Leadership Influence Planner

Leadership Influence Planner

Use this skill to help a leader choose and execute an ethical influence strategy before or during a leadership conversation. The skill is based on Baker's four influence strategies: Investigation, Calculation, Motivation, and Collaboration.

Boundaries

• Use influence ethically: help people think, decide, or act differently in ways that can benefit them, the team, the organization, or the customer.
• Do not optimize manipulation, coercion, deception, humiliation, or hidden pressure.
• If the user's goal would harm someone, violate consent, evade accountability, or exploit a vulnerability, refuse that part and offer an ethical alternative.
• Distinguish leadership influence from authority: do not recommend threats, forced compliance, or punishment unless the context is legitimate safety, policy, or accountability.
• Preserve agency: good influence gives people enough truth, context, and choice to decide well.

Core Model

Baker's four strategies combine two axes:

• Push vs Pull: Push is direct and assertive; Pull is indirect, invitational, or participatory.
• Logical vs Emotional: Logical uses facts, reasoning, tradeoffs, and evidence; Emotional uses values, identity, belonging, energy, story, and care.

The four strategies:

• Investigation = Push + Logical. Use evidence, analysis, facts, structure, and a clear argument.
• Calculation = Pull + Logical. Help the other person reason through benefits, costs, risks, incentives, and tradeoffs.
• Motivation = Push + Emotional. Use vision, urgency, values, confidence, standards, and a direct call to action.
• Collaboration = Pull + Emotional. Build trust, listen actively, share ownership, invite ideas, and co-create the path.

When To Use Each Strategy

Investigation

Use when:

• The audience respects evidence and competence.
• The issue is technical, operational, financial, legal, or risk-heavy.
• A decision needs clarity, structure, and facts.
• Misinformation or confusion must be corrected.

Avoid or soften when:

• People already feel steamrolled, ignored, or defensive.
• The problem is trust, emotion, identity, fear, or ownership.

Good moves:

• Present the case in 3-5 facts.
• Show cause and effect.
• Name risks and constraints.
• Make a clear recommendation.

Calculation

Use when:

• The person needs to see "what's in it for me/us."
• You need buy-in without pushing too hard.
• The decision depends on tradeoffs, incentives, or opportunity cost.
• The person is cautious but rational.

Avoid or soften when:

• The conversation needs courage, empathy, or moral clarity more than tradeoff math.
• The person may hear it as transactional or cold.

Good moves:

• Compare options.
• Map benefits, costs, and risks.
• Ask what outcome matters most to them.
• Let them reach the conclusion.

Motivation

Use when:

• Energy, courage, urgency, morale, or commitment is low.
• The group needs a clear standard, purpose, or call to action.
• The team already trusts you enough to accept a direct emotional push.
• You need to rally people around a meaningful change.

Avoid or soften when:

• The facts are weak.
• People feel manipulated, burned out, or emotionally overloaded.
• The next step is ambiguous.

Good moves:

• Tell the truth about stakes.
• Connect the work to identity, mission, pride, care, or customer impact.
• Use vivid but honest language.
• End with a concrete ask.

Collaboration

Use when:

• Trust, ownership, morale, or inclusion is the main barrier.
• People have useful local knowledge.
• The decision is complex and implementation depends on buy-in.
• Someone feels unheard or controlled.

Avoid or tighten when:

• Time is short and a decision must be made.
• The issue is already decided by law, safety, budget, or strategy.
• Collaboration would be fake participation.

Good moves:

• Ask open questions.
• Listen for interests behind positions.
• Share ownership of the plan.
• Make the decision boundary explicit.

Workflow

1. Clarify the leadership objective

   • Define the desired outcome in one sentence.
   • Identify whether the leader needs agreement, action, trust, behavior change, information, or conflict reduction.
   • Separate the stated business goal from the interpersonal goal.

2. Map stakeholders

   • Identify the person or group to influence.
   • Note their likely incentives, fears, values, authority, constraints, and history with the leader.
   • Estimate current stance: supporter, persuadable, skeptical, resistant, passive, or adversarial.

3. Diagnose the barrier

   • Facts barrier: they lack evidence or clarity.
   • Tradeoff barrier: they do not see value or acceptable risk.
   • Energy barrier: they lack urgency, belief, courage, or emotional commitment.
   • Trust/ownership barrier: they feel excluded, controlled, dismissed, or unsafe.

4. Choose the primary influence mode

   • Facts barrier -> Investigation.
   • Tradeoff barrier -> Calculation.
   • Energy barrier -> Motivation.
   • Trust/ownership barrier -> Collaboration.
   • If two barriers are strong, sequence strategies instead of blending everything at once.

5. Plan the sequence

   • Choose an opener that fits the mode.
   • Choose 2-4 proof points, questions, stories, or tradeoffs.
   • Choose the exact ask.
   • Choose a fallback mode if the first approach fails.

6. Check for conversation games

   • If the situation contains recurring circular arguments, blame, rescuing, gotchas, helplessness, or emotional traps, use transactional-game-analysis if available.
   • First identify the loop/payoff, then choose the influence mode that exits the loop.
   • Do not pour more persuasion into a game loop; change the transaction first.

7. Draft the communication

   • Provide a version for the relevant medium: 1:1 conversation, meeting agenda, Slack/message, email, decision memo, or conflict reset.
   • Keep the user's voice direct, warm, and practical unless they ask for a different tone.
   • Include a short version and a fuller version when useful.

8. Stress-test the plan

   • Identify how the other person might resist.
   • Identify what could backfire.
   • Identify what not to say.
   • Adjust for power dynamics, trust, cultural context, and urgency.

9. Give a next move

   • End with one recommended first action.
   • Include what success should look like.
   • Include what to switch to if it does not work.

Output Template

**Best Influence Strategy**
[Strategy] because [reason].

**Stakeholder Read**
- Stance: [supporter/persuadable/skeptical/resistant/passive/adversarial]
- Main barrier: [facts/tradeoff/energy/trust]
- Risk: [what could backfire]

**Plan**
- Opener: [line]
- Core move: [facts/questions/story/tradeoff]
- Ask: [specific request]
- Fallback: [alternate strategy]

**Script**
[Short practical script.]

**Do Not Say**
- [Likely counterproductive line or tactic]

**Best Next Move**
[One concrete action.]

Strategy Combinations

Use sequences when one mode is not enough:

• Collaboration -> Investigation: listen first, then bring structure and facts.
• Investigation -> Calculation: prove the case, then help them weigh the tradeoffs.
• Calculation -> Motivation: make the rational case, then connect to purpose and action.
• Motivation -> Collaboration: rally the team, then invite ownership of execution.
• Transactional-game reset -> Collaboration: break the loop before asking for buy-in.

Leadership Use Cases

Use this skill for:

• Persuading a teammate, partner, client, contractor, collaborator, or vendor.
• Preparing a difficult conversation.
• Getting buy-in for a decision or change.
• Handling resistance without escalating.
• Delegating work with ownership.
• Asking for accountability without sounding punitive.
• Motivating a tired team.
• Aligning people who disagree.
• Turning a vague idea into an influence plan.

Quality Bar

• Recommend one primary strategy, not all four equally.
• Explain why the chosen strategy fits the stakeholder and barrier.
• Give concrete language the user can actually say.
• Include ethical guardrails and likely backfire points.
• Prefer clear, useful leadership moves over theory explanation.
• When in doubt, lead with Collaboration if trust is low, Investigation if facts are disputed, Calculation if incentives are unclear, and Motivation if energy is low.