Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Power, and Business
Power, and Business
Power, and Business
Keltner, Van Kleef, Chen and Kraus wrote a really interesting paper in 2008 on social power entitled A reciprocal influence model of social power, and I think that, against the backdrop of emergence and complexity theory and social influence theory, we're only beginning to scratch the surface as to society's dynamics in business research (an opinion I'm open to having challenged).
Foundations
The authors had two fundamental assumptions (p 152) regarding social influence that they took from an evolutionary perspective in primate hierarchies, as follows. 1. Power relations are bi-directional, and are governed according to the extent to which individuals act in ways that advance the interests of the group. 2. Power is a heuristic solution to the problem of allocating resources in interdependent relations, and as such, should be a basic dimension of social perception and social behaviour. Interesting. Seems rather plausible and pragmatic to me, I think. I'd like to investigate these assumptions more deeply at some point though - especially the second one. Let's assume for a while that this is how things work right now, because the authors do distil these assumptions into 7 propositions (p 157) that are all proven to a degree by experimental evidence. So, we, the people, give particular individuals or groups of individuals power if they further our interests (or at least appear to further our interests). Democratic elections would be an example of this. If one candidate or political party keeps shouting about how they are going to address your interests, and the other candidates/parties don't, surely you're going to be more likely to vote
for that candidate/party? You're going to give them authority over you to provide the necessary frameworks in which you will live and you'll hope that, working and living within those frameworks, you'll have your particular interests addressed (unemployment, healthcare, education, etc.). Not only this, but we progressively (heuristically) give power to and take it from the relevant people who will be allocating resources, and we give to and take from them the relevant resources. Money, in my mind, would be one such resource, amongst others such as tangible resources (water, food, machinery, etc.) or even possibly intangible ones (our time, intellectual property, etc.). Surely then, when theorising about "business", we need to do so against the backdrop of an understanding of the dynamics of social influence? In my brief bit of research so far in the field of entrepreneurship, I haven't seen much talk of this - people mainly seem to focus on innovation, and gathering resources towards addressing an opportunity. The social influence dynamics behind this seem taken for granted (perhaps I haven't read enough yet - I am certainly open to being corrected).
society). Is this perhaps an emergent effect of some simpler, more fundamental things that you and I do on a daily basis? Entirely possible, I think. What do you then do with those resources? Do you re-invest them in creating more value for society (i.e. that which society at least perceives as being valuable)? If so, it's likely that you'll be able to carry on gaining purchasing
power. Do you waste them on things that only further your own interests and
nobody else's (even perhaps working against the interests of others)? If so, you'd better hope that nobody finds out, because if the group sees you as wasteful (think: Lehman Brothers, et al.) they will at least try to find ways (consciously or subconsciously) to remove your power from you (think:
Street movement had anything to do with Lehman Brothers' swift descent, but
its emergence after the financial crisis seems to me to be a growing signal of societal discontent with the corporate gestures made by those currently in power, who wield much of humanity's resources. Although it's a very scattered movement filled with discord, to me it's a sign that growing parts of society are not having their interests taken seriously by those who have historically been afforded power, and are looking for new ways of having their needs met, and perhaps new authorities).
societal patterning.
With this understanding, what other sorts of societal patterning are possible towards creating real value?
constructed selves (the "me" phases of self) traps us in being controlled from
Source: http://thanethomson.com/2011/11/11/power-and-business/