03189338, HAL.
    10. Yip, Jeremy A. & Schweitzer, Maurice E. & Nurmohamed, Samir, 2018. "Trash-talking: Competitive incivility motivates rivalry, performance, and unethical behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 125-144.
    11. Swaab, Roderick I. & Lount, Robert B. & Chung, Seunghoo & Brett, Jeanne M., 2021. "Setting the stage for negotiations: How superordinate goal dialogues promote trust and joint gain in negotiations between teams," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 157-169.
    12. Wang, Yaming & Wang, Xingyuan & Chen, Haipeng (Allan) & Ouyang, Qiang, 2024. "Effect of status threat on preference for cross-domain self-improvement products: The moderation of trade-off beliefs," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    13. Jamel Khenfer & Steven Shepherd & Olivier Trendel, 2020. "Customer empowerment in the face of perceived Incompetence: Effect on preference for anthropomorphized brands," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-03189338, HAL.
    14. Khenfer, Jamel & Shepherd, Steven & Trendel, Olivier, 2020. "Customer empowerment in the face of perceived Incompetence: Effect on preference for anthropomorphized brands," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 1-11.
    15. Sarah P. Doyle & Robert B. Lount, 2023. "Rising Above vs. Falling Below: When and Why Status Change Affects Interpersonal Helping in Workgroups," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 1157-1183, May.
    16. Jin, Fei & Zhu, Huawei & Tu, Ping, 2020. "How recipient group membership affects the effect of power states on prosocial behaviors," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 307-315.
    17. Tost, Leigh Plunkett & Johnson, Hana Huang, 2019. "The prosocial side of power: How structural power over subordinates can promote social responsibility," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 25-46.
    18. Pettit, Nathan C. & Doyle, Sarah P. & Kim, Hee Young & Hurwitz, Anat, 2022. "Rank extrapolation: Asymmetric forecasts of future rank after rank change," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    19. He, Tianyu & Schaerer, Michael & Foulk, Trevor A. & Wolf, Elizabeth Baily & Jiang, Winnie Y., 2025. "From low power to action: Reappraising powerlessness as an opportunity restores agency," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    20. Mengyuan Zhou, 2022. "Does the Source of Inheritance Matter in Bequest Attitudes? Evidence from Japan," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 867-887, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:35:y:2024:i:2:p:741-768. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.