Lecture No.

03: PPG (Philippine Politics and Governance)

Topic: Power
POWER is the ability to influence or outright control the behavior of people.
Power can be seen as evil or unjust.
Power is the ability of a person to influence another person or group to perform an act.
Nature
Power can be defined in many ways. Most simply, it is the ability to get what you want or as
scholar Kenneth Boulding said, power is "the ability to change the future." Some scholars make a
distinction between three kinds of power-- "power over," "power to" and "power with.
"Power over" is the ability to dominate another person or group--as in "I have power over him.
This means, "I have the ability to make him do what I want him to do." Power-over usually
comes from force and threat. If the subordinate fails to do what he or she is asked to do, the
dominant person will use force to make the subordinate person comply.
"Power to" is the ability to do something on one’s own-- it refers to one’s abilities. Sources of
this kind of power are intellect, resources, knowledge, stamina, etc. These resources give some
people the power to accomplish things that others cannot.
"Power with" is similar to "power to" in that it reflects ability, but "power with" is the ability
to work with others to get something done by cooperation. This is the power of consensus--the
power of people working together to solve a common problem.
Dimensions
One of Steven Lukes' academic theories is that of the "three faces of power," presented in his
book, Power: A Radical View. This theory claims that power is exercised in three ways:
decision-making power, non-decision-making power, and ideological power.
Decision-making power is the most public of the three dimensions. Analysis of this "face"
focuses on policy preferences revealed through political action.
Non-decision-making power is that which sets the agenda in debates and makes certain issues
(e.g., the merits of socialism in the United States) unacceptable for discussion in "legitimate"
public forums. Adding this face gives a two-dimensional view of power allowing the analyst to
examine both current and potential issues, expanding the focus on observable conflict to those
types that might be observed overtly or covertly.
Ideological power allows one to influence people's wishes and thoughts, even making them
want things opposed to their own self-interest (e.g., causing women to support a patriarchal
society). Lukes offers this third dimension as a "thoroughgoing critique" of the behavioural focus
of the first two dimensions, supplementing and correcting the shortcomings of previous views,
allowing the analyst to include both latent and observable conflicts. Lukes claims that a full
critique of power should include both subjective interests and those "real" interests held by those
excluded by the political process.
Types
Coercive Power- This kind of power involves the usage of threat to make people do what one
desires. In the organizational set up, it translates into threatening someone with transfer, firing,
demotions etc. It basically forces people to submit to one’s demand for the fear of losing
something.
Reward Power- As the name suggests, this type of power uses rewards, perks, new projects or
training opportunities, better roles and monetary benefits to influence people. However, an
interesting aspect of this type of power is that, it is not powerful enough in itself, as decisions
related to rewards do not rest solely with the person promising them, because in organizations, a
lot of other people come into play like senior managers and board.
Legitimate Power- This power emanates from an official position held by someone, be it in an
organization, bureaucracy or government etc. The duration of this power is short lived as a
person can use it only till the time he/she holds that position, as well as, the scope of the power is
small as it is strictly defined by the position held.
Expert Power- This is a personal kind of power which owes its genesis to the skills and
expertise possessed by an individual, which is of higher quality and not easily available.In such a
situation, the person can exercise the power of knowledge to influence people. Since, it is very
person specific and skills can be enhanced with time; it has more credibility and respect.
Referent Power- This is a power wielded by celebrities and film stars as they have huge
following amongst masses who like them, identify with them and follow them. Hence,they exert
lasting influence on a large number of people for a large number of decisions; like from what car
to buy to which candidate to choose for a higher office in the country.
Consequences
Consequences of using Coercive Power
No one likes to be threatened. Department members may do what the head wants if they are
threatened with political, social, financial–or even physical(!)– retribution if they do not, but
coercion is also likely to cause anger and alienation. As a consequence, even if department
members appear to agree to a head's demand, they may follow the letter but not the spirit of anew
policy, refuse to enact it when no one is watching them, sabotage it, and be less willing to accept
the head's influence in the future.
Consequence of using Reward Power
Some people are motivated by rewards and may become more productive, but others find the
offering of rewards distasteful and become alienated. Doing something for a reward may
reinforce the perception that the recipient is in a position subservient to the person granting the
reward. Large rewards may spur activity, but the awards available in universities are often small
and may be divisive. Heads should be very selective in their use of reward power, and only use it
when they are fairly certain of how department members will respond to it. While it can
sometimes be constructive, it can also be disruptive.
Consequence of using Legitimate Power
A head has a prescribed degree of legal authority through university bylaws and other legal
documents, and can exercise the legitimate power of the office without necessarily generating
either favorable or unfavorable feelings among department members. As long as the head acts
within the bounds of appropriate behavior, department members are likely to be indifferent and
to accept what the head says or does. However, an action taken by the head outside the
department's 'zone of acceptance', may lead to anger and alienation.
Consequence of using Expert Power
Expertise is highly valued, particularly in universities. Heads with some particular area of
expertise that is recognized by the department as being related to its own success can exert
influence that is unlikely to induce alienation among those responding to it.
Consequence of using Referent Power
Department members are likely to give special attention to a head with whom they identify, and
who has their respect and admiration. Heads who are able to use referent power can usually exert
influence without creating alienation among their followers.
References:
1. https://www.academia.edu/.../LESSON_1_Introduction_The...
2. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Lukes
3. https://epigeum.com/.../html/course_files/lm_4_20.html