U.S. Army Research Institute 

for the Behavioral and Social Sciences 

Research Report 1874 

Social Awareness and Leader Influence: A Proposed 

Model and Training Intervention 

Rose A. Mueller-Hanson, Erin C. Swartout, 

Courtney L. Morewitz, and Chuck T. Keil 

Personnel Decisions Research Institutes, Inc. 

Timothy P. McGonigle, Cody Martin, 

Carolyn Parish, and Raymond A. Morath 

Caliber, an ICF International Company 

July 2007 

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
U.S. Army Research Institute 

for the Behavioral and Social Sciences 

A Directorate of the Department of the Army 

Deputy Chief of Staff, G1 

Authorized and approved for distribution: 

 PAUL A. GADE MICHELLE SAMS, Ph.D. 

 Acting Technical Director Director 

Research accomplished under contract 

for the Department of the Army 

Personnel Decisions Research Institutes, Inc. 

Technical review by 

Mark S. Crowson, Center for Army Leadership 

Robert Solick, U. S. Army Research Institute 

NOTICES 

DISTRIBUTION: Primary distribution of this Research Report has been made by ARI. 

Please address correspondence concerning distribution of reports to: U.S. Army 

Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Attn: DAPE-ARI-MS, 

2511 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia 22202-3926. 

FINAL DISPOSITION: This Research Report may be destroyed when it is no longer 

needed. Please do not return it to the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral 

and Social Sciences. 

NOTE: The findings in this Research Report are not to be construed as an official 

Department of the Army position, unless so designated by other authorized documents.
i 

 

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 

1. REPORT DATE (dd-mm-yy)

July 2007 

2. REPORT TYPE

Interim 

3. DATES COVERED (from. . . to) 

 May 2005 – December 2005 

5a. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER 

DASW01-03-D0016 

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 

Social Awareness and Leader Influence: A Proposed Model 

and Training Intervention 5b. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 

622785 

5c. PROJECT NUMBER 

A790 

5d. TASK NUMBER 

 269 

6. AUTHOR(S): 

Rose A. Mueller-Hanson, Erin C. Swartout, Courtney L. 

Morewitz, and Chuck T. Keil (Personnel Decisions Research 

Institutes, Inc.); Timothy P. McGonigle, Cody Martin, Carolyn 

Parish, and Raymond A. Morath (Caliber, an ICF International 

Company) 5e. WORK UNIT NUMBER 

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 

Personnel Decisions Research Institutes, Inc. 

1300 North 17th Street 

Suite 100 

Arlington, VA 22209

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER 

10. MONITOR ACRONYM 

ARI 

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 

U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social 

Sciences 

ATTN: DAPE-ARI-RK 

2511 Jefferson Davis Highway 

Arlington, VA 22202-3926

11. MONITOR REPORT NUMBER 

Research Report 1874 

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 

Subject Matter Expert and Contracting Officer’s Representative: Alice J. (Sena) Garven 

14. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words): 

A leader’s ability to influence others is likely related to the leader’s level of social awareness (knowing how one is 

perceived by others in that environment.) Based on perceptions of the social environment, a leader must also alter 

behaviors as needed to more effectively relate to others, a process which has been termed “interpersonal 

adaptability”. Interpersonal adaptability is central to the role of the leader who must use influence and persuasion to 

successfully accomplish the mission through the work of subordinates. The objectives of this research are to 

develop a model of social influence, to propose training, and to pilot test the concepts. To meet these objectives, we 

first provide an overview of the relationship between social awareness and influence. Second, we describe a model 

of social awareness and influence. Third, we describe how these concepts link to the leader competencies defined in 

FM 6-22. Next, we discuss implications of this research for training leaders to enhance their social awareness and 

influence skills, and we present the concepts that were developed for training these skills. Finally, we describe how 

these concepts were pilot tested, and we present the results and our conclusions from the pilot. 

15. SUBJECT TERMS 

 Social Awareness, Self Awareness, Influence Training

 SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF 

16. REPORT 

Unclassified 

17. ABSTRACT 

Unclassified

18. THIS PAGE 

Unclassified

19. LIMITATION 

OF ABSTRACT 

Unlimited

20. NUMBER 

OF PAGES 

77 

21. RESPONSIBLE PERSON

Ellen Kinzer 

Technical Publication 

Specialist 

703-602-8047 
ii 
 iii 

Research Report 1874 

Social Awareness and Leader Influence: A Proposed 

Model and Training Intervention 

Rose A. Mueller-Hanson, Erin C. Swartout, 

Courtney L. Morewitz, and Chuck T. Keil 

Personnel Decisions Research Institutes, Inc. 

Timothy P. McGonigle, Cody Martin, 

 Carolyn Parish, and Raymond A. Morath 

Caliber, an ICF International Company 

Leader Development Research Unit 

Stanley M. Halpin, Chief 

U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences 

2511 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia 22202-3926 

July 2007 

Army Project Number Personnel Performance 

622785A790 and Training Technology 

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
iv 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

We would like to acknowledge the contributions of several individuals who were instrumental in 

making the project happen. First, we would like to thank Mr. Robert Solick of ARI for his early 

insights and vision in developing the concept for this project. Dr. Larry Laffitte and Dr. Stan 

Halpin of ARI provided useful feedback on our initial literature review, and their comments were 

very much appreciated. We would like to thank Dr. Sena Garven, Dr. Michelle Zbylut, and Dr. 

Jay Goodwin of ARI who were instrumental in coordinating the pilot test. Additionally, we very 

much appreciate Dr. Garven’s assistance through her role as the primary ARI point of contact. 

We would also like to thank the staff members of PDRI and Caliber, an ICF International 

Company for graciously volunteering their time to assist in pilot testing the initial role-plays. 

Their patience, enthusiasm, and sense of humor were much appreciated. In addition, we’d 

especially like to thank Dr. Rob Schneider of PDRI who provided reviews and many helpful 

comments on both the manuscript and the pilot training program. Jessie Huang was instrumental 

in structuring and analyzing the data. 

Finally, our heartfelt appreciation goes out to the 72 Army officers and NCOs who participated 

in the pilot test. Without their assistance, this research would not have been possible. The 

feedback and insights they shared throughout the pilot test were invaluable in creating our final 

recommendations. 
v 

SOCIAL AWARENESS AND LEADER INFLUENCE: A PROPOSED MODEL AND 

TRAINING INTERVENTION

CONTENTS 

INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................1 

 Background..........................................................................................................................1 

 Social Awareness and Influence ..........................................................................................2 

 Phases of the Social Awareness and Influence Model.........................................................9 

 Pre-Interaction..........................................................................................................9 

 Interaction ..............................................................................................................12 

 In-the-Moment Social Awareness Process ............................................................17 

 Factors Affecting Influence and Social Awareness...........................................................21 

 Cognitive Abilities.................................................................................................21 

 Personality..............................................................................................................22 

 Previous Experience...............................................................................................22 

 Knowledge and Skills ............................................................................................23 

 Situational Characteristics .....................................................................................25 

 Factor Impact and Trainability...............................................................................26 

 Implications for Training ...................................................................................................28

 Outline for a Social Awareness and Influence Training Program .........................28 

METHOD ......................................................................................................................................30 

 Participants.........................................................................................................................31 

 Materials ............................................................................................................................31 

 Procedure ...........................................................................................................................37 

RESULTS ......................................................................................................................................40 

 Improving Social Perceptiveness Through Training .........................................................40 

 Improving Influence Skills Through Training...................................................................44 

 Perceived Usefulness of Training ..........................................................................47 

DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................................48 

 Strengths and Implications for Research and Training......................................................49 

 Limitations .........................................................................................................................49 

 Recommendations and Future Research Needs.................................................................50 

 Summary............................................................................................................................51 

REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................................53 

APPENDIX A: TAXONOMY OF FACIAL, VERBAL, AND POSTURE REACTIONS....... A-1 

APPENDIX B:COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE TRAINING/TESTING MATERIALS.......B-1 
vi 

LIST OF TABLES 

TABLE 1. LINKAGES BETWEEN STUDY CONCEPTS AND ARMY LEADERSHIP 

COMPETENCIES....................................................................................................................... 6 

TABLE 2. TRAINING COURSE LEARNING OBJECTIVES....................................................31 

TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF COUNTERBALANCED MEASURES...........................................34 

TABLE 4. OUTLINE OF PROCEDURES ...................................................................................37 

TABLE 5. RESULTS OF LEVEL 1 ANALYSES........................................................................40 

TABLE 6. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR PONS FORMS ..................................................41 

TABLE 7. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR OBSERVATIONAL CHECKLIST, 

QUESTION 2.................................................................................................................................43 

TABLE 8. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR OBSERVATIONAL CHECKLIST, 

QUESTION 3.................................................................................................................................44 

TABLE 9. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE SCALE.........44 

TABLE 10. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE ITEMS .......45 

TABLE 11. PERCEIVED USEFULNESS OF TRAINING .........................................................47 

LIST OF FIGURES 

FIGURE 1. A MODEL OF SOCIAL AWARENESS AND INFLUENCE ....................................5 

FIGURE 2. IMPACT AND TRAINABILITY MATRIX..................................... ........... 27 

FIGURE 3. INTERACTION OF PONS FORMS .........................................................................42 
vii 

SOCIAL AWARENESS AND LEADER INFLUENCE: A PROPOSED MODEL AND 

TRAINING INTERVENTION 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Research Requirement: 

The Army defines leadership as “influencing people by providing purpose, direction, and 

motivation while operating to accomplish the mission and improving the organization” (p. 1-2, 

Department of the Army, 2006). Thus, the concepts of leadership and influence are inextricably 

linked via the Army’s definition of leadership. To complete their missions successfully, Army 

leaders must negotiate with and persuade a variety of individuals and groups, such as superior 

officers, peers, host nation personnel, allied forces, and joint forces, among others. Moreover, 

leadership influence is a key concept that is interwoven throughout the Core Leader 

Competencies defined in the newly revised Army Leadership Manual (FM 6-22). 

Although the need for influence skills and interpersonal adaptability in the Army environment 

has been well established (Department of the Army, 2001; Horey, Fallesen, Morath, Cronin, 

Cassella, Franks, & Smith, 2004; Wong, Gerrars, Kidd, Pricone, & Swengros, 2003), little 

formal training exists to help new Army leaders enhance these skills. To address this gap, the 

Army Research Institute’s Leader Development Research Unit (ARI-LDRU) has recently 

initiated work on the Army Technology Objective (ATO) titled Accelerating Leader 

Development. Specifically, ARI-LDRU has determined that one component of this research 

should examine the role of in-the-moment social awareness on leader influence; that is, how 

leaders become aware of the effectiveness of their influence attempts while they are in the 

process of influencing others and how they subsequently modify their behavior to be more 

effective. To conduct this research, ARI-LDRU has contracted with Personnel Decisions 

Research Institutes (PDRI), Inc. and Caliber, an ICF International Company to (1) develop and 

document a model of social awareness and influence based on an analysis of relevant research, 

(2) propose training concepts to address the linkages in the model, and (3) pilot-test the concepts. 

Procedure: 

Based on a review of relevant research, a model of social awareness and influence was 

developed and the factors hypothesized to impact the model were identified. The results of an 

expert rating task revealed that experience influencing others, knowledge of non-verbal behavior 

and cultural norms, communication/persuasion skills, political skills, social intelligence, 

metacognition, and self-awareness were the factors that were most likely to have a high impact 

on the social awareness and influence process and that could potentially be improved through 

training. Consequently several training concepts were identified: knowledge of the social 

awareness and influence process, knowledge of/skill in reading verbal and non-verbal cues of 

others, and knowledge of/skill in using influence tactics. Using a combination of commercially 

available tools and customized content, we developed and pilot tested a six-hour social 

awareness and influence training program with 72 NCOs and Company-grade officers. 
viii 

The pilot test served a dual purpose: (1) to test the various training concepts to determine their 

suitability for ongoing use and (2) to make some initial determinations about whether social 

awareness and influence skills could be improved through training. Evaluation data were 

collected at two levels to assess the effectiveness of the training: participant reactions (level 1) 

and acquisition of new knowledge and skills (level 2). The level 1 evaluation was conducted 

using a survey administered at the end of each training session. A pre/post test design was used 

to conduct the level 2 evaluation – participants were assessed via a test of nonverbal sensitivity 

and a role-play exercise both before and after the training on their ability to read verbal and nonverbal cues and on adjusting their own behavior to more effectively influence others. 

Findings: 

Results of the participant reactions questionnaire indicated that the training program was well 

received by the target audience. Participants indicated that the role-plays and instruction on 

influence tactics were the most useful components of the course. Results of the pre-post tests 

indicated that training was successful in helping participants improve their skills in the following 

areas: 

♦ Clearly communicating an influence goal 

♦ Adjusting behavior in response to a target’s reactions 

♦ Influencing others for compliance and commitment. 

The results of this research provide three significant contributions. First, based on a review of 

the literature, we developed a viable model of in-the-moment social awareness and influence. 

Second, this research provides support for the notion that social awareness and influence are 

skills that can be enhanced through training. A third contribution of this research is the 

development of customized behavioral observation measures to evaluate role-play performance. 

The role-play methodology was useful both as a training tool and as an evaluation tool. 

Utilization and Dissemination of Findings: 

The initial results from this research suggest future research would provide several benefits to the 

Army. Based on the initial findings of the pilot, it appears that a training program could be 

developed which would improve participant social awareness and influence skills, which are key 

to a leader’s success. In addition, the current findings warrant a more complete test of the model, 

including potential moderators, in order to identify the specific aspects of the social awareness 

and influence process that may be easier to train than others. In addition to the need for further 

research, we provide several short and long term recommendations for enhancing the training. 

Short term recommendations include more in-depth role-plays, revisions to the observational 

measures, and a more extensive validation effort. Long-term enhancements to the program 

might include more extensive use of video in the training, extended training length, and 

modifications to make the course suitable for other audiences. 
1 

Social Awareness and Leader Influence: A Proposed Model and Training Intervention 

Background 

 The Army defines leadership as “influencing people by providing purpose, direction, and 

motivation while operating to accomplish the mission and improving the organization” (p. 1-2, 

Department of the Army, 2006). Thus, for Army leaders the concepts of leadership and 

influence are inextricably linked. The increase in operational tempo in the post-9/11 

environment and the subsequent Global War on Terrorism has further highlighted the importance 

of influence skills for Army leaders. To complete their missions successfully, Army leaders 

must negotiate with and persuade a variety of individuals and groups, such as superior officers, 

peers, host nation personnel, allied forces, and joint forces, among others. Moreover, Soldier 

attitudes and behavior have changed, reflecting changes in the culture of younger Americans. 

Young people today tend to be independent and are more likely to desire more information and 

discussion than their predecessors (Fallesen, Keller-Glaze, Aude, Mitchell, Horey, Gramlich, & 

Morath, 2005; Morath, Light, Gompper, Harris, & Zazanis, 2001). To be effective with Soldiers 

who are recruited from this population requires leadership through motivation and persuasion, 

skills that have been recognized in the leadership competencies and metacompetencies defined in 

the Army Field Manual on Leadership (FM 6-22; Department of the Army, 2006). 

 A leader’s ability to influence others is likely related to his or her level of social 

awareness. Social awareness is the process of accurately perceiving the social environment, 

including knowing how one is perceived by others in that environment. Based on his or her 

perception of the social environment, a leader must also alter his or her own behavior as needed 

to more effectively relate to others, a process which has been termed “interpersonal adaptability” 

(Pulakos, Arad, Donovan, & Plamondon, 2000). Interpersonal adaptability is central to the role 

of the leader who must use influence and persuasion to successfully accomplish the mission 

through the work of his or her subordinates. For example, Horey, Morath, Keller-Glaze, and 

Fallesen (2005), found that Army leaders employ a variety of actions and tactics when 

attempting to influence those within and outside the chain of command. However, they also 

found that influence attempts by Army leaders were not always effective and that leaders 

sometimes employ tactics that do not appropriately match the situation. 

 

 To effectively adjust one’s behaviors when interacting with others, we propose that one 

must have an awareness of oneself, other parties in the interaction, and situational factors. That 

is, before one can change the way he or she interacts with others, he or she must be aware of (1) 

his or her own goals and values, (2) how he or she is perceived by others in the social interaction, 

(3) what the other parties expect and want from the interaction and from him or her, and (4) what 

interactions are dictated by the social setting in which the interactions are occurring. Zaccaro 

(2001) discusses these concepts in terms of social perceptiveness, or a capacity to recognize the 

needs, goals, and demands of others. Therefore, individuals who are able to accurately perceive 

other’s reactions and correctly analyze and evaluate their intent will be able to modify their own 

behavior to be more effective. 

 Although the need for these skills in the Army environment has been well established 

(Department of the Army, 2001; Horey, Fallesen, Morath, Cronin, Cassella, Franks, & Smith, 
2 

2004; Wong, Gerrars, Kidd, Pricone, & Swengros, 2003), little formal training exists to help new 

Army leaders enhance these skills. To address this gap, the Leader Development Research Unit 

of the Army Research Institute (ARI-LDRU) has recently initiated work on an Army Technology 

Objective (ATO) titled Accelerating Leader Development. Specifically, ARI-LDRU has 

determined that one component of this research should examine how leaders become aware of 

the effectiveness of their influence attempts while they are in the process of attempting to 

influence others (i.e., “in-the-moment awareness”), and how they subsequently modify their 

behavior to influence the target more effectively. To conduct this research, ARI-LDRU has 

requested contractor support from Personnel Decisions Research Institutes (PDRI) and Caliber, 

an ICF International Company. As described in the original statement of work, the objectives of 

this research “are to develop and document a model based upon analysis of relevant research, to 

propose training concepts based upon feedback regarding their attempts to influence others, and 

to pilot test the concepts.” 

 This report describes the research conducted to meet these objectives. First, we provide 

an overview of the concept of social awareness and its relation to influence. Second, we present 

and describe a model of social awareness and influence that demonstrates the linkages between 

self-awareness, social awareness, and influence, and we describe factors that may affect the 

relationships in the model. In addition, we describe how these concepts link to the leader 

competencies and metacompetencies defined in FM 6-22. Next, we discuss implications of this 

research for training leaders to enhance their social awareness and influence skills, and we 

present the concepts that were developed for training these skills. Finally, we describe how these 

concepts were pilot tested, and we present the results and our conclusions from the pilot. 

Social Awareness and Influence 

 Social awareness has been defined as “a contextualized cognizance either of oneself or of 

another person” (Sheldon, 1996; p. 621). Sheldon and Johnson (1993) and Sheldon (1996) have 

identified eight forms of social awareness in a two-by-two-by-two matrix. According to this 

matrix, one could attempt to understand one’s own experience (inner perceptions and evaluation) 

or appearance (how one looks outwardly) from the perspective of the self or another. Likewise, 

one could attempt to understand another’s experience or appearance from the perspective of the 

self or another individual. 

 Similarly, we define social awareness as the process by which an individual accurately 

perceives, analyzes, and evaluates social stimuli. Social stimuli include other people and their 

interpretations of and reactions to what one does and says in the context of the environment and 

culture. By accurately we mean that both parties have a shared view of both the individual’s 

behavior in the interaction and the other person’s reaction to this behavior. Thus, understanding 

how one appears to others is a key component of social awareness. 

 In the context of an influence attempt, the social awareness process described above 

would occur during the interaction between the influencer and the target of the influence. That 

is, the focus of the present research is social awareness as an in-the-moment process. However, 

the larger context of influence consists of the full range of activities that the influencer engages 

in before the interaction and the outcomes that follow from the interaction – both in the short and 
3 

long term. Specifically, the psychological processes involved in a deliberate influence attempt 

may include the following: 

♦ Prior to the interaction 

- The influence goal (i.e., what the influencer wishes to achieve) is defined either explicitly 

or implicitly (e.g., the influencer requires a favor from the target). 

- The influencer may scan the current environment to identify important aspects to 

consider when planning how he or she will influence the target (e.g., the difficulty of the request, 

the prior relationship that the influencer has with the target, the timeframe). 

- The influencer may plan an overall approach or strategy for the influence attempt (e.g., 

one strategy might be to rely on logical arguments to convince the target that it is important to 

provide assistance). 

♦ During the interaction 

- The influencer attempts to accomplish his or her goal by using one or more influence 

tactics (e.g., the influencer presents a variety of facts to support the legitimacy of the request). 

- The target perceives and interprets these influence tactics and provides a verbal and/or 

nonverbal response. This interpretation may be affected by a variety of factors such as 

attribution bias, culture, norms, and prior experiences with the influencer. The target’s response 

may indicate compliance or resistance. 

- The influencer perceives and interprets the target’s response and evaluates it against the 

initial influence goal. This interpretation may be affected by a variety of factors such as 

attribution bias, culture, norms, and prior experiences with the target. If the influencer 

determines that the influence goal has been met, the interaction may conclude. If the influencer 

determines that the goal has not been met, he or she may try different influence tactics in an 

attempt to be more effective. Thus, the process of perceiving, interpreting, and responding 

begins anew. 

♦ After the interaction 

- The interaction may conclude with either compliance or resistance from the target in the 

short term. Long-term outcomes may include commitment (the target internalizes the 

influencer’s request and supports it fully) or lack thereof. For example, an influencer who 

chooses to use coercion as an influence tactic may gain compliance in the short-term but at the 

cost of credibility and respect over the long-term, thereby potentially reducing the influencer’s 

ability to work effectively with the target in the future. 

This process is depicted graphically in Figure 1. This model and the factors hypothesized to 

moderate the relationships in the model are discussed in turn in the sections that follow. 

 As noted in the introduction of this paper, the concepts of influence and leadership are 

inextricably linked. To be effective, leaders must successfully influence others in a variety of 

situations, including downward influence, peer-to-peer influence, upward influence, and 

influence outside one’s chain of command. As such, we will anchor our discussion of the social 

awareness and influence process in the context of leadership interactions with a wide range of 

other individuals. 
4 

 Recently, the Army has updated its model of the competencies required for effective 

leadership. These new competencies are presented in FM 6-22. The linkages between the 

concepts presented in the social awareness and influence model and the leadership competencies 

and metacompetencies defined in FM 6-22 are presented in Table 1. Examples of these linkages 

are provided at the intersection of the study concepts and the competencies. While many of the 

competencies described in FM 6-22 are related to the social awareness and influence process 

(e.g., a leader who displays character by modeling Army values consistently will be more likely 

to be able to successfully influence his or her subordinates through increased credibility and 

trust), only the most direct linkages are shown in the table. As demonstrated in the table, there is 

substantial overlap between the concepts defined in the social awareness and influence model 

and the competencies required for effective Army leaders. Therefore, training designed to 

enhance leader performance related to social awareness and influence may also have a positive 

impact on the general competencies required for leadership success. 
5

Figure 1. A Model of Social Awareness and Influence 

Pre-Interaction 

In-the-Moment Social Awareness Process 

Influencer Behavior/ Influence Tactics 

Target’s Interpretation Target’s Reaction

Influencer’s Revised Strategy

Influence Goal Evaluation of the 

Situation 

Influence Strategy

Interaction 

Evaluation Analyzing Social 

Information

Perception of Social Information

(-) (+) 

Interaction Concludes
6

Table 1. Linkages between Study Concepts and Army Leadership Competencies 

 Study Concepts 

FM 6-22 Competencies 

Pre-Interaction 

(Influence Goal, 

Evaluation of the 

Situation, Influence 

Strategy) 

Influencer Behavior/ 

Influence Tactics 

Perception, 

Analysis, and 

Evaluation of 

Social 

Information 

In

Revi

(Adju

Own 

b

E

Attributes A Leader of Character (Identity) 

 Empathy: Having 

a propensity to experience something from another person’s point of view. 

A Leader With Intellectual Capacity 

Domain Knowledge: cultural and geopolitical knowledge is understanding of cultural, geographic, and political differences and sensitivities 

 Judgment: having 

a capacity to assess situations or circumstances shrewdly and to draw sound conclusions Interpersonal Tact: having a capacity to understand the interactions with others Domain Knowledge: cultural knowledge

Agilitto antadapt or chasituatithrougand theffectcurrenor actprodudesire

Core Leader Competencies Leads 
7

 Study Concepts 

FM 6-22 Competencies 

Pre-Interaction 

(Influence Goal, 

Evaluation of the 

Situation, Influence 

Strategy) 

Influencer Behavior/ 

Influence Tactics 

Perception, 

Analysis, and 

Evaluation of 

Social 

Information 

In

Revi

(Adju

Own 

b

E

Leads Others Uses appropriate 

influence techniques to energize others Conveys the significance of the work 

Extends Influence Beyond Chain Of Command 

Understands sphere of influence, means of influence, and limits of influence 

Builds trust 

Leads By Example Seeks and is open 

to diverse ideas and points of view 

Communicates Employs engaging 

communication techniques Is sensitive to cultural factors in communication 

Listens actively Is sensitive to cultural factors in communication 

Develops 

Creates a Positive 

Organizational Climate 

Sets and maintains high expectations for individuals and teams 

Encourages open and candid communications 

Prepares Self Maintains relevant 

cultural awareness 

Maintains relevant cultural awareness 

Maintains relevant cultural awareness 

Maintaware

Achieves 
8

 Study Concepts 

FM 6-22 Competencies 

Pre-Interaction 

(Influence Goal, 

Evaluation of the 

Situation, Influence 

Strategy) 

Influencer Behavior/ 

Influence Tactics 

Perception, 

Analysis, and 

Evaluation of 

Social 

Information 

In

Revi

(Adju

Own 

b

E

Gets Results Uses planning to ensure 

each course of action achieves the desired outcome 
 9

Phases of the Social Awareness and Influence Model 

Pre-Interaction 

 Many day-to-day leader influence attempts may occur automatically and naturally during 

the course of interactions with others. In these contexts, the influence process is more a means to 

an end rather than a specific end in itself. However, when the influencer anticipates resistance, 

he or she may engage in some planning and strategizing prior to the actual influence interaction. 

Therefore, the pre-interaction component of model presented in Figure 1 may be a deliberate and 

conscious process in new or difficult situations or an automatic and unconscious process in 

routine situations. During the pre-interaction phase, the influencer identifies the desired outcome 

and sets a specific influence goal, evaluates the situation to better understand the factors that may 

impact the influence interaction, and develops a strategy or overall plan for the interaction. 

These steps are discussed in more detail below. 

 Influence Goal. To begin the social awareness and influence process, the influencer 

identifies a desired outcome and sets a goal of completing a specific task, which serves as a 

reference point against which progress—and the effectiveness of the chosen influence tactic—

can be measured. Research has revealed that there are several commonly pursued goals when 

attempting to influence others (Rule, Bisanz, & Kohn, 1985). Rule et al. have identified the 

following as distinct types of influence goals: 

♦ To acquire information 

♦ To acquire a physical object 

♦ To get power or authority from the target to do something (e.g., permission from one’s 

superior to implement a new program) 

♦ To get the target to do something or to help the influencer do something 

♦ To change the target’s attitude or opinion 

♦ To get the target to go somewhere 

♦ To get the target to buy or sell something 

♦ To get the target to change an existing role relationship (e.g., enter into a partnership) 

♦ To get the target to change a personal habit or characteristic (e.g., quit drinking) 

♦ To get the target to take a risk or make a sacrifice (e.g., commit a crime) 

It is important to note that the difficulty of achieving these goals may vary widely. For example, 

a simple request for information (e.g., directions) or action may be very easy to accomplish if the 

request is straightforward and both parties are in agreement as to its necessity and 

appropriateness. Influencers may only take the time to consciously set goals and develop a plan 

for achieving them if fulfilling the request is anticipated to be very challenging. That is, if the 

influencer and target have different or mutually exclusive goals, if the request will be difficult to 

accomplish, or if the influencer and target have different perceptions of what is required in a 

given situation. 

 Evaluation of the Situation. After identifying the desired outcome of the situation, the 

next step in the model is for the influencer to consider attributes of the situation that will help 

guide the selection of an influence strategy (cf., Kipnis, 1976). In selecting an initial influence 

strategy, an influencer might consider characteristics of the:
 10

♦ Influence goal - Is the influencer’s goal to complete the task, prevent interference by the 

target, or garner support for the mission? 

♦ Task - How desirable is the task? How dangerous or difficult? 

♦ Situation - What is the formal relationship between the influencer and the target? Given this 

relationship, what are the cultural expectations about how this interaction should occur? 

♦ Influencer - Which sources of power does the influencer hold? Which influence tactics are 

the best fit with the influencer’s skills? 

♦ Target - Is the target a superior, subordinate, peer, or outside the chain of command? Which 

potential targets have the capabilities to perform the task, and what responsibility do these 

individuals have for completing the goal? 

 It is important to recognize that the process of considering these characteristics may be 

largely automatic, unless the influencer anticipates the target will be resistant. That is, an 

influencer may not stop to explicitly review all available information about these characteristics 

and combine them in some controlled manner to identify an influence strategy. Instead, these 

factors are descriptive of the types of information that affect the cognitive process that underlies 

the selection of an initial influence strategy. While this line of reasoning suggests that it may be 

difficult to attempt to train individuals to consider environmental factors, research shows that 

cognitive processes can become automatized through practice, repetition, and habit (e.g., Bargh, 

1990). Further, deliberate consideration of these factors may be more important for mission 

success in specific situations, such as when the influencer expects or detects resistance to the 

influence goal. Thus, one component of the training should focus on identifying relevant 

features of the situation with the goal of making environmental scanning an automatic process. 

 Influence Strategy. The environmental factors described above will have a direct and 

significant impact on the influence strategy. The influence strategy is the influencer’s general 

plan or approach for influencing the target. Two important factors to consider when selecting a 

strategy are (1) the nature of the relationship between the influencer and the target, and (2) the 

individual bases of power that the influencer can bring to bear in the influence interaction. 

 In the leadership context, a leader in the role of influencer must carefully consider the 

nature of the relationship that he or she has with subordinates when formulating an influence 

strategy. Several theories have been proposed to explore the nature of the leader-follower 

relationship, including transactional and transformational theories of leadership, Leader-Member 

Exchange theory (LMX), and bond testing. According to transactional models of leadership, 

leaders give benefits to followers, which are reciprocated by heightened esteem for and 

responsiveness to the leader (Hollander, 1992). Thus, over time leaders can influence followers 

based on past relationships in which they have previously given benefits to followers. Following 

this model, exchange approaches to influence are likely to yield positive results. 

 In contrast to transactional leadership, transformational leaders “motivate their followers 

to perform beyond expectations by activating followers’ higher order needs, fostering a climate 

of trust and inducing followers to transcend self-interest for the sake of the organization” (Pillai, 

Schriesheim, & Williams, 1999). Thus transformational leaders may choose and have better 

success with influence strategies that rely on inspirational or personal appeals. However, there is 

evidence that good leaders use both transactional and transformational strategies (Bass & Avolio, 
 11

1993); therefore, using a combination of leadership styles may be more appropriate than reliance 

on any single approach. 

 Leader-Member Exchange theory posits that the quality of the leader-follower 

relationship can vary across dyads of leaders and followers. A poorly-developed leader-follower 

dyad may maintain a transactional relationship that is well within the bounds of the employment 

contract. On the other hand, a stronger leader-follower dyad that allows for trust, loyalty, and 

social exchange (outside the traditional employment relationship) can result in more successful 

influence (Brower, Schoorman, & Tan, 2000) and an increased likelihood of discretionary 

behavior (Settoon, Bennett, & Liden, 1996). 

 Bond testing offers an alternative view of the impact of the leader-follower relationship 

on behavior. 1 According to the bond testing hypothesis, the leader may engage in idiosyncratic 

or high-risk behavior (e.g., disclosure of personal information, showing vulnerability) as a way 

of testing the limits of follower tolerance and loyalty (Whitham & Maestripieri, 2003; Zahavi & 

Zahavi, 1997). Lower ranking individuals may also bond-test by engaging risky behavior with 

higher ranking individuals as a way to test the support that they might expect from their 

leadership. 

 By engaging in risky behavior, the individual gains information about the strength of the 

relationship. If the risk pays off (e.g., the behavior is accepted and/or reciprocated), the 

relationship may be strengthened, and the initiator of the behavior may increase his or her status 

in the social hierarchy – especially when the test was conducted publicly. For example, 

disclosure, which can pose an exposure risk to the individual, is sometimes seen as a way of 

building or showing trust in others, which can lead to a stronger bond in the future. In addition, 

disclosure can encourage disclosure from others, thereby sharing risk and developing stronger 

bonds. However, if the risk does not pay off, the initiator of the behavior has gained information 

indicating the relationship is not strong enough to “pass the test” imposed by the risky behavior. 

For example, behavior outside the norm may be punished with a withdrawal of support or even 

ridicule. 

 Hollander’s notion of idiosyncrasy credit can be thought of as a specific case of bondtesting. Hollander (1958) postulated that individuals who are high in status have greater latitude 

for nonconformance to group norms. Idiosyncrasy credit is the term that describes the degree to 

which a leader is allowed to deviate from the norm. Credits can be built through an individual’s 

perceived task competence and other non-task characteristics (e.g., status to those external to the 

group). From the perspective of followers, leaders are expected to conform to established norms 

and expectations early on, but over time they are expected to be more innovative. Leaders who 

perceive this change in expectations and act accordingly will build more credits. According to 

Hollander, to leverage this credit, leaders must have high self-awareness to accurately perceive 

their current level of credit. It is possible that leaders with a greater amount of idiosyncrasy 

credits will be able to exert more influence over group members because followers may be more 

likely to perceive the request as legitimate. In the Army environment, building these credits will 

occur when the leader exemplifies Army values, builds subordinate trust through the 

 

1

 We would like to thank an anonymous reviewer for the insights in this section. 
 12

demonstration of personal integrity and courage, and demonstrates technical and tactical 

competence. 

 As the discussion of idiosyncrasy credit suggests, leaders may be permitted more latitude 

to engage in risky behavior as a function of their personal credit with followers. Thus, bondtesting may be a self-reinforcing phenomenon: leaders who engage in risky behaviors may build 

more trust with followers, allowing the leader more latitude in the future to take risks in 

relationships. Bond-testing, therefore, may be a useful strategy for influencers to gain 

information about the likelihood of a successful influence attempt with the target. 

The relative status of the influencer and target will also have an impact on the choice of 

influence strategy. When formulating an influence strategy, the influencer should consider the 

sources of personal power that are available to him or her and that are relevant given the 

relationship with the target. Early work in this area has led to the identification of six sources of 

power (French & Raven, 1959; Raven, 1965): 

♦ Reward – the influencer’s ability to bestow positive outcomes. 

♦ Coercive – the influencer’s ability to bestow negative outcomes.

♦ Legitimate – the target’s belief that the influencer has the authority over him or her and that 

the target is obliged to comply. 

♦ Referent – the extent to which the target identifies and desires to affiliate with the influencer. 

♦ Expert – the target’s belief that the influencer has the knowledge and expertise to make 

reasonable requests. 

♦ Informational – the target’s belief that the influencer has access to reliable and valid 

information. 

 These sources of power contribute to one’s ability to influence others (Bruins, 1999). In 

addition, research on sources of power specified potential outcomes of relying on each source. 

For example, while use of reward or coercive power to influence a target may result in 

completion of the influencer’s immediate goal, these power bases do not alter the target’s 

underlying beliefs or attitudes and are less likely to result in a successful long-term relationship 

between the influencer and the target. In contrast, the use of legitimate, referent, expert, or 

informational power bases is likely to support the development and maintenance of a relationship 

between the influencer and the target. These findings are consistent with the literature on 

transactional and transformational leadership (Avolio, 1999; Bass, 1985; Bass, 1998), which 

links transactional leadership behaviors to less successful long-term outcomes than 

transformational leadership behaviors. In turn, transactional leadership behaviors tend to rely on 

reward and coercive power bases while transformational leadership behaviors tend to rely on 

legitimate, referent, expert, and informational power bases. While this work provides an initial 

starting point for understanding the social influence process, it does not delineate specific tactics 

that influencers can use when interacting with targets. 

Interaction 

 Leader Behavior/Influence Tactics. Considering that the influence strategy is the 

influencer’s general plan or approach for influencing the target, then the influence tactics are the 

manifestations of this strategy during the course of the influencer-target interaction. That is, 

influence tactics are the concrete actions that the influencer takes to influence the target. For 
 13

example, in planning an influence attempt an influencer may rely on a transactional strategy 

(Bass, 1985) based on a history of exchange between the influencer and the target. To execute 

this strategy, the influencer may offer to provide some favor to the target as an incentive for 

complying with the influencer’s request. The success of this approach will likely depend in large 

part on the degree of trust that the target has in the influencer. If, based on the prior relationship, 

the target believes that the influencer is likely to follow through on granting the favor, the target 

is more likely to comply with the request (Brower, Schoorman, & Tan, 2000). In contrast, the 

influencer may rely on a transformational strategy (Bass & Avolio, 1993) that entails motivating 

the target to comply with the request. This strategy may be implemented through the use of an 

inspirational appeal tactic (e.g., explaining to the target that complying with the request would 

serve a higher purpose such as accomplishing the mission) or a consultation tactic (e.g., getting 

the “buy-in” of the target by soliciting his or her input on solving the problem). 

 Numerous researchers have attempted to identify and evaluate the effectiveness of 

common influence tactics (Cialdini, 1995; Falbe & Yukl, 1992; Horey, et al., 2005; Kipnis, 

Schmidt, & Wilkerson; 1980; Schresheim & Hinkin, 1990; Yang, Cerverom, Valnetine, & 

Benson, 1998; Yukl, Chavez, & Seifert, n.d.; Yukl & Falbe, 1991; Yukl & Tracey, 1992). From 

this body of research it is possible to identify seventeen unique influence tactics2

: 

♦ Rational persuasion – Using logical arguments and factual evidence to persuade the target 

that a goal is important. 

♦ Inspirational appeals – Appealing to a target’s values, ideals, or aspirations to increase the 

target’s enthusiasm or confidence. 

♦ Consultation – Soliciting input from the target for achieving the goal. 

♦ Ingratiation – Increasing the target’s positive feeling for the influencer. 

♦ Exchange – Indicating a willingness to reciprocate for assistance in meeting the goal (note: 

this can also be done in reverse – the influencer has already done a favor for the target and now 

is “calling in the favor.” 

♦ Personal appeals – Appealing to the target’s sense of loyalty to or friendship. 

♦ Coalition – Using the support of others in an attempt to influence. 

♦ Collaboration – Offering to supply assistance or resources to help the target complete the 

goal. 

♦ Apprising – Explaining the benefits of the influencer’s request to the target as an individual. 

♦ Appeal to higher authority – Indicating support for the goal from those higher in the 

organization than the influencer. 

♦ Consistency – Gaining commitment to a small request first, and then leveraging that 

commitment to ask for commitment to larger requests. 

♦ Scarcity – Indicating that the goal is rare so as to increase its perceived value. 

♦ Social validation – Indicating that others have agreed with request. 

♦ Expertise – Providing evidence of expertise to legitimate the request.

♦ Legitimating – Claiming or verifying one’s authority to influence the target. 

♦ Pressure – Using demands or threats to coerce the target into completing the goal. 

♦ Blocking – Preventing the target from accomplishing another goal. 

 

2

 There are many additional negative influence tactics, such as bullying, lying, and using logical fallacies. We did 

not include these tactics in this list or the associated training recommendations because of their inherent negative 

effects on long-term trust between the influencer and the target. 
 14

 Traditionally, researchers studying the effectiveness of influence tactics measured only 

the dichotomous criterion of whether the influence attempt was successful. However, additional 

information about the effectiveness of influence tactics can be gained by treating the criterion as 

multidimensional. For example, Falbe and Yukl (1992) evaluated nine influence tactics against 

three criteria specified by Yukl (1989): 

♦ Commitment – “Occurs when a target person agrees internally with an action or decision, is 

enthusiastic about it, and is likely to exercise initiative and demonstrate unusual effort and 

persistence in order to carry out the request successfully” (p. 639, Falbe & Yukl, 1992). 

♦ Compliance – “Occurs when the target person carries out the requested action but is 

apathetic about it rather than enthusiastic, makes only a minimal or average effort, and does not 

show any initiative” (p. 639-640, Falbe & Yukl, 1992). 

♦ Resistance – “Occurs when the target person is opposed to the requested action and tries to 

avoid doing it by refusing, arguing, delaying, or seeking to have the request nullified” (p. 640, 

Falbe & Yukl, 1992). 

 These criteria are organized in a hierarchy of desirability and difficulty —commitment is 

generally more preferable than compliance but more difficult to achieve. In turn, compliance is 

more desirable and difficult to achieve than resistance. However, when a single interaction 

between an influencer and a target is being studied, it is possible that compliance or even 

resistance will still lead to goal attainment, depending on the specific influence tactic the 

influencer uses. For example, a goal might still be achieved even if the target initially resists 

(e.g., when the influencer relies on pressure, legitimating, or blocking to influence the target). 

However, the long-term consequences of such an interaction might reduce the likelihood that the 

influencer could successfully influence the target—or other targets—in the future. 

Higgins, Judge, and Ferris (2003) conducted a meta-analysis to examine the relationship 

between influence tactics and their associated outcomes. Their results show that both 

ingratiation and rational persuasion have positive effects on work outcomes, such as supervisory 

ratings of leader effectiveness. In contrast, Falbe and Yukl (1992) found inspirational appeals, 

consultation, personal appeals, and exchange to be the most effective tactics. These varied 

results highlight the fact that the effectiveness of an influence tactic is situationally dependent. 

That is, while the results of either study indicate that some influence tactics have specific, 

predictable consequences, the best approach is to tailor the use of tactics as appropriate to the 

situation. 

Target’s Interpretation and Reaction. As the influencer is attempting to persuade the 

target, the target perceives, analyzes, and evaluates the influencer’s message. These cognitive 

processes are similar to the processes that the influencer uses to evaluate the target’s reaction and 

are discussed in the section below. In this section, we will describe strategies for understanding 

the target’s reaction to the influence attempt.

The target’s reaction can manifest itself through a variety of biological signals and 

nonverbal behavior, such as facial expressions, body language, and verbal expressions. In close 

conversation, the human face is the most visible social part of the human body, and research has 

shown that it is the primary signaling system for displaying emotions (Ekman & Friesen, 1975; 
 15

Fridlund, 1994). Individuals’ body language is also an important part of nonverbal behavior and 

is considered to be the mechanism individuals use to cope with the emotion (Anderson, 1999). 

Both facial expressions and body language are key signals that the influencer needs to be able to 

recognize and interpret correctly to have an accurate depiction of how the target is reacting3

. 

There are two major lines of research regarding how facial expressions are generated: the 

neocultural theory of emotions and the behavioral ecology perspective. According to the 

neocultural theory, there is a direct link between facial expressions and emotions (Ekman, 1972). 

That is, spontaneous facial expressions are automatically triggered by emotional stimuli (Ekman, 

1972; Ekman, 2003; Ekman & Friesen 1975; Ekman & Keltner, 1997). Ekman and his 

colleagues have identified six fundamental emotions (surprise, fear, anger, disgust, sadness, and 

happiness) that have a prototypical expression that can be identified and interpreted by others 

(Ekman, 2003; Ekman & Friesen, 1975; Ekman & Keltner, 1997). Any expression that deviates 

from the prototype is considered to be a blend of two or more of the prototypes. These six basic 

emotional expressions have been shown to be culturally universal in their performance and their 

perception (Ekman & Keltner, 1997); however, these facial expressions can be modified by 

socialization. During the process of socialization, individuals learn to deceive or mask their own 

emotions, and during social interaction, spontaneous emotional displays can be modified to meet 

the demands of the culture (Ekman, 1985). 

Behavioral ecology offers a contrasting view to Ekman’s (1972) neocultural theory. 

According to the behavioral ecology perspective, facial expressions are indicative of behavioral 

intentions rather than emotions, and the interpretation of expressions relies on the social context 

(Fridlund, 1994). From this perspective, there is a less precise relationship between facial 

expressions and their meaning; rather, particular behavioral intentions are broadly associated 

with facial expressions and the social context helps define the meaning of the expression. In 

support of this view, researchers have found facial behavior to vary according to factors such as 

age (Chapell, 1997), gender (Briton & Hall, 1995; Chapell, 1997), cultural background (Ekman, 

1973), and the context of the situation (Fridlund, 1994). 

In an empirical comparison of these competing theories, Horstmann (2003) found 

stronger support for the argument that facial expressions communicate emotions, but some 

support for the behavioral ecology view (particularly for the facial expression of anger). 

Moreover, there is evidence that facial expressions can be either spontaneous or contrived, 

depending on the strength of the emotional stimuli and the social context (e.g., Zaalberg, 

Manstead, & Fischer, 2004). Whether facial expressions are spontaneous reflections of inner 

emotions or more deliberate signals that people use to achieve social goals, it is clear that facial 

expressions are one of the most significant and visible indicators of the target’s reaction to the 

interaction with the influencer. Thus, facial expressions and their meanings can provide critical 

information to help interpret targets’ reactions. 

In addition to facial expressions, body language and other nonverbal communication play 

an important role in reading the target’s reaction (Fiske & Taylor, 1991). Anderson (1999), in 

 

3

 It is not known whether the ability to detect emotional (and other) facial signals is diminished significantly among 

military personnel in dim light and/or when wearing camouflage face paint. Further research may be warranted on 

the extent to which influencers compensate for "signal degradation" in these circumstances. 
 16

noting the importance of nonverbal communication, described two studies estimating that no 

more than 35 percent of the meaning in conversation comes from verbal communication. Thus, 

having the ability to identify common nonverbal signals is useful in the influencer-target 

interaction. Argyle (1972) provided an inventory of ten different categories of nonverbal 

communication. These include bodily contact, proximity, orientation, appearance, posture, headnods, facial expression, gestures, looking, and nonverbal aspects of speech. 

Some of the categories that have particular application for an influence interaction are 

posture, head-nods, gestures, looking, and nonverbal aspects of speech. Posture is described as 

the way in which people stand, sit, or lie. Postures can be used to convey interpersonal attitudes 

such as friendly, hostile, superior, and inferior as well as the status of the individual. Postures 

also vary depending on emotional states. Head-nods are fast moving nonverbal signals that have 

important connections to speech. Usually these would be reinforcing signals by the target to the 

influencer. Gestures, which can indicate general emotional arousal or expression of a particular 

emotional state, refer mainly to hand movements but can also include the head and feet. 

Looking, or the periods that people intermittently view each other, plays an important role in 

communicating, and it shows a sign of interest. Nonverbal aspects of speech include the 

variations in pitch, stress, and timing called prosodic signals. These non-verbal signals affect the 

meaning of sentences and represent the true intentions behind verbal statements. 

These signals can vary widely by culture, however, and the culture of the target should be 

carefully considered when attempting to interpret nonverbal cues. For example, Asian cultures 

are more indirect than American cultures, and it is considered rude to openly disagree with 

another person, especially a higher-status individual. Therefore, smiling and head nodding may 

not indicate agreement. In another example, requirements for personal space vary widely by 

culture. While standing too close to someone may be perceived as threatening in the U.S., in 

Middle Eastern cultures it is quite acceptable to stand close to others during conversation. Also, 

in the U.S. culture eye contact during conversation is generally viewed as a sign of interest; 

however, avoiding eye contact is viewed as a sign of respect in some Asian and Latin American 

cultures. 

In a study on the degree to which verbal and nonverbal cues can be observed by others, 

Bartel and Saavedra (2000) developed a taxonomy of verbal expressions, facial expressions, and 

body postures that were indicative of self-reported moods. During several observations of work 

group members, observers were able to use this taxonomy to accurately identify participants’ 

moods. According to the researchers, facial expressions were easiest to detect by observers. In 

addition, they noted that moods could converge in groups due to emotional contagion and 

emotional comparison. In a subsequent study on leadership and emotional contagion, Sy, Cote, 

and Saavedra (2005) demonstrated that leaders have a significant influence on the group’s mood; 

leaders transferred their negative or positive moods to group members. 

In sum, the target’s reactions to the influence attempt may include facial expressions, 

verbal expressions, body language, and other forms of nonverbal communication. Appendix A 

provides a list of the most salient signals and their associated moods and emotions. These 

biological signals are the most visible and accessible cues with which the influencer may infer 

the target’s reaction to an influence attempt. Understanding the target’s emotional state is 
 17

important for understanding whether the influence attempt is likely to succeed. Moreover, the 

influencer must interpret these emotions in light of the relationship that he or she has with the 

target. The process that the influencer uses to perceive, analyze, and evaluate this information is 

discussed below. 

In-the-Moment Social Awareness Process 

After the influence attempt produces a reaction from the target, the influencer must try to 

interpret and evaluate the target’s reaction. Based on this evaluation, the influencer may change 

his or her behavior in-the-moment (that is, immediately during the interaction) as needed to 

achieve the desired influence goal. This process may be more or less automatic, depending on 

the influencer’s skills and experience. That is, influencers with more experience or certain skill 

sets will perceive and respond to situations rapidly because they have practiced these skills to the 

point where they occur without conscious thought (Bargh, 1990). 

The process of in-the-moment social awareness consists of three steps. First, the 

influencer perceives social information from the target. Second, the influencer analyzes the 

social information. Finally, the influencer evaluates the effectiveness of the influence tactic by 

determining if the target’s reaction matches his or her initial goal for the influence attempt. 

Perception of Social Information. In the first stage of the in-the-moment social 

awareness process, the influencer perceives the target’s reaction to the influence attempt. 

Research shows that the goals of the influencer (in this case, influencing the target) affect his or 

her ability to accurately perceive social information in the environment (Moskowitz, 2005). 

Specifically, while the influencer is trying to achieve the influence goal, he or she will engage in 

compensatory cognition (Moskowitz, 2001), during which cognitive activity is directed toward 

aspects of the environment that are specifically related to achieving the influence goal 

(Moskowitz, 2002). Thus, in the social awareness process, the influencer would be more likely 

to seek out and perceive goal-relevant stimuli, such as verbal and nonverbal cues from the target. 

The specific cognitive process underlying the perception of social information may be 

similar to Wyer and Scrull’s (1989) information processing system. According to their model, 

different components of social information are processed independently. Sensory input, such as 

visual observations of the target’s facial expressions, enters the information processing system 

and is stored temporarily in a Sensory Store. Independently, a Comprehender unit encodes and 

classifies social information, for example categorization of the target’s facial expression as a 

smile or frown. This initial perception and encoding process occurs automatically, most likely as 

a function of one’s prior experiences (Wyer & Scrull, 1989). Therefore, to help influencers 

accurately perceive social information, it may be fruitful to focus training efforts on providing 

numerous opportunities to interact with a variety of others. 

Analyzing Social Information. After social information is perceived, the influencer must 

analyze and integrate it with his or her existing knowledge to interpret the target’s reaction. 

Although perceiving social information must occur prior to analyzing social information, these 

steps occur rapidly and in an iterative fashion, as represented in the model. That is, 

environmental information is perceived and then analyzed, and this analysis influences 
 18

subsequent scanning and perception of information from the environment. An accurate 

interpretation is needed to evaluate the reaction and decide what future actions would be most 

appropriate. Indeed, the relationship between perceiving social information and generating 

behaviors is mediated by the individual’s strategy for selecting and processing relevant 

information in the environment (Mischel & Shoda, 1995).

This processing of social information is best described as parallel processing in a 

connectionist cognitive architecture. Cognitive architectures are theoretical structures that 

explain the mechanisms for information processing, such as encoding, interpretation, and 

storage, and how these operations can produce behavior (Newell, Rosenbloom, & Laird, 1989). 

During a social interaction, parallel processing can assist the influencer in efficiently 

analyzing and processing multiple types of social information in the environment. The 

influencer must simultaneously process incoming social information (e.g., verbal behavior, 

nonverbal behavior, affective cues, and body language) and integrate this information with 

internal goals, values, and previous experiences. In this way, parallel processing can capture the 

“in-the-moment” nature of social awareness. 

In the context of social cognition, schemas are the building blocks of cognitive 

architecture. Schemas serve as internal models of the environment, and they can serve as a basis 

for managing environmental information (Moskowitz, 2005). For example, an influencer’s 

previous knowledge and experiences are organized into specific schemas that simplify the 

perception, storage, and evaluation of social information. These internal schemas can be 

activated in two key ways: (a) when the influencer is exposed to environmental stimuli that 

share the same features as an existing schema, and (b) when schemas share features that are 

related to goals that the influencer is actively pursuing (Lord & Maher, 1991). 

Many different patterns of environmental information can activate the same schema as 

long as they are relatively well matched during a “settling in” process (Lord & Maher, 1991; p. 

40); the greater the fit between the incoming social information and the existing schema, the 

greater the activation of their common features. The schema with the highest level of activation 

– that is, the schema that shares the most features with that particular social environment – will 

be selected to best interpret the input information and guide subsequent cognitions and behavior. 

Schemas can also be modified to help assimilate new information. In this sense, schemas are 

cognitive strategies that allow for relatively automatic information processing that is highly 

descriptive of—and reactive to—the environment. Thus, “in-the-moment” processing of social 

information is greatly facilitated by schemas (acquired through experience), which help to ensure 

processing is done quickly and efficiently. 

Evaluation. Once information from the environment is processed and integrated with the 

influencer’s own knowledge and schemas, the influencer must evaluate if the initial influence 

attempt was successful in producing the desired outcome. In other words, the influencer must 

determine if the initial influence goal has been met. The influencer makes this determination by 

comparing the target’s reaction with the behavior defined by the initial influence goal. If the 

goal had been met, then the interaction would conclude or move on to other topics. However, 
 19

because the influence goal was not met, the influencer in this scenario may need to try another 

approach to achieve the influence goal. 

The evaluation process is similar to the concept of self-regulation, which has been 

defined as “the processes involved in attaining and maintaining goals, where goals are internally 

represented desired states” (Vancouver, 2000; Vancouver & Day, 2005, p. 158). There are four 

basic processes involved in self-regulation: establishing goals, planning (selecting a strategy), 

goal striving (engaging in goal-relevant behaviors, in this case using a variety of tactics to 

attempt to influence the target), and goal revision (modifying the course of action based on 

feedback) (Austin & Vancouver, 1996). Thus, self-regulation processes involve monitoring the 

environment for feedback and making the appropriate adjustments to better meet the influence 

goal. Similarly, in the context of our model, the evaluation stage involves making a selfregulatory judgment as to whether or not the initial influence goal has been achieved, and if 

needed, making the appropriate behavioral adjustments. 

More specifically, the evaluation step (and the subsequent step of revising actions to be 

discussed below) in our model is consistent with the steps involved in a negative feedback loop 

model of self-regulation (Carver & Scheier, 1981). In Carver and Scheier’s model, Goals serve 

as a reference for how the system is working. An Input function perceives incoming 

information, and the Comparator evaluates this information with regard to the reference goal in 

order to determine discrepancies. If necessary, the Output function involves the behavioral or 

cognitive processes that seek to reduce the discrepancy. In a cyclical fashion, the new behaviors 

or cognitions that emerge have an impact on the environment, thus changing the subsequent 

input function as well; this constitutes the feedback loop of the model. Thus, the Comparator

component is equivalent to the evaluation step in our model. If the influencer determines that 

discrepancies remain because the influence goals has not been achieved, then the influencer will 

revise his or her actions consistent with the Output function of Carver and Scheier’s model. 

Influencer’s Revised Actions. Metacognitive processes in-the-moment of the interaction 

provide one explanation for how the influencer may revise his or her approach (i.e., select a 

different schema) when the initial approach fails to meet the influence goal. Metacognition is an 

active, conscious process for analyzing information via “higher-level cognitive systems that 

regulate moment-to-moment cognitions” (e.g., schemas; Lord & Emrich, 2000; p. 554). For 

example, influencers may provide more direction to subordinates if there are group problems or 

if group members display low levels of motivation (Wofford, Joplin, & Comforth, 1996). 

Consistent with the parallel processing involved in the perception and analysis of social 

information, connectionist architectures also capture the cognitive processes involved in 

metacognition. Lord, Brown, and Harvey (2001) state that individuals can rapidly adjust 

schemas because parallel processing enables a rapid integration of environmental information 

with the one’s internal network of schemas. Thus, when confronted with new environmental 

demands, connectionist architectures account for the flexibility in schematic networks to allow 

for quick modifications in schema activation to take these new features into account. 

Consequently, the influencer is able to select a new schema and revise his or her tactics. 

It should be noted that one criticism of leader adaptability is the concern that a leader 

who over-adapts will come across at best as “wishy-washy” and at worst unethical. For 
 20

example, a leader who constantly changes his or her approach with others may lack credibility 

because others could perceive that this individual can be easily influenced. Therefore, we would 

urge caution in the application of the social awareness and influence model with regard to limits 

that that influencers should place on their willingness to adjust their behavior. When we assert 

that adjusting one’s behavior helps one to be more effective in interpersonal interactions, we are 

primarily advocating that the influencer change his or her interpersonal approach or technique to 

be maximally effective (e.g., respecting cultural differences, asking questions to understand the 

target’s potential concerns and effectively mitigating them, demonstrating understanding of the 

target’s perspective). However, we are not suggesting that the influencer cross legal, ethical, or 

moral boundaries in an attempt to be more accommodating to the target. Moreover, in a 

leadership position, influencers should not compromise their values or core leadership principles 

for the sake of persuading others. Rather, when differences in values and principles exist, the 

effective influencer will look for opportunities to work around these obstacles in order to 

persuade the target to change his or her point of view on a specific issue. 

Feedback Loop. After the influencer performs the revised influence attempt, the target 

will once again observe and interpret the influencer’s behavior, resulting in a verbal and/or 

nonverbal reaction. In turn, the influencer will repeat the process of perception, analysis, and 

evaluation to determine if the influence goal has been met. If the influencer’s revised behavior 

was effective, the influence attempt will conclude. If the influencer’s revised behavior still did 

not result in a successful outcome, then the influencer will need to revise his or her tactic once 

again. Similar to Carver and Scheier’s (1981) feedback loop model of self-regulation, the cycle 

will continue until the influencer’s goal has been met (e.g., the target has been influenced to 

perform. 

Short- and Long-Term Outcomes. As described previously, the outcome of an influence 

attempt can be categorized broadly as commitment, compliance, or resistance. Although these 

outcomes are generally thought to be hierarchical in terms of their desirable, with commitment 

being the most desirable and resistance being the least desirable, the effectiveness of the outcome 

depends on the initial influence goal. In some cases, simple compliance may be the desired end 

state. In other cases, the influencer may not be asking for compliance, but commitment. For 

example, the influencer may be seeking support from the target for a decision that the influencer 

has made. In this instance, the influencer may not be asking for the target to comply with a 

specific request. Rather, the influencer is attempting to convince the target to adopt the 

influencer’s point of view. A third alternative is for the influencer to seek commitment and 

compliance from the target (e.g., both carry out a decision made by the influencer and to 

wholeheartedly support the decision). Commitment is desirable in addition to compliance 

because a committed target is more likely to fully embrace and follow through on the 

influencer’s request. Additionally, negative feelings between the influencer and the target that 

arise during the course of the influence interaction can have negative consequences for their 

long-term relationship as well as the long-term relationship that the target might have with others 

who are similar to the influencer (e.g., host nation personnel who have bad experiences with 

American Soldiers may carry these negative feelings over to interactions with other Americans). 
 21

Factors Affecting Influence and Social Awareness 

Earlier it was noted that one’s ability to accurately read social interactions and effectively 

influence others is affected by many factors. Some of these factors, such as the current context 

of the interaction, external environmental conditions, and the moods of the parties involved may 

have an impact on a single, immediate interaction, but may not have a long-term impact. Other 

factors, such as characteristics of the influencer and the target (e.g., intelligence, self-monitoring 

skill, personality, intelligence) and the past relationship between the influencer and the 

target, are likely to have a more consistent effect on the influencer’s success across a number of 

interactions. 

An understanding of these moderating factors has important implications for designing 

training interventions to help individuals improve their social awareness and influence skills. 

Understanding how these factors impact the social awareness and influence process will better 

inform how the training programs can be developed to diagnose and enhance performance at 

various points in the process. In addition, these factors vary in the extent to which they are 

appropriate for a selection context (i.e., inherent individual differences) versus a training context 

(i.e., more malleable attributes). Below we discuss each of the primary factors hypothesized to 

impact social awareness, their degree of influence on the social awareness process, and 

implications for training. 

Cognitive Abilities 

Individual differences in the ability to accurately perceive, analyze, and evaluate social 

information may be related to differences in general intelligence. For example, working memory 

capacity impacts one’s ability to control attention to maintain or suppress information (Kane, 

Bleckley, Conway, & Engle, 2001). Individuals with a high working memory capacity are better 

able to maintain situational awareness and create a comprehensive picture of the social landscape 

by attending to multiple factors simultaneously. Individuals with a lower working memory 

capacity by definition cannot attend to as many factors in the environment and may have 

difficulty with self-regulation (Engle, 2002). These individuals are less equipped to incorporate 

new information into existing schemas and mental models, and as a result, develop less 

integrated and less complex mental models (Barrett, Tugade, & Engle, 2004). In the context of 

social awareness, this would imply that leaders with high working memory capacity could be 

more socially aware because they have an enhanced ability to perceive and process verbal and 

nonverbal cues in the environment by focusing their attention and avoiding distractions.

Another individual difference in the ability to accurately perceive and process social 

information is one’s capacity for cognitive complexity. Cognitive complexity is the degree to 

which cognitive space is differentiated and integrated (Streufert & Streufert, 1978). That is, 

individuals with greater levels of cognitive complexity differentiate a greater number of 

dimensions or categories in perceiving the environment (Goldstein & Blackman, 1978), and they 

are better able to integrate multiple dimensions to produce an outcome (Streufert & Swezey, 

1986). Thus, individuals with greater levels of cognitive complexity process information 

differently. They use more categories and see more commonalities among different dimensions, 

which results in better interpersonal perception, communication, and adaptation (Streufert & 
 22

Nogami, 1989). For example, individuals with high levels of cognitive complexity are better 

able to recognize when a message recipient does not understand the message, indicating greater 

sensitivity to nonverbal feedback (Rubin & Henzel, 1984). Moreover, higher levels of cognitive 

complexity correlate with one’s ability to decode nonverbal cues (Woods, 1996) and take the 

perspective of another (e.g., Kline, Pelias, & Delia., 1991; Sypher & Zorn, 1986). 

While it is commonly accepted that general intelligence is not amenable to change in 

adulthood, recent research suggests that one’s working memory capacity could be expanded with 

practice (Klingberg, Fernell, Olesen, Johnson, Gustafsson, Dahlstrom, et al., 2005; Verhaeghen, 

Cerella, & Basak, 2004). In addition, there is some evidence that cognitive complexity can be 

enhanced through training (Montuori, 1994). Our recommendations for training social 

awareness and influence skills, therefore, would be to expose the students to a wide variety of 

examples and ideas to help them make new connections to their existing knowledge structures. 

Personality 

Core personality factors are believed to be relatively stable in adulthood (Costa & 

McCrae, 1988). As such, personality factors are poor candidates for training interventions. 

However, increased self knowledge of one’s personality traits may be important in helping 

training participants to become more self-aware and identify their strengths and weaknesses 

related to social awareness and influence skills. Personality traits relevant to social awareness 

and influence may include: 

♦ High nurturance/need for intimacy: Sheldon and Johnson (1993) and Sheldon 

(1996) found that with regard to social awareness, people high in nurturance or need for intimacy 

tend to take the perspective of the others more often. 

♦ Openness to experience: Individuals who are high on openness are more likely to 

be receptive to social cues and be open to the possibility that a change in their own behavior 

might be necessary to achieve a better result in a social setting (e.g., Pulakos, Schmitt, Dorsey, 

Arad, Hedge, & Borman, 2002). 

♦ Extraversion: Extraversion has been shown to predict performance in sales and 

management jobs (Barrick & Mount, 1991), and it has been shown to predict performance that 

involves negotiation or persuasion (Hogan & Holland, 2003). 

♦ Emotional stability: Individuals who are more stable may be less likely to persist 

in an influence attempt and overcome resistance without becoming overly emotional (Schneider, 

2001). 

Previous Experience 

Prior experiences likely influence the social awareness process in two ways. First, the 

influencer’s past interactions with the target will likely have a substantial impact on the degree to 

which he or she can successfully influence the target. Previously, we discussed several 

leadership theories that describe the influence of the leader-follower relationship on behavior. 

Thus, the nature of this relationship is likely to have a substantial impact on the social awareness 

process. That is, influencers who have built up a sufficient level of trust or “idiosyncrasy credit” 

may be able to “cash in” these credits to successfully influence the target. Additionally, two 
 23

parties who know each other very well are more likely to be able to read each other’s verbal 

cues, facial expressions, and body language to more accurately interpret each other’s emotions. 

Second, the amount of general experience that the influencer has in attempting to 

influence others is also likely to affect his or her success in future influence attempts. For 

example, in a naturalistic decision making context, people respond to novel environments by 

matching the current situation to situations they have experienced in the past. The more 

situations that one has stored in memory, the greater the reserves to draw from when establishing 

a match or combining elements of past situations to match the current one (Klein, 1997). In turn, 

this increases the likelihood of determining an appropriate response, even under time pressure 

and stress. An experienced individual will have a catalog of influence experiences from which to 

draw when choosing an appropriate strategy to influence someone. In addition, the individual 

may draw on experiences in interacting with people from a variety of diverse backgrounds to 

better interpret the target’s reaction during the exchange. The greater the number of successful 

experiences that the individual has had, the greater the likelihood that he or she will be 

successful in future attempts. Therefore, training interventions should incorporate a broad 

variety of examples and opportunities to practice so that the training participant may begin to 

build a repertoire of experiences from which to draw in the future. 

Knowledge and Skills 

Communication/Persuasion Skills. Basic communication skills include negotiation, 

conflict resolution, persuasion, and collaboration skills. The leader’s persuasion skills in 

particular can have a significant impact on the success of the influence attempt (Falbe & Yukl, 

1992; Ferris, Perrewé, Anthony, & Gilmore, 2000). One important aspect of communication 

skills with respect to social awareness is being able to communicate in a variety of ways (e.g., 

casual vs. formal, democratic vs. autocratic, verbal vs. nonverbal, oral vs. written) to be effective 

with a number of different audiences. This includes paying attention to others’ verbal and 

nonverbal messages so as to determine the best way to relate to them (Stevens & Campion, 

1994). Skilled communicators actively listen to and observe others to determine their views and 

how they are reacting to the interaction. In a cross-cultural context, communicators must be 

mindful of the use of jargon, delivery speed in relation to the language fluency of the listener, 

and differences in the cultural meaning or verbal and nonverbal behavior (Berger, 1998). 

 

Self-monitoring. Self-monitoring is skill in reading social situations, knowing what is 

appropriate for a given situation, and demonstrating the appropriate behavior to fit the situation. 

High self-monitors are more sensitive to situations and interpersonal cues, are more socially 

skilled (Ickes & Barnes, 1977), can communicate a wider range of emotional states, and can 

more accurately interpret the meaning of nonverbal behavior (Snyder, 1974). Low self-monitors 

tend to be themselves, regardless of the social situation they are in, and tend not to bend to the 

norms of the social setting (Fiske & Taylor, 1984; Lennox & Wolfe, 1984; Snyder, 1979; Snyder 

& Cantor, 1980). High self-monitors tend to act according to the demands made upon them in 

their role as leader, are better able to adapt to situational requirements, and are more successful 

boundary-spanners (Snyder & Cantor, 1980). Zaccaro and his colleagues (e.g., Zaccaro, Foti, & 

Kenny, 1991; Gilbert & Zaccaro, 1995) have found evidence that high self-monitors are more 

sensitive to the changing environment (social perceptiveness) and are also better able to alter 
 24

their responses in addressing these changes (behavioral flexibility). Although self-monitoring 

has been considered a personality variable by some researchers (e.g., Gangestad & Snyder, 

2000), more recent evidence suggests that self-monitoring is better classified as a skill 

(Schleicher & Day, 2002) and that it moderates the relationship between personality and 

performance (Barrick, Parks, & Mount, 2005). As such, it may be possible to improve one’s 

skill in self-monitoring through training. 

Self-awareness. Self-awareness is the fundamental understanding that one has of his or 

her own strengths and weaknesses and how these manifest themselves to others (Van Velsor, 

McCauley, & Moxley, 1998). As such, self-awareness is related to social awareness. That is, to 

effectively alter one’s behavior in response to feedback from others, one must first understand 

the target’s impression regarding the initial behavior. Although increasing self-awareness has 

been a major area of emphasis in Army leadership development efforts (Department of the 

Army, 2001), it is not clear if a deep level of self-awareness is necessary for one to be successful 

at influencing others. Moreover, too much self-awareness may be detrimental, as numerous 

studies have linked a moderate degree of self-deception with a healthy ego (Helmes & Holden, 

1986; Paulhus, 1991; Zerbe & Paulhus, 1987). Despite these concerns, it is expected that greater 

self-awareness in relation to one’s ability to influence others may be helpful. Therefore, training 

interventions will likely need to incorporate some type of baseline self-assessment and feedback 

so that leaders may better understand what they must do to improve. 

Metacognition. Closely related to the concept of self-awareness is metacognition, or 

“thinking about thinking.” Metacognition refers to an awareness and regulation of one’s own 

thought processes (Lord & Emrich, 2000; Nelson & Narens, 1990). For example, during the inthe-moment social awareness process, a leader may ask, “Am I attending fully to the target’s 

reaction? Am I correctly interpreting the target’s intent or am I making erroneous attributions? 

What are my preconceived biases that might make me more likely to misattribute the target’s 

reaction?” Strengthening metacognitive skills through training may enable leaders to be more 

situationally aware and therefore respond more appropriately to their environment (Endsley & 

Robertson, 2000). 

Knowledge. A leader’s knowledge in a variety of domains is likely to affect the social 

awareness process. For example, knowledge of the target, his or her needs and motives, culture, 

personality, background, etc. can help the influencer in preparing an influence strategy, using the 

appropriate influence tactics, and accurately reading the target’s reaction. Even in the absence of 

specific knowledge about the target, more general knowledge about influence and 

communication techniques may be helpful. For example, a general knowledge of nonverbal cues 

such as facial expressions and how to read them can help an influencer more accurately perceive 

and interpret the target’s reaction (Archer, Costanzo, & Akert, 2001; Hall, 2001; Nowicki & 

Duke, 2001). Also, a general knowledge of cultural norms for communication can greatly aid 

the social awareness process, particularly when the cultures of the influencer and target are 

substantially different. Depending on the context, knowledge may have a high or low degree of 

impact on the social awareness process. However, it is highly amenable to training and thus 

appropriate as a target for interventions. 
 25

Social and Emotional Intelligence. Social intelligence has been defined as “the ability to 

understand the feelings, thoughts, and behaviors of persons, including oneself, in interpersonal 

situations and to act appropriately upon that understanding” (Marlowe, 1986, p. 52). This 

concept was first introduced in 1920 and is similar to a host of other constructs, such as 

emotional intelligence (Goleman, 1995; Matthews, Zeidner, & Roberts, 2002) and social 

competence (Schneider, Ackerman, & Kanfer, 1996). However, despite the prevalence of these 

concepts in popular literature, there has been a great deal of controversy over their meaning and 

utility (Landy, 2005; Locke, 2005), in part because of disagreement about whether 

social/emotional intelligence is trait-based or a set of abilities and skills. If social/emotional 

intelligence is indeed a trait, it may make a poor candidate for training. If, however, it is a set of 

abilities and skills (as is more likely the case), it may indeed be appropriate to address in a 

training context. 

Political Skill. Ferris, et al., (2000) define political skill as “an interpersonal style that 

combines social astuteness with the ability to relate well, and otherwise demonstrate situationally 

appropriate behavior in a disarmingly charming and engaging manner that inspires confidence, 

trust, sincerity, and genuineness” (p. 30). According to these researchers, the difference between 

political skill and other related constructs is that political skill involves actively attempting to 

control the work environment through social skills and influencing others. Thus, people high in 

political skill are able to influence others without appearing insincere or manipulative. This 

construct is not a single trait or skill, but a composite of several skills. Reputation, emotional 

control, and social capital all may contribute to political skill. Political skill is directly related to 

one’s ability to effectively influence others, and as such may be an appropriate target for a 

training intervention (Ahearn, Ferris, Hochwarter, Douglas & Ammeter, 2004). 

Situational Characteristics 

No discussion of moderating factors would be complete without a discussion of the role 

of situational characteristics. Situational characteristics can be thought of as a filter through 

which all the other factors flow during the social awareness process. For example, the nature of 

the task or mission may make the success of the influence attempt more or less likely. With an 

easy task, the target may more readily agree to comply with the influencer’s request. Likewise, 

if the task is clearly of critical importance, the target may also readily agree to comply, especially 

if he or she perceives that complying fits with his or her personal needs and goals. In contrast, 

an obviously difficult task may make it easier for the influencer to detect and correctly interpret 

any resistance from the target, though it may make the influence attempt itself more difficult. 

In addition to the nature of the task, the characteristics of the target have an impact on the 

social awareness and influence process (Mowday, 1978). All of the factors discussed earlier as 

applied to the influencer could apply equally to the target. For example, the target’s general 

level of agreeableness may make him or her more or less likely to acquiesce to the influencer’s 

request. In addition, the degree of affect or liking that the target has for the influencer may have 

an impact on his or her willingness to comply (Ferris & Judge, 1991). Beyond individual 

characteristics of the target, there are also the cultural and political environments (Gelfand & 

Christakopulu, 1999; Gelfand, Nishii, Holcombe, Dyer, Ohbuchi, & Fukuno, 2001; Porter, Allen 

& Angle, 1981). 
 26

Even environmental factors such as climate, elevation, and terrain, can affect the social 

awareness process if they serve to distract or drain the energy of the influencer or the target. For 

example, Baumeister, Muraven, and Tice (2000) have proposed that a failure to self-regulate 

behavior is due to depletion of energy that serves to control impulses and habits—termed ego 

depletion. According to this research, the same resource is used for a variety of self-regulation 

operations, and this resource is limited. Therefore, too many distractions or environmental 

obstacles can drain the resources of the influencer, making it more difficult to successfully 

influence others. The automaticity that comes from experience and practice may mitigate this 

effect by allowing the influencer to use fewer resources to achieve the same result. 

While the influencer may have no direct control over any of the situational factors 

mentioned above, he or she may at least be aware of the impact that the situation has on the 

influence attempt and plan appropriately. For example, if the influencer is aware of the 

personality of the target, he or she may be able to select a more effective influence tactic. 

Likewise, if the influencer is aware of the target’s true needs and motives, he or she may be able 

to more successfully negotiate with the target. The degree to which these factors will influence 

the social awareness and influence process is discussed in more detail in the next section. 

Factor Impact and Trainability 

To date, there is no direct research evidence regarding how these factors affect the “inthe-moment” social awareness process. Therefore, the research authors all participated in an 

expert judgment task in which the authors rated each factor described above for the extent to 

which it was likely to (a) have an effect on social awareness and (b) be improved through 

training or experience. Figure 2 shows the results of these ratings. The vertical axis 

demonstrates the degree of impact. At the top are factors hypothesized to have a high impact on 

the social awareness process, and factors that have a lesser impact are toward the bottom. The 

horizontal axis demonstrates the degree of trainability. Factors on the left are generally thought 

to be immutable and thus poor candidates for training. Factors on the right are believed to be 

more malleable and thus better candidates for training. 
 27

Figure 2. Impact and Trainability Matrix 

Impact 

 (Higher) Experience as an 

influencer 

Experience with 

target 

Self-monitoring Social 

intelligence Political skills 

Communication/ 

Persuasion skill 

Working 

memory 

capacity 

Cognitive 

complexity 

Metacognition 

Self-awareness 

 Knowledge of 

non-verbal 

behavior and 

cultural norms

 Openness to 

disconfirming 

information

(Lower) 

Openness to 

experience 

General 

intelligence 

 (Higher) 

Trainability 

Emotional 

stability 

Conscientiousness 

 

Agreeableness 

 

Extraversion 

 

(Lower)

 

As shown in the figure, experience (both as an influencer in general and with the target 

specifically), knowledge of non-verbal behavior and cultural norms, communication/persuasion 

skills, political skills, social intelligence, metacognition, and self-awareness are the highest 

impact factors that are also most likely to be improved through training. In the next section we 

describe how the appropriate factors may be incorporated into a concrete training intervention. 

Implications for Training 
 28

 As described in the introduction, a key goal of this project is to develop a training 

program that will help Army leaders to increase their ability to be socially aware in interactions 

with others and to subsequently improve their skill in influencing others. Little research exists 

that evaluates the efficacy of training interventions to improve social awareness and influence 

skills. However, as shown in Figure 2, there are a number of factors hypothesized to relate to 

social awareness and influence which may be amenable to change. Our recommendation is that 

the training focus on specific skills in the context of realistic examples and scenarios to help 

Army leaders rapidly acquire relevant experience. In this section, we describe our general 

recommendations for topics to include in a social awareness and influence training program. In 

the next section, we describe how these recommendations were translated into a set of initial 

training concepts and delivered to a sample of Army leaders in a pilot training program. 

Outline for a Social Awareness and Influence Training Program 

 Our recommendations for the development of a social awareness and influence training 

program are aimed at helping leaders to enhance their skills to the point that they become more 

automatic. Automaticity of a skill develops once a learner has engaged in elaborative 

processing, which facilitates the application of skills to performance situations (May & 

Kahnweiler, 2000). Accordingly, the recommended training approach will include an integrative 

role-play (May & Kahnweiler, 2000), and, to the extent feasible, successive practice sessions to 

promote over-learning and mastery. Specifically, we would propose that the social awareness 

and influence training program consist of the following components: 

♦ Baseline Assessment. Self-awareness is thought to be a key component of leadership 

development (Department of the Army, 2001; Van Velsor, et al., 1998), and it is particularly 

important in developing social awareness. As Fernandez (1991) noted, “the most important 

technique to be successful [in interacting with diverse others] is to know and understand who 

you really are” (p. 242). However, new leaders typically receive very little feedback on their 

ability to effectively interpret interpersonal situations. Therefore, a baseline assessment is 

essential for leaders to understand where their strengths and weaknesses are in this area. This 

type of feedback is essential to the “unfreezing” process that makes one more ready to learn (Van 

Velsor et al., 1998). 

 The baseline assessment may be conducted through a variety of methods. For example, 

there are several commercial measures that assess one’s ability to read facial expressions (e.g., 

the Micro Expression Training Tools and Subtle Expression Training Tools programs, 

METT/SETT, developed by Dr. Paul Ekman) and social situations; for example, the 

Interpersonal Perception Task (Constanzo & Archer, 1989), and the Profile of Nonverbal 

Sensitivity (Rosenthal, Hall, Dimatteo, & Rogers, 1979). In addition, there are a variety of selfreport measures that may be used to evaluate social awareness and influence skills, such as the 

Social Competence Inventory, Version 2 (Schneider, 2001). Appendix B provides detailed 

descriptions of the pre-existing products that were reviewed for this project. 

Alternatively, a customized role-play assessment could be developed to more fully evaluate the 

participants’ ability to influence others. Videotaping the participants as they participate in the 
 29

role-play can also be a powerful tool for increasing self-awareness (Guthrie & Kelly-Radford, 

1998). For example, participants can be videotaped as they engage in an influence attempt. 

Later, they can review the video and get direct feedback on how they appear to others. 

Regardless of which method is chosen for the baseline assessment, a similar assessment could 

also be used as a post-test to assess the degree of learning that occurred in the intervention. 

♦ The Social Awareness Process. To better understand the influence context, we would 

recommend that participants receive a brief overview of the entire social awareness process. As 

part of this overview, participants would learn about the factors that influence this process, such 

as the relationship between the influencer and the target, characteristics of the situation, and the 

characteristics of the people in the interaction. Understanding how this process works and why 

it’s important for influence will serve as an advance organizer for the course as well as help the 

participants better understand the importance of the topic. Advance organizers help participants 

organize and make sense of information that is presented (Goldsmith & Kraiger, 1997; 

Goldstein, 1993; Howell & Cooke, 1989; Smith, Ford, & Kozlowski, 1997). That is, advance 

organizers can provide participants with an initial framework, which will help them to make 

connections between what they are learning and their existing knowledge base. 

♦ Reading Others. Skill in accurately reading others’ reactions is a key component of social 

awareness (Zacarro, 2001). As such, participants would be provided instruction on reading 

verbal cues, facial expressions, and other nonverbal cues (i.e., body language). There are a 

variety of products available in the public domain that may be useful for this purpose, such as the 

METT/SETT, the Interpersonal Perception Task (Constanzo & Archer, 1989), the Profile of 

Nonverbal Sensitivity (Rosenthal et al., 1979), and the Social Knowledge Test (Schneider & 

Johnson, 2005). Ideally, the chosen product would allow the participants the opportunity to 

observe a variety of relevant social interactions and then attempt to interpret the thoughts and 

feelings of the individuals in the interaction by reading their verbal and nonverbal cues. 

♦ Influence Tactics. The primary influence tactics, as described earlier in this report, would be 

reviewed along with the strengths and weaknesses of each. Participants would be encouraged to 

discuss their own experiences with these tactics, and they should be given the opportunity to 

practice them. As part of this discussion, consideration should be given to when these various 

tactics may or may not be appropriate to use. Additionally, participants could engage in several 

short role-play activities to practice these tactics. These role-plays would be developed 

specifically for this training program, and would be based on real-world Army examples. 

♦ Social Awareness and Influence Practice and Feedback. Using a behavioral modeling 

framework (Bandura, 1977), we recommend that participants have the opportunity to observe the 

entire social awareness and influence process, practice their own skills during this process, and 

obtain feedback on their performance. A number of studies have demonstrated the effectiveness 

of this technique in teaching skills and enhancing transfer back to the workplace (e.g., Beard, 

Salas, & Prince, 1995; Goldstein & Sorcher, 1974; Latham & Saari, 1979; Salas, & CannonBowers, 2001). Specifically, we recommend that participants view videotaped examples of 

influence interactions—both successful and unsuccessful. Ineffective behavior models should be 

used in addition to effective behavior models so that trainees can learn to discriminate between 

good and bad behaviors as well as generalize to other environments (Baldwin, 1992; Robertson, 
 30

1990). Pre-existing video interactions could be used (e.g., influence scenarios from the Social 

Knowledge Test, Schneider & Johnson, 2005), or customized videos could be developed for the 

course. Then, participants would discuss the interactions, specifically key aspects of the leaders 

attempted influence, the target’s reaction, the leader’s revised behavior, and the leader’s ultimate 

success or failure. By watching the models in the video and deriving key concepts through 

discussions, the participants would be engaging in discovery learning (Smith et al., 1997). 

Discovery learning, or guided discovery, is an inductive method of instruction by which 

participants develop and test hypotheses in order to infer and learn strategies for effective 

performance. As such, discovery learning is a technique that fits in well with the principles of 

adult learning theory (London & Bassman, 1989). Moreover, the active nature of discovery 

learning can lead to deeper knowledge structures and potentially improved metacognitive and 

self-regulatory skills (Kozlowski, 1998). 

 In addition to watching video models engage in influence interactions, participants should 

have the opportunity to actively practice and obtain feedback on their social awareness and 

influence skills (Ferris et al., 2000; Klein, DeRouin, & Salas, 2005). This practice and feedback 

is best carried out in a role-play. A powerful mechanism for feedback is to videotape the roleplayers for later review and discussion. During the playback, participants would be able to view 

and discuss their reactions to the influence attempts, and participants who were in the 

“influencer” role would get direct feedback on whether they accurately interpreted the target’s 

reaction and were able to modify their behavior as needed to achieve a successful outcome. If 

videotaping participants is not feasible due to resource limitations, participants could provide 

each other feedback via a guided discussion after the role-play. 

We recommend that several practice and feedback role-plays be conducted to give participants a 

broad array of experiences with several different partners. Additionally, practice sessions should 

be conducted in a building-block fashion. For example, participants could practice reading each 

other’s emotions, attempting various influence tactics, adapting their own behavior to achieve 

better outcomes, and then put all of these steps together in a single interaction. 

 Prior to developing a complete training intervention, it is necessary to pilot test some of 

the concepts described above to determine the viability of the social awareness model and 

resulting training recommendations. Therefore, as part of this project, we acquired and 

developed several of the above training concepts and conducted a pilot test of these concepts. 

The pilot test research design and results are discussed in detail in the next section. 

Method 

The purpose of the pilot test was to make an initial evaluation of some of the components of the 

social awareness and influence model. We addressed two primary research questions regarding 

in-the-moment social awareness in the pilot test: 

♦ Can the accuracy of perceptions of social information be improved through training? 

♦ Can one’s ability to use social information to influence others be improved through 

training? 

Given the exploratory nature of the model and the limited sample size available for the current 

research, we proposed these research questions rather than formal hypotheses. These research 
 31

questions allow us to conduct an initial evaluation of core components of the social awareness 

and influence model and identify formal hypotheses for testing on a larger sample. 

 To address these questions, we measured the effectiveness of the training program at two 

levels (Kirkpatrick, 1998): participant reactions to the training (Level 1) and participant learning 

on knowledge and skills related to the training objectives (Level 2). Participant reactions were 

gathered using a reactions questionnaire that was administered at the conclusion of each pilot test 

session. The questionnaire measured both perceived benefits of the course and satisfaction with 

each component of the course. Participant learning was assessed using pre- and post-tests of 

relevant knowledge and skills. The pilot test methodology and results are described in detail in 

the following sections. 

Participants 

 A total of nine pilot test sessions were conducted at three separate United States Army 

locations. The first four sessions were conducted at Fort Bliss, Texas during the week of January 

10, 2006. The next four sessions were conducted at Fort Bragg, North Carolina during the week 

of January 17, 2006. The final session was conducted at Fort Hood, Texas on April 20, 2006. 

Participants at Fort Bliss came primarily from the Air Defense Artillery and participants at Fort 

Bragg came primarily from the Medical Services Corps. Participants at Fort Hood came from a 

variety of different units. A total of 72 individuals participated in the pilot test. Fifty-one of the 

participants were men and 21 were women. Participants were primarily in first-line leadership 

roles, including captains (n = 15), lieutenants (n = 14), senior non-commissioned officers (n = 

30), and non-commissioned officers (n = 11); 61.3% of the participants were White, 29.0% were 

African American, 4.8% were Hispanic, 3.2% were Asian, and 1.6% of the participants’ race was 

unidentifiable4

. Participants were tasked to attend the pilot test as part of umbrella week 

activities; however, participation was voluntary. 

Materials 

 The first step in developing the materials to be used in the pilot was to articulate the 

learning objectives for the training program. The learning objectives with their corresponding 

course components are presented in Table 2. 

Table 2. Training Course Learning Objectives 

Learning Objectives Course Component 

TO 1: Given a definition of social awareness and influence, 

describe the importance of these concepts to military 

leadership as defined in the lecture materials. 

Course Overview 

TO 2: Given a role-play scenario, develop an awareness of 

own social awareness strengths and development needs by 

comparing self perceptions of effectiveness with other’s 

Pre-Test Role-Play 

Exercise 

 

4

 Information on race was not available for participants from Fort Hood. These percentages represent participants 

from Fort Bliss and Fort Bragg only. 
 32

Learning Objectives Course Component 

perceptions of effectiveness. 

TO 3: Given a portion of the PONS assessment, identify 

baseline skill level in the correct interpretation of facial 

expressions, voice tone, and posture. 

PONS (Profile of 

Nonverbal Sensitivity) 

Pre-Test 

TO 4: Given a model of the social awareness process, describe 

how the process works in the context of an example influence 

attempt. 

Social Awareness 

Lecture/Discussion 

TO 5: Given a set of photographs and video clips, identify the 

appropriate emotion based on facial expressions as defined in 

the SETT training program. 

SETT (Subtle 

Expression Training 

Tool) 

TO 6: Given an influence goal, persuade another person to 

support this goal. Support is defined by both short-term 

compliance (e.g., agreeing to support a decision, agreeing to 

comply with a task, etc.) and long-term commitment (e.g., 

following through to complete the request, changing one’s 

own perspective to be congruent with the influencer’s 

perspective). 

EO 6a: Given a list of influence tactics and their 

definitions, describe when each tactic is appropriate to use 

and the potential benefits and drawbacks of each tactic as 

defined in the lecture materials. 

Influence 

Lecture/Discussion 

EO 6b: Given a list of influence tactics and a discussion 

topic, effectively demonstrate at least two separate tactics 

using the “Influence Tips” handout. 

Influence Role-Play 

Exercise 

TO 7: Given a video clip of a social interaction, evaluate the 

actor’s level of social awareness and effectiveness in using 

influence tactics in comparison to expert ratings. 

Social Knowledge 

Video Exercise 

TO 8: Given a portion of the PONS assessment, demonstrate 

an improved ability to correctly interpret facial expressions, 

voice tone, and posture as defined by improved scores on the 

PONS. 

PONS (Profile of 

Nonverbal Sensitivity) 

Post-Test 

TO 9: Given a role-play scenario, demonstrate improved inthe-moment social awareness and influence skill as confirmed 

by observer reactions. 

Post-Test Role-Play 

Exercise 

A brief description of each course component and the process used to develop it is provided 

below. The instructor manual for the pilot course includes all the course materials and measures. 

Pre- and Post-Test Role-Play Exercises. Six scenarios were developed for the pre- and post-test 

role-play exercises. Use of the scenarios was counterbalanced in the pilot course such that each 

scenario was used for both pre-testing and post-testing during the course of the various pilot 
 33

sessions. However, on any given day, different scenarios were used for the pre- and post-test. 

Although the role-play exercises were designed initial for assessment purposes; they were also 

useful as teaching opportunities in that students were able to practice their skills and receive 

feedback on their efforts. Table 3 presents a summary of the counterbalanced measures given on 

each day. 
34

Table 3. Summary of Counterbalanced Measures 

Pre-Test Post-Test Day N Scenario 1 Scenario 2 PONS Scenario 1 Scenario 2 

1 6 Granting Leave Clean-Up Crew 

Face/Body 

Verbal 

Expressions 

New PT Program Sick Volunteer 

2 5 Corporal Bennett Lost Radio N/A5 Granting Leave Clean-Up Crew 3 5 New PT Program Granting Leave 

Face/Body 

Verbal 

Expressions 

Lost Radio Corporal Benne

4 8 Sick Volunteer Clean-Up Crew 

Face/Body 

Verbal 

Expressions 

New PT Program Lost Radio 

5 10 Granting Leave Clean-Up Crew 

Face/Body 

Verbal 

Expressions 

New PT Program Sick Volunteer 

6 8 Corporal Bennett Lost Radio Full PONS Granting Leave Clean-Up Crew 7 8 New PT Program Granting Leave Full PONS Lost Radio Corporal Benne8 11 Sick Volunteer Clean-Up Crew Full PONS New PT Program Lost Radio 9 10 Granting Leave6 Corporal Bennett N/A7 Sick Volunteer Clean-Up Crew 

5 Note: due to an equipment malfunction, PONS data are not available for this session. 6 Note: Based on feedback received for the first two sessions, minor modifications were made to the role-play scenarios prior to data co7 Note: Based on feedback received for the first two sessions, the PONS was not administered at Fort Hood. 
 35

 The scenarios were adapted from existing critical incidents from other ARI-funded 

projects and were modified to fit a general Army audience. To initially test the role-plays we 

conducted several informal pilot sessions with experienced Industrial/Organizational 

psychologists to refine the instructions and observational measures. The role-play exercises were 

designed to test participants’ effectiveness at each major phase of the social awareness and 

influence process (e.g., choice of appropriate influence tactic, accurate interpretation of the 

other’s reaction, and modification of behavior to be more effective). There were two defined 

roles in the role play, the “influencer” and the “target of influence.” 

 Both the influencer and the target materials included extensive role instructions. The 

influencer was tasked with persuading the target to comply with a particular request and/or 

support the influencer’s perspective on a particular issue. For example, in one of the role-plays, 

the influencer was tasked with convincing the target to help look for a lost radio. In an effort to 

enforce some level of standardization on the targets’ reactions, the target was given specific 

instructions on how to respond to the various influence tactics. In the lost radio scenario, the 

target was instructed to respond positively when the influencer focused on the mission and 

clearly explained why not looking for the radio would be detrimental. In contrast, the target was 

instructed to respond negatively if the influencer tried to use a personal appeal or exchange 

tactic. Targets were instructed to respond with both verbal and nonverbal cues (e.g., smiling and 

leaning forward for positive responses, and frowning and crossing arms for negative responses). 

Note that the purpose of the instructions to the target was to minimize the effect of the individual 

targets when evaluating whether the leader was able to read the target’s reaction and adjust his or 

her behavior as appropriate. Thus, the focus was not on using the “correct” influence tactic in an 

objective sense, but rather on learning, through trial and error, how to read verbal and nonverbal 

cues and adjust his or her behavior to get a more positive response. 

 The influencer’s performance in the role-play was evaluated through the use of structured 

behavioral observation measures. Three checklists were created for each scenario: one for the 

influencer to make a self rating, one for the target to rate the influencer’s effectiveness and one 

for an observer (usually an instructor) to rate the influencer’s effectiveness. Each checklist 

included eight questions that were designed to measure the major components of the social 

awareness and influence process, including articulating an initial goal, selecting an influence 

strategy, adjusting behavior in response to negative reactions, and gaining various levels of 

compliance and commitment. 

Pre- and Post-Test PONS (Profile of Nonverbal Sensitivity). The Profile of Nonverbal 

Sensitivity (PONS; Rosenthal et al., 1979) was used as the second pre- and post-test measure. 

The PONS is a commercially available measure that evaluates one’s ability to perceive and 

interpret the meanings of nonverbal cues through facial expressions, body posture, vocal tones, 

and combinations of these cue channels. The PONS consists of a series of short video/audio 

clips containing nonverbal cues. After each clip the test taker is asked to answer a multiplechoice question about the context of the clip (e.g., “Is the woman in this clip (a) nagging a child 

or (b) enjoying nature”). The answers for each clip are based on one of four dimensions: (1) 

positive/submissive, (2) positive/dominant, (3) negative/submissive, and (4) negative/dominant. 
 36

 For the purposes of this training we used two shortened versions of the PONS because 

sufficient time was not available to use the full PONS. One version consisted of two subsets of 

items from the full PONS that were developed by Rosenthal et al. (1979): the Face and Body

subset (consisting of 40 items) and the Vocal Expressions subset (consisting of 40 items). The 

other version consisted of the first 65 items from the full-length PONS. These items included 

facial expressions, body posture, and vocal tones. In selecting these items, we ensured that 

approximately the same number of items for each dimension from Face and Body and Vocal 

Expressions were present in the first 65 items of the full-version. The tests were counterbalanced 

by giving the Face and Body and Vocal Expressions as the pre-test for the first 30 participants 

and the first 65 items of the full PONS as the post-test. For the remaining 27 participants, the 

first 65 items of the full PONS were used as the pre-test and the Face and Body and Vocal 

Expressions subsets were used as the post test8

. Due to ongoing difficulties in the use of the 

PONS, use of this assessment was discontinued after the eighth day. 

 Social Awareness Lecture/Discussion. This section of the training course was designed 

to provide the participants with knowledge about what social awareness is, why it is important 

for Army leaders, and how the process of social awareness works within an influence context. 

This was accomplished by creating a lecture and discussion using the model of Social Awareness 

in the Context of Leader Influence from Figure 1 and a case study. 

 SETT (Subtle Expressions Training Tool—Group Version). The purpose of this portion 

of the training was to give participants the opportunity to learn about facial expressions and 

practice interpreting them. Additionally, this component was designed to emphasize the 

importance of the social information that one can acquire by attending to an individual’s facial 

expressions. The SETT is a CD-ROM training tool developed by Dr. Paul Ekman, and it is 

designed to teach individuals to recognize subtle signs of emotion in others from their facial 

expressions. The tool presents short video clips of subtle facial expressions in one localized area 

of the face that correspond with one of seven emotions (fear, happiness, surprise, sadness, anger, 

disgust, and contempt; note these emotions are identical to Ekman’s fundamental emotions 

described previously with the addition of “contempt”). The tool gives participants a chance to 

learn the subtle expressions for each of the seven emotions and take practice tests to assess what 

they have learned. The SETT was chosen in part because it has been widely and successfully 

used in military and government contexts. 

 Influence Lecture/Discussion. This component of the training course was designed to 

give participants detailed information about influence. More specifically, a lecture incorporating 

a large amount of group discussion was developed that focused on influence and influence 

tactics, their definitions, and when they are appropriate to use. 

 Influence Tactic Role-Play Exercise. A short role-play exercise was developed for 

participants to practice using the tactics they learned during the Influence Lecture/Discussion. 

During the role-play, participants would pair up and take turns being the influencer or the target 

of the influence. They were given a broad topic to discuss (such as legalizing marijuana) and 

instructed to take opposite perspectives when discussing the topic. Broad topics were chosen to 

 

8

 Due to a technical malfunction during one session, PONS data are not available for five participants. 
 37

ensure that the participants would be able to generate a sufficient amount of ideas in a short 

amount of time and so that the topics would be familiar to the participants. 

 Social Knowledge Video Exercise. The purpose of this activity was to use a behavioral 

modeling framework to allow participants the opportunity to see an influence attempt and then 

discuss the influencer’s effectiveness. Two separate video vignettes were chosen from the Social 

Knowledge Test (Schneider & Johnson, 2005): a peer-to-peer influence attempt and an upward 

influence attempt. The Social Knowledge Test was originally developed for use in assessing 

knowledge of effective and ineffective interpersonal behaviors, and it consists of videotaped 

interactions between actors playing Army roles. Prior to the pilot, two researchers coded the 

vignettes by identifying the influencer’s strategies, tactics, and actions along with the target’s 

reactions for each video. This coding was done to help the instructor guide the discussion while 

facilitating the exercise. 

Social Awareness and Influence Pilot Evaluation. A survey consisting of 21 items was 

developed to assess the participants’ reactions to the (1) design of the course, (2) perceived 

relevance of course content, and (3) perceived usefulness of course content. The measure 

consisted of a mixture of items rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale as well as open-ended 

questions. 

Procedure 

The pilot sessions were six hours in duration. One session was conducted per day at each U.S. 

Army post, and each group received the same content delivered in the same manner. The 

instructors were five of the research authors. The instructors were all experienced facilitators 

who were intimately involved in the development of this research. The instructors all used a 

detailed manual that provided them with standardized guidelines and instructions on how to 

facilitate the course. Two instructors facilitated the course each day; one instructor facilitated 

the morning and one facilitated the afternoon. Additional instructors assisted throughout the 

training course by facilitating small group discussions during specific exercises. Instructors 

rotated sessions to avoid facilitator effects. 

 Table 4 provides an outline of the procedures for each component of the pilot test9

. See 

the instructor manual for a description of the detailed procedures. 

Table 4. Outline of Procedures 

Course Component Procedure 

Introduction and 

Overview 

 The instructor gave a brief introduction and overview, which 

lasted 10 minutes. 

Pre-Test Role -Play 

Exercise 

 The instructor described the exercise and gave detailed directions. 

 The participants paired up and reviewed their role instructions. 

During the preparation period, the instructor pulled the targets out 

of the room and coached them on how to respond to the 

influencer in accordance with the written instructions. 

 

9

 Note that the procedures for Ft. Hood did not include the use of the PONS either as a pre or post-test. 
 38

Course Component Procedure 

 Each pair engaged in two different role-plays to allow each 

person in the pair to be evaluated as the influencer. 

 Where possible, each pair had an instructor observe the role-plays 

and rate each influencer by using the observer checklist. 

 After each role-play concluded, the instructor asked the 

individuals to fill out their respective checklists. 

 Where possible, the observing instructor facilitated a discussion 

about the influencer’s performance. 

 In all cases, students received feedback about their performance 

from their peers. 

 The activity lasted approximately 1 hour and 10 minutes. 

Pre-Test PONS  The instructor described the measure and provided detailed 

directions. 

 The activity lasted approximately 20 minutes. 

Social Awareness 

Lecture/Discussion 

 The instructor facilitated a lecture and discussion about social 

awareness. 

 The activity lasted approximately 40 minutes. 

SETT (Subtle Expression 

Training Tool) 

 The instructor described the training tool and gave some 

background about subtle facial expressions. 

 The instructor guided the participants through a discussion of 

each emotion and its corresponding facial expressions. 

 The instructor facilitated a portion of one of the practice tests as a 

group discussion. 

 The activity lasted approximately 30 minutes. 

Influence Lecture/ 

Discussion 

 The instructor facilitated a lecture and discussion about influence 

and influence tactics. 

 The activity lasted approximately 30 minutes. 

Influence Role-Play 

Exercise 

 The instructor described the activity and provided detailed 

directions. 

 The participants were asked to pair up with a different person 

than the first role-play. 

 The pairs engaged in two different role-plays with different 

topics. 

 Each person had the opportunity to play the role of the 

“Influencer” and practice using the tactics. 

 Where possible, one instructor was paired with each group and 

facilitated a discussion about the effectiveness of the 

“Influencer’s” use of influence tactics after each role-play 

concluded. 

 The activity lasted approximately 20 minutes. 

Social Knowledge Video 

Exercise 

 The instructor described the activity and provided detailed 

directions. 

 The participants watched two videos and engaged in a discussion 

about the key aspects of the leader’s influence attempt, the 

target’s reaction and interpretation, the leader’s revised behavior, 
 39

Course Component Procedure 

and the leader’s ultimate success or failure. 

Post-Test Role Play 

Exercise 

 The procedure was identical to the Pre-Test Role-Play Exercise 

except that different scenarios were used. 

Post-Test PONS  The procedure was identical to the Pre-Test PONS, except a 

different set of PONS items was used.

Conclusion and 

Evaluation 

 The participants completed the Social Awareness and Influence 

Pilot Evaluation form. 
 40

Results 

Improving Social Perceptiveness Through Training 

 To address the first research question (Can the Accuracy of One’s Perceptions of Social 

Information be Improved Through Training?) we conducted a series of analyses. Table 5 

presents the results of the level 1 analysis, which were collected using a 5-point Likert scale. 

Participants had a positive reaction to the training and indicated high levels of agreement with 

statements such as “This course helped me to better recognize and accurately interpret nonverbal 

cues from others.” and “This course helped me to better change my own behavior to more 

effectively interact with other people.” These results indicate that participants perceived that the 

training would improve their performance related to the key objectives of the training. 

Table 5. Results of Level 1 Analyses 

Evaluation Item Mean SD 

This course helped me to better understand the importance of 

social awareness and influence to Army leaders. 

4.26 0.67 

This course helped me to learn more about my own strengths and 

development needs related to social awareness and influence. 

4.31 0.67 

This course helped me to better understand the social awareness 

and influence process. 

4.36 0.57 

This course helped me to better recognize and accurately interpret 

nonverbal cues from others. 

4.14 0.89 

This course helped me to better change my own behavior to more 

effectively interact with other people. 

4.16 0.75 

This course helped me to more effectively influence others. 4.07 0.67 

Overall, I believe that what I learned in this course will help me to 

be a better leader. 

4.17 0.70 

The instructors effectively facilitated this course. 4.64 0.57 

The course materials were organized and easy to use. 4.51 0.63 

Overall, I believe this course was worthwhile. 4.36 0.74 

I'm planning to use what I learned in this course in future 

interactions with other people on the job. 

4.28 0.68 

Note: N = 72. Ratings were made on the following scale: 1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = 

Disagree, 3 = Neither Agree nor Disagree, 

4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree. 

 To examine participants’ learning on knowledge and skills related to the training 

objectives, we first compared pre- and post-test scores on the PONS10 by conducting a withinsubjects analysis of variance where test form (pre versus post) served as the within-subject 

 

10 For participants at Fort Bliss and Fort Bragg only. 
 41

factor. To prepare the data for analysis, we calculated percent correct scores for each participant 

to account for the differing number of items on each form. Consistent with the counterbalancing 

procedure, we assigned Group A (the first 30 participants) these scores from the Face and Body 

and Vocal Expressions to the pre-test and the first 65 items of the full PONS as the post-test. For 

group B (the remaining 27 participants), we assigned the first 65 items of the full PONS to the 

pre-test and the Face and Body and Vocal Expressions to the post test. Table 6 provides 

descriptive statistics for all PONS forms. Training did appear to have a significant effect on 

PONS scores; F(1, 53) = 5.22, p = .026. 

Table 6. Descriptive Statistics for PONS Forms 

Administration F&B/ VE (65 items) Full PONS (80 items) 

M SD n M SD n 

Pre-test 47.50 

(73.1%)

5.24 26 54.50 

(68.1%)

3.47 29 

Post-test 48.83 

(75.1%)

3.13 29 55.73 

(69.7%)

4.61 26 

Note: Due to the counterbalancing of the test forms, the results in this 

table should be interpreted as follows: Group A answered 73.1% of the 

pre-test items correctly and 69.7% of the post-test items correctly, while 

group B answered 68.1% of the pre-test items correctly and 75.1% of the 

post-test items correctly. 

 However, these results for the PONS must be interpreted in light of a few cautions. First, 

the psychometric quality of the PONS versions we used was poor. The observed internal 

consistency estimates were all quite low, ranging from .24 for the combined Face and Body and 

Vocal Expressions scales (which individually had reliabilities that were even lower) to .52 for 

the first 65 items of the full PONS. Across all 145 PONS items, 44 (30%) were answered 

correctly by 90% or more of participants and many of the items showed negative or low itemtotal correlations. Second, it should be noted that the PONS forms were not equivalent. As can 

be seen in Table 6, the 80-item form was more difficult than the 65-item form when used as 

either a pre-test or a post-test. The relationship depicted in Figure 3 shows that there were 

significant main effects of time (that is the average post-test score was higher than the average 

pre-test score), (F(1,53) = 5.47, p = .023) and test form (that is, the average score for the Face 

and Body and Vocal Expressions was higher than the average score for the full PONS) (F(1,53) 

= 11,162.19, p <.000) as well as a significant interaction (F(1,53) = 158.99, p < .000). This 

pattern of results suggests that regardless of form, mean post-test scores were higher than mean 

pre-test scores; however, mean test scores were also higher on the 65-item form regardless of 

when it was administered, and there was a significant interaction between test form and time. 

The interaction shows that those who took the 80-item form as the pre-test showed improved 

scores on the 65-item post-test, while those who took the 65-item form as the pre-test actually 

performed more poorly on the 80-item post-test. 
 42

 Because of these findings and the negative reactions of the students to this test, use of the 

PONS was discontinued during the final data collection sessions. 

Figure 3. Interaction of PONS Forms 

Pre-test Post-test

0.68

0.69

0.70

0.71

0.72

0.73

0.74

0.75

0.76 Group

A

B

Note: Group A received the 65-item form as the pre-test and the 80-item form as the post-test, 

and Group B received the 80-item form as the pre-test and the 65-item form as the post-test. 

 Next, we examined whether the training reduced discrepancies between the rating sources 

on question 2 of the rating checklist (“Which of the following arguments or influence tactics did 

the influencer use during the interaction?”). Our definition of social awareness emphasizes the 

accuracy of one’s social perceptions, where accuracy is operationally defined as a shared view of 

the interaction. Therefore, the extent that the discrepancy between the rating sources is reduced 

as a function of the training provides another answer to the first research question. 

 On question 2 raters (i.e., influencers, targets, and observers) had the opportunity to 

indicate whether the influencer used a particular influence attempt and whether the target’s 

reaction to that influence attempt was positive, neutral, or negative. We first coded these rating 

such that ratings of “positive” received one point, ratings of “neutral” received two points, and 

ratings of “negative” received three points. 

 We then calculated two indices of rater agreement. The first index provides a 

conservative measure of agreement. For the first index, agreement had to be exact; if the two 

sources provided different ratings, this index would result in a discrepancy. For example, if the 

target rated his or her reaction to an influence attempt as positive and the influencer rated the 
 43

target’s reaction as neutral, this index would record a discrepancy. The second index is based 

on a less conservative operationalization of agreement. Here, disagreement only occurred if one 

rater viewed the target’s reaction as positive and the other viewed it as negative. For example, 

the target must provide a positive (or negative) rating of his or her reaction to an influence 

attempt and the influencer must provide the converse (i.e., negative or positive) rating to produce 

a discrepancy. Table 7 provides descriptive statistics for the ratings from each source. 

Table 7. Descriptive Statistics for Observational Checklist, Question 2 

 Source Pre-test Post-test 

M SD n M SD n 

First Index (More 

Conservative) 

 

Influencer-Target 0.49 0.26 68 0.49 0.30 64 

Influencer-Observer 0.48 0.30 47 0.46 0.33 47 

Second Index (Less 

Conservative) 

 

Influencer-Target 0.92 0.16 68 0.94 0.16 64 

Influencer-Observer 0.98 0.08 47 0.98 0.09 47 

 To examine whether rating agreement improved after the training, we compared pre- and 

post-test scores on the question 2 by conducting a repeated-measures analysis of variance where 

time (pre versus post) served as the within-subject factor. For the comparison of influencer and 

target agreement, the differences were not significant for either the first index, F(1, 61) = .002, p

= .968 or the second index, F(1, 61) = 1.09, p = .301. A similar pattern emerged for the 

comparison of influencer and observer agreement F(1, 46) = .042, p = .839 for the first index and 

F(1, 46) = .001, p = .981 for the second index11. These results suggest that the training did not 

improve agreement on the targets’ reactions. This finding may have resulted from confounds 

between different forms and raters in the pre and post test condition and from participant 

difficulty in understanding the checklist directions. These findings are discussed in more detail 

below. 

 Finally, we examined whether the training improved the influencers’ ability to adjust 

behavior in response to the targets' reactions. Here, we compared pre- and post-test scores on 

question 3 of the rating checklist (“How effective was the influencer in adjusting his or her 

behavior in response to the target’s negative reactions?”) by conducting a repeated-measures 

analysis of variance where time (pre versus post) served as the within-subject factor. We 

conducted separate analyses for each rating source. Table 8 provides descriptive statistics for the 

ratings from each source. Influencer ratings did improve after training F(1, 62) = 4.57, p = .004. 

Target ratings produced a similar pattern, F(1, 66) = 3.95, p = .013, as did observer ratings, F(1, 

40) = 6.75, p = .013. 

 

11 Observer ratings were not collected at Fort Hood. 
 44

Table 8. Descriptive Statistics for Observational Checklist, Question 3 

Source Pre-test Post-test 

M SD n M SD n 

Influencer 2.29 .92 63 1.90 .73 63 

Target 2.04 .93 67 1.70 .63 67 

Observer 2.37 .73 41 1.90 .97 41 

Note: Responses to question 3 were coded such that lower scores indicate higher 

levels of effectiveness. 

Improving Influence Skills Through Training 

 

 To address the second research question (Can one’s ability to use social information to 

influence others be improved through training?), we conducted several additional analyses. 

Results of the level 1 analyses (see Table 5 above) provided some initial evidence that the 

participants believed the training improved their ability to influence. For example, participants 

indicated high levels of agreement with statements such as “This course helped me to more 

effectively influence others.” and “Overall, I believe that what I learned in this course will help 

me to be a better leader.” 

 To determine whether participants’ perception of improvement corresponded to actual 

performance improvement, we calculated an influence performance scale by computing the 

average rating of responses to questions 1 and 4 through 8 on the rating checklist for each source. 

These questions are designed to measure the spectrum of influence behaviors and outcomes, 

including stating an influence goal, persuading the target to agree to the influencer’s request, 

likelihood that the target would actually carry out the request, likelihood that the target would 

comply with future requests from the influencer, the extent to which the target understands the 

influencer’s perspective as a result of the interaction, and extent to which the target is likely to 

change his or her perspective to be in line with the influencer’s perspective. The scale score 

represents the average Likert-like ratings for these questions, where low scores indicated high 

influence success. Improvement from pre-test to post-test, therefore, is indicated by a decrease 

in mean score. We then compared pre- and post-test scores on the influence success scale by 

conducting a repeated-measures analysis of variance where time (pre versus post) served as the 

within-subject factor. Table 9 provides descriptive statistics for the ratings from each source. 

Table 9. Descriptive Statistics for Influence Performance Scale 

Source Pre-test Post-test 

M SD n M SD n 

Influencer 2.48 .87 63 2.08 .77 63 

Target 2.31 .86 67 1.99 .69 67 

Observer 2.59 .86 53 2.31 .93 53 
 45

 We conducted separate analyses for each rating source (influencers, targets, and 

observers). Influencer ratings improved after training, F(1, 62) = 7.69, p = .007. Target ratings 

also showed improvement, F(1, 66) = 5.53, p = .022. Observer ratings also showed 

improvement, but the differences were not significant, F(1, 45) = 1.94, p = .171. 

 Finally, we examined influencers’ performance on each of the items comprising the 

influence performance scale by conducting a repeated-measures t-test where time (pre versus 

post) served as the within-subject factor. For each item, we conducted separate analyses for each 

rating source (influencers, targets, and observers) and the aggregate ratings across source. Table 

10 presents the results. 

Table 10. Descriptive Statistics for Influence Performance Items 

Aggregated Across Sources 

 Mean* SD t df p** 

1. How effective was the influencer in 

communicating his/her goals for the 

interaction? 0.35 0.72 4.07*** 67 0.000

4. How quickly was the influencer able to 

persuade the target to agree to his/her 

request? 0.38 1.61 1.93 67 0.058

5. How likely would the target be to 

follow through and actually carry out 

the influencer’s request? 0.48 1.40 2.80 67 0.007

6. How likely would the target be to 

comply with future requests from the 

influencer of a similar nature? 0.40 1.15 2.84 67 0.006

7. To what extent did the target 

understand the influencer’s perspective 

as a result of the interaction? 0.11 0.69 1.34 67 0.185

8. How likely would the target be to 

change his or her perspective to be in 

line with the influencer’s perspective? 0.49 0.99 4.07*** 67 0.000

 Influencer Ratings Only 

 Mean* SD T df p**

1. How effective was the influencer in 

communicating his/her goals for the 

interaction? 0.50 0.95 3.92*** 55 0.000

4. How quickly was the influencer able to 

persuade the target to agree to his/her 

request? 0.44 1.83 1.93 62 0.058
 46

5. How likely would the target be to 

follow through and actually carry out the 

influencer’s request? 0.44 1.64 2.06 58 0.044

6. How likely would the target be to 

comply with future requests from the 

influencer of a similar nature? 0.32 1.44 1.71 58 0.092

7. To what extent did the target 

understand the influencer’s perspective as 

a result of the interaction? 0.12 0.81 1.12 58 0.266

8. How likely would the target be to 

change his or her perspective to be in line 

with the influencer’s perspective? 0.56 1.26 3.40*** 58 0.001

 Target Ratings Only 

 Mean* SD T df p**

1. How effective was the influencer in 

communicating his/her goals for the 

interaction? 0.14 0.76 1.38 57 0.172

4. How quickly was the influencer able to 

persuade the target to agree to his/her 

request? 0.25 1.92 1.08 66 0.283

5. How likely would the target be to 

follow through and actually carry out the 

influencer’s request? 0.41 1.56 2.13 65 0.037

6. How likely would the target be to 

comply with future requests from the 

influencer of a similar nature? 0.35 1.44 1.96 65 0.054

7. To what extent did the target 

understand the influencer’s perspective as 

a result of the interaction? 0.08 0.83 0.74 64 0.460

8. How likely would the target be to 

change his or her perspective to be in line 

with the influencer’s perspective? 0.64 1.33 3.87*** 63 0.000

 Observer Ratings Only 

 Mean* SD T df p**

1. How effective was the influencer in 

communicating his/her goals for the 

interaction? 0.48 1.05 3.03 43 0.004

4. How quickly was the influencer able to 

persuade the target to agree to his/her 

request? 0.49 1.56 2.10 44 0.041

5. How likely would the target be to 0.46 2.01 1.54 45 0.130
 47

follow through and actually carry out the 

influencer’s request? 

6. How likely would the target be to 

comply with future requests from the 

influencer of a similar nature? 0.42 1.69 1.68 44 0.100

7. To what extent did the target 

understand the influencer’s perspective as 

a result of the interaction? 0.09 1.15 0.51 45 0.611

8. How likely would the target be to 

change his or her perspective to be in line 

with the influencer’s perspective? 0.22 1.61 0.93 44 0.359

* Mean scores reflect improvement from the pre-test to the post-test. **not corrected for family 

wise error. *** Significant at p < .05 when corrected for family wise error. 

 After correcting for family wise error, several of the items showed significant 

improvement from pre-test to post-test. In addition, the majority of the non-significant results 

are in the predicted direction, suggesting that significance would likely be obtained with a larger 

sample. 

 

Perceived Usefulness of Training 

 Table 11 presents descriptive statistics for the perceived usefulness of each component of 

the course. The role play exercises and the discussion of and role play exercises involving 

influence tactics received the highest mean ratings, while the SETT and the social knowledge 

videos received the lowest (but still reasonably high) ratings. In addition, 87.1% of the 

participants indicated that the training was appropriately difficult for the intended audience and 

81.4% indicated the length of the course was appropriate (7.1% indicated it was too short and 

11.3% indicated it was too long). 

Table 11. Perceived Usefulness of Training 

Evaluation Item Mean SD 

Pre-test role play and feedback 4.01 0.85 

Overview of social awareness and influence model 3.90 0.82 

Subtle Expressions Training Tool (SETT) 3.46 1.24 

Influence tactics lecture and discussion 4.13 0.78 

Influence tactics role play exercise 4.32 0.76 

Social Knowledge videos 3.74 1.02 

Post-test role play exercise 4.38 0.91 

Note: N=72. Ratings were made on the extent to which each part of the course was 

perceived as useful on following scale: 1 =Not at all, 2 = Slight extent, 3 = Moderate 

extent, 4 = Great extent, 5 = Very great extent. 
 48

Discussion 

The purpose of this research was to develop and document a model of social awareness 

and influence based upon an analysis of relevant research, to propose training concepts to 

improve leaders’ social awareness and influence skills, and to pilot test the concepts. 

Consequently, after reviewing relevant research we developed a model of social awareness and 

influence and identified the factors that may impact the model. The results of an expert rating 

task revealed that experience (both as a leader and with the target), knowledge of non-verbal 

behavior and cultural norms, communication/persuasion skills, political skills, social 

intelligence, metacognition, and self-awareness were the factors that were most likely to have a 

high impact on the social awareness and influence process and that could potentially be 

improved through training. Based on these findings we identified several training concepts to 

address in the pilot: knowledge of the social awareness and influence process, knowledge of/skill 

in reading verbal and non-verbal cues of others, and knowledge of/skill in using influence tactics. 

Using a combination of commercially available tools and customized content, we developed and 

pilot tested a six-hour social awareness and influence training program with 72 officers and 

NCOs. 

The pilot test served a dual purpose: (1) to test the various training concepts to determine 

their suitability for ongoing use and (2) to make some initial determinations about whether social 

awareness and influence skills could be improved through training. Evaluation data were 

collected at two levels to assess the effectiveness of the training: participant reactions (level 1) 

and acquisition of new knowledge and skills (level 2). The level 1 evaluation was conducted 

using a survey administered at the end of each training session. A pre/post test design was used 

to conduct the level 2 evaluation – participants were assessed both before and after the training 

on their ability to read verbal and non-verbal cues and on adjusting their own behavior to more 

effectively influence others. 

Results of the participant reactions questionnaire indicated that the training program was 

well received by the target audience. Participants indicated that the role-plays and instruction on 

influence tactics were the most useful components of the course. Results of the pre-post tests 

indicated that training was successful in helping participants improve their skills in the following 

areas: 

♦ Clearly communicating an influence goal, 

♦ Adjusting behavior in response to a target’s reactions, and 

♦ Influencing others for compliance and commitment. 

It is not clear whether the training resulted in improved ability to read verbal and 

nonverbal cues because measures of this skill did not appear to work as expected. Although preand post-test results of PONS scores were significantly different, the PONS showed poor 

psychometric properties, and there was a strong interaction of form by condition such that 

individuals who took the more difficult form actually scored worse in the post-test than the pretest. Therefore, the two forms of the PONS were not equivalent. Moreover, the observational 

measure question that we designed to assess this skill also did not reveal any significant 

differences between pre- and post-test scores. 
 49

Strengths and Implications for Research and Training 

The results of this research provide three significant contributions. First, based on a 

review of the literature, we developed a viable model of in-the-moment social awareness and 

influence. This model provides a series of testable hypotheses and a framework for future 

research. Moreover, the model offers several testable hypotheses about factors that might impact 

the social awareness and influence process. These factors have implications for selection and 

training. 

Second, this research provides support for the notion that social awareness and influence 

are skills that can be enhanced through training. Prior to undertaking this research, few if any 

studies examined the question of whether social awareness could be improved through training. 

The results of the pilot test indicate that training may potentially improve these skills in Army 

leaders. Therefore, the approach we took in the pilot appears to be a viable option for training 

Army leaders to be more socially aware and better influencers. In the current operational 

environment, these skills are critical. Moreover, these skills fit very well with the Army’s 

increased emphasis on socially aware and adaptable leaders and overlap considerably with the 

competencies and metacompetencies defined in FM 6-22. 

A third contribution of this research is the development of customized behavioral 

observation measures to evaluate role-play performance. The role-play methodology was useful 

both as a training tool and as an evaluation tool. Participants had positive reactions to the roleplays, based on the results of the participant reactions questionnaire. In addition, the role-play 

was instrumental in evaluating level 2 results. This finding is even more encouraging in light of 

the fact that the improvement occurred after a short training program (6 hours of instruction) and 

in a relatively small sample. Therefore, we would recommend that the role-play methodology 

and structured behavioral observation measures continue to be used as a training and evaluation 

tool. 

Limitations 

As with any research, there were a few limitations in our pilot test that merit 

consideration. First, the measures that we used to assess participants’ ability to read verbal and 

nonverbal cues did not appear to work as anticipated. The shortened versions of the PONS 

showed inadequate psychometric properties. In addition, participants indicated frustration with 

the apparent age and poor quality of the sound and video used in the PONS. These limitations 

resulted in discontinuing the use of this instrument. 

Aside from the PONS, we attempted to measure skill at reading verbal and nonverbal 

cues by comparing influencer perceptions of the target’s reactions with reactions reported by 

both targets and observers. As described in the results section, there were no significant 

differences between pre- and post-test scores on this measure. In hindsight, there were a number 

of potential reasons for this non-significant difference. First, the pre- and post-tests involved 

different role-play scenarios, different targets, and different observers. Therefore, it is 

impossible to separate the effects of these variables—changes in scenarios, targets, or 

observational standards from pre-test to post-test may mask any true performance improvement. 
 50

Second, the facilitators observed that several of the participants appeared not to understand the 

instructions for this measure, and it is very likely that these people filled this section of the 

questionnaire out incorrectly. Finally, this measure was contingent in large part upon the 

participants accurately remembering what had transpired in the interaction and reporting these 

observations accurately. It is very likely that the demands of the role-play interaction on both the 

influencer and the target may have prevented a realistic recall of the situation and thus affected 

the results. 

A second limitation was that the sample size and time constraints inherent in a pilot test 

necessarily limited our ability to test the full model. That is, because this was an initial pilot test, 

we were unable to measure other factors that may impact trainability or the social 

awareness/influence process itself (e.g., personality factors, amount of previous leadership 

experience). While our initial results have been encouraging thus far, more research is needed to 

more fully test the model and the factors hypothesized to affect the social awareness and 

influence process. 

A final limitation concerns the inherent difficulties in determining whether improvement 

in social awareness leads to improvement in influence outcomes. Although the role play 

questionnaire was designed to assess these aspects separately, the limited number of observers 

available made it difficult to collect standardized ratings. Moreover, the “targets” in the role 

plays varied widely in their ability to successfully execute the target role. Having more trained 

observers and targets available would provide a more reliable source of measurement. A more 

complete test of the model with additional measurement methods might help to establish the 

linkage between social awareness and influence. 

Recommendations and Future Research Needs 

Despite the above limitations, the initial results from this research suggest future research 

would provide several benefits to the Army. Specifically, further research is warranted on: 

♦ A more complete test of the model, which would entail larger samples and 

enhanced measures 

♦ The impact of various factors on the social awareness and influence process, such 

as self-awareness, personality, and leadership experience, which would entail identifying or 

developing measures of these attributes 

♦ Identification of the specific aspects of the social awareness and influence process 

that may be more amenable to training than others, which may potentially entail a longer training 

program and additional measures 

In addition to the need for further research, we provide several short and long term 

recommendations for enhancing the training. Based on lessons learned from pilot, we have 

identified several small changes that could be made in the short-term to enhance the training with 

minimal effort, including: 

♦ Eliminate the use of the PONS as it provides no training value and little 

measurement value 
 51

♦ Use the time gained by eliminating the PONS for more in-depth role plays (e.g., 

more complex scenarios) and additional time on influence tactics and practices (note these were 

the most popular and appeared to have the most value for training) 

♦ Revise observational measure for reading verbal and nonverbal cues, perhaps to 

include the use of a structured interview protocol by trained observers to assess the extent to 

which influencers accurately read the target’s reaction 

♦ Conduct more extensive validation effort once these changes are made and 

produce training materials that could be used by Army instructors to teach this course on an 

ongoing basis 

♦ Improve role play instructions, particularly for targets, to include additional 

practice time or other methods to ensure targets understand the instructions and perform in a 

manner that is consistent with the intentions of the role plays. 

Depending on the outcome of these short-term enhancements, long-term enhancements to 

the program might include the following: 

♦ Create Army-specific training videos of influence interactions, which would be 

useful for behavioral modeling and a more direct measure of one’s ability to read verbal and nonverbal cues 

♦ Modify the training to be applicable to other audiences (e.g., more senior leaders, 

younger Soldiers that are transitioning into leadership roles) 

♦ Extend the length of the training course to allow more in-depth discussions, more 

feedback, and more time for each exercise 

♦ Videotape student role-plays to enhance self-awareness and allow for more indepth feedback 

♦

Summary 

The current pressures of the operational environment and the realities and challenges 

associated with today’s Soldiers have highlighted the need for Army leaders who are effective at 

influencing and motivating others. A key component of a leader’s ability to influence is the 

extent to which he or she is socially aware and interpersonally adaptive. That is, a leader must 

understand how his or her behavior appears to others and how, in turn, others interpret and react 

to the behavior. Moreover, if the target’s reaction is unfavorable (e.g., resistance or noncompliance), the leader must then adjust his or her behavior in-the-moment of the influence 

attempt to achieve a more positive outcome. 

To better understand the social awareness process and its relationships to self-awareness, 

self-regulation, and influence, PDRI and Caliber have undertaken research to model these 

relationships and develop training concepts to increase leaders’ skills in these areas. This report 

provides a starting place for this research. In it, we provide our conclusions from the relevant 

literature, we present a model of the social awareness process, we describe the factors or 

moderators that affect this process, and we describe the development and pilot testing of a 

training intervention to improve leadership performance throughout this process. In doing so, 

our hope is that we have laid the groundwork for the design of a useful training intervention that 

will enhance the skills and overall readiness of U.S. Army leaders. 
 52
 53

References 

Ahearn, K. K., Ferris, G. R., & Hochwater, W. A., Douglas, C., & Ammeter, A. P. (2004). Leader 

Political Skill and Team Performance. Journal of Management, 30, 309-327. 

Anderson, P. A. (1999). Nonverbal communication: Forms and functions. Mountain View, CA: 

Mayfield. 

Archer, D., Costanzo, M., Akert, R. (2001). The Interpersonal Perception Task (IPT): Alternative 

approaches to problems of theory and design. In J. A. Hall and F. J. Bernieri (Eds.), 

Interpersonal Sensitivity: Theory and Measurement, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. 

Argyle, M. (1972). Non-verbal communication in human social interaction. In R. A. Hinde (Ed.), 

Non-verbal communication. Cambridge: University Press. 

Austin, J. T., & Vancouver, J. B. (1996). Goal constructs in psychology: Structure, process, and 

content. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 338-375. 

Avolio, B.J. (1999). Full leadership development: Building the vital forces in organizations. 

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 

Baldwin, T. T. (1992). Effects of alternative modeling strategies on outcomes of interpersonal-

 skills training. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 147-154. 

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman. 

Bargh, J. A. (1990). Auto-motives: Preconscious determinants of social interaction. In E. T. 

Higgins & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of 

social behavior (Vol. 2, pp. 93-130). New York: Guilford Press. 

Barrett, L. F., Tugade, M. M., & Engle, R. W. (2004). Individual differences in working memory 

capacity and dual-process theories of the mind. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 553-573. 

Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job 

performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26. 

Barrick, M. R., Parks, L., & Mount, M. K. (2005). Self-monitoring as a moderator of the 

relationships between personality traits and performance. Personnel Psychology, 58, 745-767. 

Bartel, C. A., & Saavedra, R. (2000). The collective construction of work group moods. 

Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 197-231. 

Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York Free Press. 

Bass, B. M. (1998). Transformational leadership: Individual, military, and educational impact. 

Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 
 54

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership: A response to critiques. In M. 

M. Chemers & R. Ayman (Eds.), Leadership theory and research: Perspectives and directions 

(pp. 49-80). San Diego: Academic Press. 

Baum, K. M., & Nowicki, S. (1998). Perception of emotion: Measuring decoding accuracy of adult 

prosodic cues varying in intensity. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 22, 89-107. 

Baumeister, R. F., Muraven, M., and Tice, D. M. (2000). Ego depletion: A resource model of 

volition, self-regulation, and controlled processing. Social Cognition, 18, 130-150. 

Beard, R. L., Salas, E., & Prince, C. (1995). Enhancing transfer of training: Using role-play to 

foster teamwork in the cockpit. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 5(2), 131-

143. 

Berger, M. (1998). Going global: Implications for communication and leadership training. 

Industrial and Commercial Training, 30, 123-127. 

Briton, N. J., & Hall, A. (1995). Gender-based expectancies and observer judgments of smiling. 

Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 19, 49-65. 

Brower, H. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Tan, H. H. (2000). A model of relational leadership: The 

integration of trust and leader-member exchange. Leadership Quarterly, 11, 227.250. 

Bruins, J. (1999). Social power and influence tactics. Journal of Social Issues. 55, 7-14. 

Carver, C. S., and Scheier, M. F. (1981). The self-attention-induced feedback loop and social 

facilitation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 17, 545-568. 

Chapell, M. S. (1997). Frequency of smiling across the life span. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 85,

13-26. 

Cialdini, R.B. (1995). Principles and techniques of social influence. In A. Tesser (Ed.), Advanced 

Social Psychology (pp. 257-282). New York: McGraw-Hill. 

Costa, P. T. & McCrae, R. R. (1988). Personality in adulthood: A six-year longitudinal study of 

self-reports and spouse ratings on the NEO Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality and 

Social Psychology, 54, 853-863. 

Constanzo, M., & Archer, D. (1989). Interpreting the expressive behavior of others: The 

Interpersonal Perception Task. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 13, 225-245. 

Department of the Army (2001). The Army Training and Leader Development Panel Officer Study 

Report to the Army, http://www.army.mil/atld. 

Department of the Army (2006). Army Leadership, FM 6-22. Center for Army Leadership. Ft. 

Leavenworth, KS. 
 55

Ekman, P. (1972). Universals and cultural differences in facial expression of emotion. In J. Cole 

(Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (vol. 19, pp. 208-283). Lincoln: University of 

Nebraska Press. 

Ekman, P. (1973). Cross-cultural studies of facial expression. In P. Ekman (Ed.), Darwin and 

facial expression. (pp. 169-222). New York: Academic Press. 

Ekman, P. (1985). Telling lies. New York: Norton. 

Ekman, P. (2003). Emotions revealed. New York: Henry Holt. 

Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. (1975). Unmasking the face: A guide to recognizing emotions from 

facial expressions. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. 

Ekman, P., & Keltner, D. (1997). Universal facial expressions of emotion: An old controversy and 

new findings. In U. Segerstrale and P. Molnar (Eds.), Nonverbal communication: Where nature 

meets culture. (pp. 27-46). Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 

Endsley, M. R., and Robertson, M. M. (2000). Training for situational awareness in individuals and 

teams. In R. Mica and Garland, D. J. (Eds.) Situation Awareness Analysis and Measurement (pp. 

349-365). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 

Engle, R.W. (2002). Working memory capacity as executive attention. Current Directions in 

Psychological Science, 11, 19-23. 

Falbe, C. M., & Yukl, G. (1992). Consequences for managers of using single influence tactics and 

combinations of tactics. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 638-652. 

Fallesen, J. J., Keller-Glaze, H., Aude, S. N., Mitchell, D. D., Horey, J. D., Gramlich, A., & 

Morath, R. (2005). The Army Training and Leader Development Report: Consolidation Phase 

(Study Report 2006-02). Arlington, VA: United States Army Research Institute for the 

Behavioral Sciences. 

Fernandez, J. P. (1991). Managing a diverse workforce: Regaining the competitive edge. 

Lexington, Massachusetts: Lexington Books. 

Ferris, G. R., & Judge, T. A. (1991). Personnel/Human Resources Management: A political 

influence perspective. Journal of Management, 17, 447-488. 

Ferris, G. R., Perrewé, P. L., Anthony, W. P., & Gilmore, D.C. (2000). Political skill at work. 

Organizational Dynamics, 28, 25-37. 

Fiske, S. T. & Taylor, S. E. (1984). Social Cognition. New York: Random House. 

Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social Cognition. New York: McGraw-Hill. 
 56

French, J. R., Jr., & Raven, B. H. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Eds.), 

Studies in Social Power (pp. 150-167). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research. 

Fridlund, A. J. (1994). Human facial expression: An evolutionary view. California: Academic 

Press. 

Gangestad, S. W., & Snyder, M. (2000). Self-monitoring: Appraisal and reappraisal. 

Psychological Bulletin, 126, 530-555. 

Gelfand, M. J., & Christakopoulou, S. (1999). Culture and negotiator cognition: Judgment 

accuracy and negotiation processes in individualistic and collectivistic cultures. Organizational 

Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 79, 248-269. 

Gelfand, M. J., Nishii, L. H., Holcombe, K. M., Dyer, N., Ohbuchi, K., & Fukuno, M. (2001). 

Cultural influences on cognitive representations of conflict: Interpretations of conflict episodes 

in the United States and Japan. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 1059-1074. 

Gilbert, J. A., & Zaccaro, S. J. (August, 1995). Social intelligence and organizational leadership.

Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, New York. 

Goldsmith, T. E., & Kraiger, K. (1997). Applications of structural knowledge assessment to 

training evaluation. In J. K. Ford, S. W. J. Kozlowski, K. Kraiger, E. Salas & M. S. Teachout 

(Eds.) Improving training effectiveness in work organizations (pp. 73-96). Mahwah, NJ: 

Lawrence Erlbaum. 

Goldstein, I. (1993). Training in organizations: Needs assessment, development and evaluation 

(3rd edition). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company. 

Goldstein, K. M., & Blackman, S. (1978). Cognitive style: Five approaches and relevant research.

New York: Wiley. 

Goldstein, A. P., & Sorcher, M. (1974). Changing supervisory behavior. New York: Pergamon. 

Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam. 

Griffin, R. W. (1983). Objective and social sources of information in task redesign: A field 

experiment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 184-200. 

Guthrie, V. A. & Kelly-Radford, L., (1998). Feedback-intensive programs. In C. D. McCauley, R. 

S. Moxley, and E. Van Velsor (Eds.) Handbook of Leadership Development (pp. 66-105) 

Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership. 

Hall, J. A. (2001). The PONS test and the psychometric approach to measuring interpersonal 

sensitivity. In J. A. Hall and F. J. Bernieri (eds.), Interpersonal Sensitivity: Theory and 

Measurement, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 
 57

Helmes, E., & Holden, R. R. (1986). Response styles and faking on the Basic Personality 

Inventory. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 54, 853-859. 

Higgins, C. A., Judge, T. A.; & Ferris, G. R. (2003). Influence tactics and work outcomes: A metaanalysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(1), 89-106. 

Hogan, J. & Holland, B., (2003). Using theory to evaluate personality and job performance 

relations: A socioanalytic perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 100-112. 

Hollander, E. P. (1958). Conformity, status, and idiosyncrasy credit. Psychological Review, 65, 

117-127. 

Hollander, E. P. (1992). Leadership, followership, self, and others. Leadership Quarterly, 3, 43-54. 

Horey, J., Fallesen, J. J., Morath, R., Cronin, B., Cassella, R., Franks, Jr., W., & Smith, J. (2004). 

Competency based future leadership requirements. Technical Report 1148. Arlington, VA: U.S. 

Army Research for the Behavioral and Social Sciences. 

Horey, J., Morath, R., Keller-Glaze, H., & Fallesen, J. (2005). Study of Army Leader Development 

Practices: Determine influencing strategies and actions that Army leaders perform. Prepared for 

the U.S. Army Research Institute under contract (DASW01-03-D-0016). Caliber Associates: 

Fairfax, VA. 

Horstmann, G. (2003). What do facial expressions convey: Feeling States, behavioral intentions, or 

action requests? Emotion, 3, 150-166. 

House, R. J., & Baetz, M. L. (1979). Leadership: Some empirical generalizations and new research 

directions. Research in Organizational Behavior, 1, 341-423. 

Howell, W. C., & Cooke, N. J. (1989). Training the human information processor: A review of 

cognitive models. In I.L. Goldstein (Ed.) Training and development in organizations (pp. 121-

182). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. 

Ickes, W., and Barnes, R. D. (1977). The role of sex and self-monitoring in unstructured dyadic 

interactions. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 35, 315-330. 

Kane, M. J., Bleckley, M. K., Conway, A. R. A., & Engle, R. W. (2001). A controlled-attention 

view of working-memory capacity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 169-183. 

Kipnis, D. (1976). The Powerholders. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 

Kipnis, D., Schmidt, S. M., & Wilkinson, I. (1980). Intraorganizational influence tactics: 

Explorations in getting one’s way. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 440-452. 

Kirkpatrick, D. (1998). Evaluating Training Programs (2nd edition). San Francisco: BerrettKoehler Publishers, Inc. 
 58

Klein, G. (1997). The Recognition-primed decision (RPD) model: Looking back, looking 

forward. In C.E. Zsambok and G. Klein (Eds.) Naturalistic Decision Making (pp. 285-292). 

Mawah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 

Klein, C., DeRouin, R. E., & Salas, E. (2005). Uncovering workplace interpersonal skills: A 

review, framework, and research agenda. In G. Hodgkinson & J.K. Ford (Eds.), International 

Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Vol. 21). Chichester, UK: Wiley. 

Kline, S. L., Pelias, R. J., & Delia, J. G. (1991). The predictive validity of cognitive complexity 

measures on social perspective taking and counseling communication. International Journal of 

Personal Construct Psychology, 4, 347-357. 

Klingberg, T., Fernell, E., Olesen, P. J., Johnson, M., Gustafsson, P., Dahlstrom, K., Gillberg, 

C.G., Forssberg, H., & Westerberg, H. (2005). Computerized training of working memory in 

children with ADHD – A randomized, controlled trial. Journal of the American Academy of 

Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 44(2), 177-186. 

Kozlowski, S. W. J. (1998). Training and developing adaptive teams: Theory, principles, and 

research. In J.A. Cannon-Bowers & E. Salas (Eds.) Making decisions under stress: Implications 

for individual and team training (pp. 115-153). Washington DC: American Psychological 

Association. 

Landy, F. J. (2005). Some historical and scientific issues related to research on emotional 

intelligence. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 411-424. 

Latham, G. P., & Saari, L. M., (1979). The application of social learning theory to training 

supervisors through behavioral modeling. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 239-246. 

Locke, E. A. (2005). Why emotional intelligence is an invalid concept. Journal of Organizational 

Behavior, 26, 425-431. 

London, M., & Bassman, E. (1989). Retraining midcareer workers for the future workplace. In 

I.L. Goldstein (Ed.) Training and development in organizations (pp. 333-375). San Francisco, 

CA: Jossey Bass. 

Lord, R. G., Brown, D. J., & Harvey, J. L. (2001). System constraints on leadership perceptions, 

behavior, and influence: An example of connectionist level processes. In M. A. Hogg & R. S. 

Tindale (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology, Vol. 3: Group processes. Oxford: 

Blackwell. 

Lord, R. G., & Emrich, C. G. (2000). Thinking outside the box by looking inside the box: 

Extending the cognitive revolution in leadership research. Leadership Quarterly, 11, 551-579. 

Lord, R. G., & Maher, K. J. (1991). Cognitive theory in industrial and organizational psychology. 

In M. D. Dunnette and L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational 

psychology, Vol. 2 (pp. 1-62). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. 
 59

Marlowe, H. A., Jr. (1986). Social intelligence: Evidence for multidimensionality and construct 

independence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 52-58. 

Matthews, G., Zeidner, M., & Roberts, R. D. (2002). Emotional intelligence: Science and myth. 

Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 

May, G. L., & Kahnweiler, W. M. (2000). The effect of a mastery practice design on learning and 

transfer in behavior modeling training. Personnel Psychology, 53, 353-373. 

Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1995). A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: 

Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. 

Psychological Review, 102(2), 246-268. 

Montuori, L. A. (1994). Teaching conceptual complexity to adults using an in-basket instructional 

design. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities & Social Sciences, 54(12-A), 

994, 4348. US: Univ Microfilms International. 

Morath, R., Light, E., Gompper, N., Harris, J., & Zazanis, M. (2001). Developing an Army Market 

Research Index in Support of Army Recruiting.(Institute Report Number 1766) Arlington, VA: 

U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences. 

Moskowitz, G. B. (2001). Preconscious control and compensatory cognition. In G. B. Moskowitz 

(Ed.), Cognitive social psychology: The Princeton symposium on the legacy and future of social 

cognition (pp. 333-358). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 

Moskowitz, G. B. (2002). Preconscious effects of temporary goals on attention. Journal of 

Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 397-404. 

Moskowitz, G. B. (2005). Social cognition: Understanding self and others. New York: Guilford 

Press. 

Mowday, R. T. (1978). The exercise of upward influence in organizations. Administrative Science 

Quarterly, 23, 40-64. 

Nelson, T.O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In G. 

Bowers (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory 

(Vol. 26, pp. 125-141). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 

Newell, A., Rosenbloom, P. S., & Laird, J. E. (1989). Symbolic architectures for cognition. In M. 

Posner (Ed.), Foundations of cognitive science (pp. 93-131). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 

Nowicki, S., & Carton, J. (1993). The measurement of emotional intensity from facial expressions. 

Journal of Social Psychology, 133, 749-750. 
 60

Nowicki, S., & Duke, M. P. (2001). Nonverbal receptivity: The diagnostic analysis of nonverbal 

accuracy (DANVA). In J. A. Hall and F. J. Bernieri (eds.), Interpersonal Sensitivity: Theory and 

Measurement, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 

Paulhus, D. L. (1991). Measurement and control of response bias. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, 

& L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychology attitudes (pp. 17-59). 

San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 

Pillai, R., Schriescheim, C. A., & Williams, E. S. (1999). Fairness perceptions and trust as 

mediators for transformational and transactional leadership: A two-sample study. Journal of 

Management, 25, 897-933. 

Pitterman, H., & Nowicki, S. (2004). A Test of the Ability to Identify Emotion in Human Standing 

and Sitting Postures: The Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal Accuracy-2 Posture Test 

(DANVA2-POS). Genetic, Social, & General Psychology Monographs, 130, 146-162. 

Porter, L. W., Allen, R. W., & Angle, H. L. (1981). The politics of upward influence in 

organizations. In L.L. Cummings, & B.M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior

(pp. 109-149). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. 

Pulakos, E. D., Arad, S., Donovan, M. A., & Plamondon, K. E. (2000). Adaptability in the 

workplace: Development of a taxonomy of adaptive performance. Journal of Applied 

Psychology, 85, 612-624. 

Pulakos, E. D., Schmitt, N., Dorsey, D. W., Arad, S., Hedge, J. W., & Borman, W. C. (2002). 

Predicting adaptive performance: Further tests of a model of adaptability. Human Performance, 

15, 299-323. 

Raven, B. H. (1965). Social influence and power. In I. D. Steiner & M. Fishbein (Eds.), Current 

Studies in Social Psychology (pp. 399-444). New York: Wiley. 

Robertson, I. T. (1990). Behavior modeling: Its record and potential in training and development. 

British Journal of Management, 1, 117-125. 

Rosenthal, R., Hall, J. A., Dimatteo, M. R., & Rogers, P. L. (1979). Sensitivity to Nonverbal 

Communication: The PONS test. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. 

Rubin, R. B., & Henzl, S. A. (1984). Cognitive complexity, communication competence, and 

verbal ability. Communication Quarterly, 32, 263-270. 

Rule, B. G., Bisanz, G. L, & Kohn, M. (1985). Anatomy of a persuasion schema: Targets, goals, 

and strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1127-1140. 

Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J.A. (2001). The science of training: A decade of progress. Annual 

Reviews Psychology, 52, 471-499. 
 61

Schleicher, D. J., & Day, D. V. (2002). Establishing a nomological network for self-monitoring 

personality: A meta-analysis. Unpublished manuscript. 

Schneider, R. J. (2001). PDRI Social Competence Inventory (Version 2). Unpublished instrument, 

Personnel Decisions Research Institutes, Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota. 

Schneider, R. J., Ackerman, P. L., & Kanfer, R. (1996). To “act wisely in human relations:” 

Exploring the dimensions of social competence. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 469-

481. 

Schneider, R. J., & Johnson, J. (2005). Direct and Indirect Predictors of Social Competence in 

United States Army Junior Commissioned Officers.(Institute Report Number Pending). 

Arlington, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences. 

Schriesheim, C. A., & Hinkin, T. R. (1990). Influence tactics used by subordinates: A theoretical 

and empirical analysis and refinement of Kiphis, Schmidt, and Wilkinson subscale. Journal of 

Applied Psychology, 75, 246-257. 

Settoon, R.P., Bennett, N., & iden, R.C. (1996). Social exchange in organizations: Perceived 

organizational support, leader-member exchange, and employee reciprocity. Journal of Applied 

Psychology, 81, 219-227. 

Sheldon, K. M. (1996). The Social Awareness Inventory: Development and applications. 

Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 620-634. 

Sheldon, K. M., Johnson, J. T. (1993). Forms of social awareness: Their frequency and correlates. 

Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 320-330. 

Smith, E. M., Ford, J. K., & Kozlowski, S. W. (1997). Building adaptive expertise: Implications 

for training design strategies. In M.A. Quiñones & A. Ehrenstein (Eds.) Training for a rapidly 

changing workplace (pp. 89-118). Washington DC: American Psychological Association. 

Snyder, M. (1974). Self-monitoring of expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social 

Psychology, 30, 526-537. 

Snyder, M. (1979). Self-monitoring processes. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental 

social psychology (Vol. 12). New York: Academic Press. 

Snyder, M., & Cantor, N. (1980). Thinking about ourselves and others: Self-monitoring and social 

knowledge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 222-234. 

Stevens, M. J., & Campion, M. A. (1994). The knowledge, skill, and ability requirements for 

teamwork: Implications for human resource management. Journal of Management, 20, 503-530. 
 62

Streufert, S., & Nogami, G. Y. (1989). Cognitive style and complexity: Implications for I/O 

psychology. In C. L. Cooper and I. T. Robertson (Eds.) International Review of Industrial and 

Organizational Psychology. (pp.93-143). Oxford, England: John Wiley & Sons. 

Streufert, S. & Streufert, S. C. (1978). Behavior in the complex environment. Oxford, England: V. 

H. Winston & Sons. 

Streufert, S., & Swezey, R. W. (1986). Complexity, managers, and organizations. San Diego, CA: 

Academic Press. 

Sy, T., Cote, S., & Saavedra, R. (2005). The Contagious Leader: Impact of the Leader's Mood on 

the Mood of Group Members, Group Affective Tone, and Group Processes. Journal of Applied 

Psychology, 90, 295-305. 

Sypher, B. D., & Zorn, T. E. (1991). Communication-related abilities and upward mobility: A 

longitudinal investigation. Human Communication Research, 12, 420-431. 

Van Velsor, E., McCauley, C.D., & Moxley, R. S. (1998). Our view of leadership development. 

In C. D. McCauley, R. S. Moxley, and E. Van Velsor (Eds.) Handbook of Leadership 

Development (pp. 1-25). Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership. 

Vancouver, J. B. (2000). Self-regulation in organizational settings: A tale of two paradigms. In M. 

Boekaerts and P. R. Pintrich (Eds.) Handbook of self-regulation. (pp. 303-341). San Diego, CA, 

US: Academic Press. 

Vancouver, J. B., & Day, D. V. (2005). Industrial and organization research on self-regulation: 

From constructs to applications. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 54, 155-185. 

Verhaeghen, P., Cerella, J., & Basak, C. (2004). A working memory workout: How to expand the 

focus of serial attention from one to four items in 10 hours or less. Journal of Experimental 

Psychology: learning, Memory, & Cognition, 30, 1322-1337. 

Whitham, J. C. & Maestripieri, D. (2003). Primate rituals: The function of greetings between male 

guinea baboons. Ethology, 109, 847-859. 

Wofford, J. C., Joplin, J. R. W., & Comforth, B. (1996). Use of simultaneous verbal protocols in 

analysis of group leaders’ cognitions. Psychological Reports, 79, 847-858. 

Wong, L., Gerrars, S., Kidd, W., Pricone, & R. Swengros, R. (2003, September). Strategic 

Leadership Competencies. Paper developed for the Strategic Studies Institute in the U.S. Army 

War College. 

Woods, E. (1996). Associations of nonverbal decoding ability with indices of person-centered 

communication ability. Communication Reports, 9(1), 13-22. 
 63

Wyer, R. S., & Scrull, T. K. (1989). Memory and cognition in its social context. Hillsdale, NJ: 

Erlbaum. 

Yang, B., Cervero, R.M., Valentine, T., & Benson, J. (1998, Summer). Development and 

validation of an instrument to measure educator’s power and influence. Adult Education 

Quarterly. 48, 227-244. 

Yukl, G. (1989). Managerial leadership: A review of theory and research. Journal of Management, 

15, 251-289. 

Yukl, G., Chavez, C., & Seifert, C. (n.d.). Assessing the utility of two new influence tactics and 

three research methods. Paper submitted to Journal of Applied Psychology. Downloaded 

8/19/2005 from http://www .siena.edu/seifert/Assessing% 

20the%20effectiveness%20of%20two%20new%20influence%20tactics%20with%20three%20re

search%20methods.pdf 

Yukl, G. & Falbe, C. M. (1991). Importance of different power sources in downward and lateral 

relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 416-423. 

Yukl, G., & Tracey, B. (1992). Consequences of influence tactics used with subordinates, peers, 

and the boss. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 525-535. 

Zaalberg, R., Manstead, A. S. R., & Fischer, A. (2004). Relations between emotions, display rules, 

social motives, and facial behaviors. Cognition and Emotion, 18, 183-207. 

Zaccaro, S. J. (2001). Social complexity and the competencies required for effective military 

leadership. In J. G. Hunt, G. E. Dodge, & L. Wong (Eds.) Out-of-the-box leadership: 

Transforming the twenty-first century army and other top-performing organizations (pp. 131-

151). Stamford, CT: JAI Press. 

Zaccaro, S. J., Foti, R. J., & Kenny, D. A. (1991). Self-monitoring and trait-based variance in 

leadership: An investigation of leader flexibility across multiple group situations. Journal of 

Applied Psychology, 76, 308-315. 

Zahavi, A., & Zahavi, A. (1997). The handicap principle: A missing piece of Darwin’s puzzle. 

Oxford University Press, Oxford. 

Zerbe, W. J., & Paulhus, D. L. (1987). Socially desirable responding in organizational behavior: A 

reconception. Academy of Management Review, 12, 250-264. 
 64
A-1 

Appendix A: Taxonomy of Facial, Verbal, and Posture Reactions 

Behaviors Self-reported 

Mood Facial Expression Verbal Posture (body 

language) 

High Activation 

• Aroused 

• Astonished 

• Stimulated 

• Surprised 

• Active 

• Intense 

• A lot of eye 

contact 

• Pupil dilation 

• Open mouth 

• Arched eyebrows 

• Jaw drop 

• Raised upper 

eyelid 

• Eyes widened 

• Rapid pace 

• Varied inflection 

• Incredulous tone 

• Poised for action 

• Startled 

• Restless 

Activated Pleasant 

• Euphoric 

• Lively 

• Enthusiastic 

• Excited 

• Peppy 

• Elated 

• Smile with teeth 

showing 

• Arched eyebrows 

• A lot of eye 

contact 

• Hard laughter high 

pitch 

• Rapid pace 

• Loud volume 

• Slightly breathless 

• Talking a lot 

• Animated 

intonation 

(rhythmic pattern) 

• Exaggerated hand 

gestures 

• Leaning forward 

• Constant body 

movement 

• Orienting toward 

group members 

• More physical 

contact 

Pleasant 

• Happy 

• Delighted 

• Glad 

• Cheerful 

• Pleased 

• Warmhearted 

• Slightly raised 

eyebrows 

• Closed lip smile 

(grin) 

• Eyes scan stimuli 

• Tightening of 

eyelids 

• Varied inflection 

• Regular pace 

• Clearly audible 

volume 

• Hands are active 

during speech 

• Head tilted toward 

stimuli 

• Body poised to 

include group 

members 

Unactivated 

pleasant 

• Calm 

• Relaxed 

• At rest 

• Serene 

• Content 

• At ease 

• Mouth may be 

turned slightly 

upwards 

• Little facial 

movement 

• Soft but audible 

volume 

• Some inflection in 

tone or pitch 

• Regular pace 

• Relaxed but 

engaged 

orientation toward 

group members 

• Little movement in 

limbs or torso 

Low activation 

• Quiet tranquil 

• Still 

• Inactive 

• Expressionless 

• Little eye contact 

• Closed mouth 

• Whispering 

volume 

• Monotone 

• Slow pace 

• Slow movements 

• Reclined position 

• Immobile 

•
A- 2 

Behaviors Self-reported 

Mood Facial Expression Verbal Posture (body 

language) 

• Idle 

• Passive 

• Delayed responses 

• Infrequent speech 

Unactivated 

unpleasant 

• Tired 

• Dull 

• Drowsy 

• Sluggish 

• Bored 

• Droopy 

• Excessive blinking 

• Droopy eyes 

(partially closed) 

• Yawning 

• Fixed stare away 

from group 

members 

• Almost no eye 

contact 

• Dropping of upper 

eyelid 

• Monotone 

• Few vocalizations 

• Mumbling 

• Low volume 

• Low pitch 

• Delayed responses 

• Slouching 

• Orienting away 

from group 

(withdrawn 

• Motionless 

• Leaning chin on 

hand 

• Hands inactive 

during speech 

• Rubbing eyes 

• Shying away from 

stimuli 

• No physical 

contact 

Unpleasant 

• Unhappy 

• Miserable 

• Grouchy 

• Sad 

• Gloomy 

• Blue 

• Frown 

• Eyes avoid stimuli 

• Blank stare 

• Inner corners of 

eyebrows raised, 

eyebrows drawn 

together 

• Corner of lips 

pulled down 

• Lower lip pushed 

up 

• Corner of lips 

tightened and 

pressed 

• Soft volume 

• Slow pace 

• Monotone 

• Head tilted 

downward 

• Resting head on 

hands 

• Body poised to 

exclude group 

members 

Activated 

unpleasant 

• Distressed 

• Anxious 

• Annoyed 

• Fearful 

• Nervous 

• Jittery 

• Eyebrows 

lowered, chin 

raised, mouth 

closed 

• Sporadic eye 

contact 

• Sneering 

• Flushed face 

• “Nervous smile” 

• Clenched teeth 

• Lips stretched 

• Stuttering 

• Rapid speech 

• Short of breath 

• Uneven pitch 

(voice “cracks”) 

• Uneven volume 

• Closed fists 

• Hand tremors 

• Poised for action 

• Nervous habits 

(rocking, chewing 

fingernails) 
A- 3 

Behaviors Self-reported 

Mood Facial Expression Verbal Posture (body 

language) 

horizontally 

• Eyebrows raised 

and drawn 

together, upper 

eyelid raised 

High Activation

• Disgust 

• Angry 

• Contempt 

• Nose wrinkled 

• Upper lip raised, 

lower lip 

protruding 

• Eyebrows lowered 

and drawn 

together, lower 

eyelids tightened 

• Eyebrows 

lowered, upper 

eyelids raised 

• Jaw thrust forward 

• Unilateral upper 

eyelid raise 

• Asymmetrical lip 

corner tightening 

• Flushed face 

• Many harmonics 

• Fast tempo 

• High pitch level 

• Clenched fist 

• Poised for action 

• Perspiration 

• Tensed muscles 

Note: Adapted from Bartel and Saavedra (2000). 
 B-1

Appendix B: Commercially Available Training/Testing Materials 

Product Name Micro Expression Training Tools (METT)/ Subtle Expression Training Tools 

(SETT) Hybrid. Individual or group versions available. (Produced by Dr. Paul 

Ekman and available at www.paulekman.com). 

Description The METT/SETT is a CD-ROM consisting of two types of training for 

identifying facial expressions and their corresponding emotion (sad, angry, 

fear, disgust, contempt, happy, surprise). The METT focuses on very brief 

(1/25th of a second) micro expressions of concealed emotion and the SETT 

trains identification of the subtlest signs of when an emotion is first beginning 

in another person. 

Product Name The Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal Accuracy-Adult Facial Expressions 

(DANVA2-AF; Nowicki & Carton, 1993). 

Description The DANVA2-AF consists of 24 photographs of an equal number of happy, 

sad, angry, and fearful facial expressions of high and low intensities. The test 

evaluates the participant’s ability to identify the correct emotion with the facial 

expression. 

Product Name The Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal Accuracy-Adult Paralanguage Test 

(DANVA2-AP; Baum & Nowicki, 1997). 

Description The DANVA2-AP consists of 24 spoken sentences by different voices (each 

voice reads the same sentence) of an equal number of happy, sad, angry, and 

fearful facial expressions of high and low intensities. The test evaluates the 

participant’s ability to identify the correct emotion with the voice being 

spoken. 
 B-2

Product Name The Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal Accuracy-Adult Posture Test 

(DANVA2-POS; Pitterman & Nowicki, 2004). 

Description The DANVA2-POS consists of 40 photographs of an equal number of happy, 

sad, angry, and fearful emotions of high and low intensities in both standing 

and seated postures. Contained within the 40 photographs are 16 neutral 

photographs. The test evaluates the participant’s ability to identify the correct 

emotion with the posture. 

Product Name The Profile of Nonverbal Sensitivity (PONS; Rosenthal, Hall, Dimatteo, & 

Rogers, 1979). 

Description The full-length version of the test consists of 220 two-second audio clips, video 

clips, or both. The PONS is used to identify the accuracy with which people 

interpret nonverbal cues from brief interpersonal scenarios. There is also a 

short version of the test, which consists of only 40 items of only the face and 

body. An additional short version of only the audio portion is available which 

also consists of 40 items. 

Product Name The Interpersonal Perception Task (IPT; Constanzo & Archer, 1989). 

Description The test contains 30 brief scenes, each 30 to 60 seconds in length. Each scene 

is paired with a question that has two or three possible answers. The viewer 

watches the scene and then is asked to choose one of the multiple-choice 

answers that best describe what is happening in a scene. There are six different 

“scene types”: status, intimacy, kinship, competition, and deception. For 

example, in one of the scenes a woman tells two very different versions of her 

childhood; the viewer is asked to identify which version is a lie. The viewer 

makes their judgment based on verbal and nonverbal communication. There 

are objective answers for each scene and the behavior shown in the scenes 

contain spontaneous, naturalistic interaction. 
 B-3

Product Name The Human Voice: Exploring Vocal Paralanguage (Produced by Dane Archer 

and available at www.berkeleymedia.com). 

Description The video examines "clues" that are contained in vocal paralanguage. The 

“clues” presented help people to identify an individual’s biography and 

background, identity, standard or nonstandard speech, regional and national 

accents, emotions, and true feelings. This is done through a series of examples 

where a person is blindfolded and has to guess the characteristics of an 

individual speaking to them. The voice is the only clue. Afterwards, there is a 

discussion based on the individual’s assessment of the voice. 

Product Name The World of Differences: Understanding Cross-Cultural Communication 

(Produced by Dane Archer and available at www.berkeleymedia.com). 

Description The video examines 14 different facets, verbal and nonverbal, of cross-cultural 

misunderstanding. The video interviews individuals from various cultures and 

who have lived in cultures other than their own. The people explain 

experiences involving differences in communication when being in a foreign 

culture. Some of the examples include differences in personal space, patterns 

of touch, etiquette and rituals, expression of emotions, ideas about food, 

gestures, courtship patterns, and parent-child relationships. 

Product Name Social Competence Inventory, Version 2 (Schneider, 2001). 

Description The Social Competence Inventory, Version 2 is a self-report measure of the 

broad social competence domain. It consists of a total of 368 items measuring 

27 distinct facets of social competence. The items are rated on a Likert-type 

scale, ranging from Definitely False to Definitely True. 

Product Name Social Knowledge Test (Schneider & Johnson, 2005). (This instrument was 

developed in a study for ARI). 

Description The Social Knowledge Test is a video-based instrument that presents 20 social 

scenarios linked to Schneider and Johnson’s (2005) social performance model. 

The examinees are required to identify, rather than select from a set of prespecified response options, socially effective and ineffective behaviors and 

reasons for that categorization. Several of the vignettes include social 

influence scenarios. Research has supported the reliability and validity of the 

Social Knowledge Test for predicting on-the-job social performance 

(Schneider & Johnson, 2005). 
 B-4

Product Name Social Performance Inventory (Schneider & Johnson, 2005). (This instrument 

was developed in a study for ARI). 

Description The Social Performance Inventory is a multi-source social performance 

measurement and feedback instrument. The instrument consists of 52 items 

measuring a variety of social skills, including social influence. Research has 

supported the reliability and validity of the Social Performance Inventory as a 

tool for gathering accurate performance ratings (Schneider & Johnson, 2005).