Abstract
This study examines the use of the cost/benefit argument by human resources professionals in municipal sector organizations. The analysis compares their approach to the social influence exercised by line managers. Drawing from critical incidents generated from in-depth interviews, the results suggest that human resources professionals and line managers use the cost/benefit argument in much the same way with greater use of the weak form. Both groups exert influence through rational persuasion in the form of ‘light’ financial arguments. A second wave of data collection was initiated to add the perspective of city managers relative to the use of this form of rational persuasion by human resources professionals and public works managers. Content analysis of the interviews conducted with city managers was revealing of different views of the public works and human resources departments, suggesting that the use of the stronger form of the cost/benefit argument by human resources professionals may actually be associated with lower influence capability.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: The International Journal of Human Resource Management
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
