Power can make people listen. Influence makes people choose to listen. 

Not surprisingly, power can be attractive because people often associate it with autonomy, access, and the ability to get things done. Having power means not only having a seat at the table, but also having some authority over what happens there.

Influence is different. It is the ability to shape thinking, decisions, and action without relying solely on authority. It is about building trust, sharing ownership, and having the ability to move people to action. 

Understanding the limits of authority

My career has spanned the interconnected ecosystem of sustainability, climate, inclusion, and related fields. Within the business community (and even society more broadly), these fields are often still treated as niche areas of expertise. Connecting their inputs and outcomes to business strategy and value creation requires thoughtful knowledge-sharing and awareness-building.  

Even when I held a seat at the proverbial table, power and authority brought more accountability for actions, investments, and outcomes — especially when they fell short. But credibility, evidence, conviction, and relationships were what enabled me to influence which actions and investments were adopted.

At the leadership level, so many conflicting priorities often mean that tough decisions need to be made collectively. A role’s place in the hierarchy or within a particular P&L might confer additional authority, but influence is what allows a leader to move people and shape what happens at the table. 

Perhaps one of leadership’s hardest realities is that we are accountable for outcomes we do not fully control. Not having full dominion of your function can be deeply frustrating and even derailing, creating a sense that you lack agency, recognition, or control. Even more difficult is the need to rely on someone else’s command of the topic, commitment to the work, and willingness to advocate boldly when you are not in the room. 

I completely understand these feelings. I have had them. But they cannot become an excuse for why specific agendas are not advancing. They may be a factor, but they are also a reason to push harder. 

We still have the ability to persuade through clearly-defined outcomes, a well-grounded perspective, and compelling evidence. Doing so requires knowing your audience, understanding the right levers to pull and when, and being intellectually grounded in how the work creates value. 

Power is the capacity to direct outcomes; influence is the capacity to shape them. Both need to be activated. 

The dichotomy of control

For me, the need for control was always the real agitator — not simply the tension between power and influence. I spent too much time and emotional energy on items outside of my control: all aspects of our initiatives, how they were perceived, etc. 

That remained a central challenge until my professional coach and friend enlightened me to Stoicism, and one of its central tenets in particular: the dichotomy of control. 

At its simplest, Stoicism holds that some things are within our control, and some things are not; wisdom is knowing the difference and directing our energy accordingly.

For my own mental stability, I had begun to focus fiercely on what was within my control — particularly my judgments, choices, actions, responses, attitudes, and how I responded to feedback. I could not lead effectively if I was consumed by things outside of my control, such as other people’s behavior, opinions, decisions, or agreements. 

Power says: I need to control the outcome.

Stoicism says: The outcome isn’t entirely mine to control.

Influence says: I can shape the conditions around the outcome.

Both power and influence have an appropriate place in the successful operation of any venture. Perhaps the most crucial mark of an effective, competent leader is the ability to recognize when to rely on each one depending on the circumstances, time constraints, and people involved. 

The strongest leaders don’t default to power or influence; they develop the discernment to know when to command, when to persuade, and how to distinguish between what they can shape and what they must accept.