POWER AND POLITICS

CONCEPT OF POWER
Max Weber defined power as “the probability that one actor within a social relationship will be in a position
to carry out his own will despite resistance.”
In the words of White and Bednar, “Power is the ability, to influence people of things, usually obtained
through the control of important resources.”
Distinctions among Power, Authority, and Influence
The individual who possesses power has the ability to manipulate or change others. Such a definition of
power distinguishes it from authority & influence. Authority legitimatizes & is a source of power. Authority
is the right to manipulate or change others. Power need not be legitimate. Influence is usually conceived of
as being broader in scope than power. It involves the ability to alter other people in general ways, such as by
changing their satisfaction & performance. Influence is more closely associated with leadership than power
is, but both obviously are involved in the leadership process. Thus, authority is different from power because
of its legitimacy & acceptance, & influence is broader than power, but it is so conceptually close that the
two terms can be used interchangeably.
For example, a police officer has authority to ‘stop’ a motorist. The motorist is legally obliged to comply.
Managers are said to possess a ‘right to manage’. Employees are legally obliged to obey the employer’s
instructions provided these are lawful & within the scope of the contract of employment.
Characteristics of Power:
1) Specific: Power is specific in the sense that it may be exercised by some people in some
circumstances. Power may not be exercised by all people in all circumstances.
2) Dependency: The main feature of power is dependency. The greater the dependence of one person on
you, the greater is the amount of power you can exert on him
3) Expand or Contract: Power is elastic. People who are habituated to exercise power, may try to
acquire more power & expand it. In some organisations, due to change in position of a manager in
the organisation, that is, shift from one department to the other may cause contraction in power.
4) Reciprocal Relationship: Power relationships in an organisation are reciprocal in nature. Power exists
due to relationship between two or more persons. It is based on two-way concept of influencing
others & being influenced.

Views of Power and

Influence

Autocratic View of Participative View of

Power Power

the power flows downward, it basically
comes from the authoritative structure
from the management. In autocratic
view, someone loses and someone
gains, as it has fixed amount.
the power varies i.e. Power has variable
amount. It flows in all directions. The
power comes from both official and
unofficial channels and applied by
activities in a group.

CLASSIFICATION OF POWER
Position Power: Power based on one’s formal position in an organization. For example, there are certain
powers that the president of India has simply because of the office (e.g., signing bills into law, making
treaties, etc.). These remain vested in the position & are available to anyone who holds it. When the
president’s term is up, they transfer to the new office-holder.
There are four bases of position power:
 legitimate power,
 reward power,
 coercive power, and
 information power.
Reward power: Reward power is an individual’s ability to influence others’ behaviour by rewarding their
desirable behaviour. Employees comply with requests & directives because of the authority of managers to
grant rewards in the form of praise, promotions, salary increase, bonuses, & time-off. Reward power can
lead to better performance, but only as long as the employee sees a clear & strong link between performance
& rewards.
Coercive power: Coercive power is an individual’s ability to influence others’ behaviour by means of
punishment for undesirable behaviour. For example, subordinates may comply because they expect to be
punished for failure to respond favourably to managerial directives. Punishment may be major or minor,
depending on the nature of omission or commission.
Legitimate Power: Legitimate power most often refers to a manager’s ability to influence subordinates’
behaviour because of the manager’ s position in the organisational hierarchy. Subordinates may respond to
such influence because they acknowledge the manager’s legitimate right to prescribe certain behaviours.
Legitimate power is an important organisational concept. Typically, a manager is empowered to make
decisions within a specific area of responsibility, such as quality control, accounting, human resource,
marketing, & so on.
Information Power: power available to people by virtue of their positions is based on the data & other
knowledge they have at their disposal—known as information power. Traditionally, people in top positions
have access to unique sources of information that are unavailable to others (e.g., knowledge of company
performance, market trends, & so on), which makes them powerful.

Personal Power: The power that one derives because of one’s individual qualities or characteristics.
There are four basic types:
Rational Persuasion: Individuals who are truly expert at influencing others through the strength of their
logic & by means of an effective style for delivering their arguments often acquire power over others. Not
only can they influence them in specific situations or about special issues, but they also gain power within
their organizations by virtue of their effectiveness in doing so.
Expert Power: Another basis of personal power lies in expertise. People who possess expert knowledge of a
business or some facet of it often gain what is known as expert power, power based on others’ beliefs that
one has superior knowledge, skills or abilities in a certain area. Consider, for example, the conductor of an
orchestra or band. The musicians follow this person’s directions & lead not only because he or she is in
charge formally (i.e., because of legitimate power), but also because this individual is a recognized expert in
the field of music.
Referent Power: Referent power is an individual’s ability to influence others’ behaviour as a result of being
liked or admired. For instance, subordinates’ identification with a manager often forms the basis for referent
power. This identification may include the desire of the subordinates to emulate the manager. Referent
power is usually associated with the individuals who possess admired personality characteristics, charisma,
or a good reputation.
Charisma: some people seem to possess personalities that are so powerful & magnetic that they seem to put
others in a kind of trance. Such individuals are described as possessing charisma, & one benefit they gain
from this quality is a big boost in personal power.
The Strategic Contingencies Model: Power Through Dependence
Strategic contingencies theory is a theory of intra-organizational power that was proposed in 1971 by David
Hickson, Bob Hinings, C.A. Lee, Rodney Schneck & Johannes Penning. The theory assumes that sub units
or departments within a firm necessarily exert power over one another because the organizational division of
the labour creates strategic contingencies. Control of these contingencies serves as the basis of intra-
organizational power.
A subunit’s power is enhanced when
(1) it can reduce the level of uncertainty experienced by other subunits,
(2) it occupies a central position in the organization, and
(3) its activities are non-substitutable.
Uncertainty refers to the lack of knowledge about the likelihood of certain events occurring in the future.
For example, departments that can shed light on projections of future markets, changes in government
regulations, & the availability of needed supplies, for example, can be expected to wield the most power.
Centrality refers to the degree to which an organizational unit has a key impact on others because it has to
be consulted & because its activities have immediate effects on an organization. Some organizational
subunits perform functions that are more central, whereas others perform ones that are more peripheral. For
example, a firm’s accounting department may have to be consulted before expenditures can be approved. As
a result, it occupies a very central position in its organization. A unit’s centrality also is considered high to
the extent that its actions have immediate effects.
Non-substitutable refers to the degree to which it is the only unit that can perform its particular duties. So,
if any group can perform a certain function, then the particular subunits responsible for controlling that
function are not especially powerful. In a hospital, for example, personnel on surgical teams are certainly
more non-substitutable than maintenance workers because fewer individuals have the skills needed to
perform surgery than to mop a floor. Because an organization easily can replace some employees with
others either from within or outside, subunits composed of individuals who are most easily replaced tend to
wield very little organizational power.
EMPOWERMENT
Empowerment the process of delegating authority to individuals at the lowest levels in organizations at
which competent decisions can be made. Although empowerment involves many specific steps and policies,
three are particularly important. These are:
Information sharing: Providing potentially sensitive information on costs, productivity, quality, and financial
performance to employees throughout the organization.
Autonomy through boundaries: Using organizational designs and practices that encourage autonomous
action by employees, including work procedures, areas of responsibilities, and goals.
Team accountability: Ensuring that both decision-making authority and performance accountability reside in
teams.
Employee empowerment is giving workers decision-making authority and resources within their area of
expertise. This differs from traditional delegation by encouraging initiative and providing resources for
implementation. By fostering collaboration and shared purpose, it can revitalize organizations and deliver
better customer value. However, overcoming challenges like impatience and unclear expectations is crucial
for success. Embedding empowerment in the company culture through participation, innovation, information
access, and accountability is key.
Empowerment: It's a Balancing Act!
Benefits:
 Workers are willing to take responsibility and improve, with training support.
 Empowerment programs lead to better manufacturing performance and empowered managers.
 Example: Georgia-Pacific employees empowered to improve testing processes, leading to a
company-wide system.
Challenges:
 Middle managers face conflicting demands: relinquish control vs. maintain it.
 Empowerment only works when everyone is on board with the new ideas.
 Balancing "poetic" ideas (aspirations) with "rhetoric" (reality) is crucial for feeling truly empowered.
Empowerment and Innovation: Empowerment fuels innovation by giving employees freedom to
experiment and make decisions. This creates a climate where:
Empowerment and Innovation:

 Employees with decision-making authority are more likely to try new ideas, even if they sometimes
fail (example of engineers and the product).
 This creates a climate where innovation is encouraged and supported by management
Empowerment and Access to Information:
 Giving employees access to relevant information (e.g., finances, operations) improves their ability to
collaborate and make informed decisions.
 This "open-book" culture contrasts with traditional, secretive approaches and leverages technology
for accessibility.
Empowerment and Accountability:
 While empowered to make decisions, employees are also held accountable for results.
This accountability focuses on effort, goal achievement, and responsible behavior, not short-term
punishment.
 It fosters trust within the organization, where employees feel invested in the shared success.
Putting Empowerment into Action: Managers can implement employee empowerment through various
methods, including:
 Kaizen and "Just Do It" principles: This approach emphasizes continuous improvement, team
problem-solving, and immediate action, even if imperfect. Companies like Cummins Engine use
training programs to instill these ideas in their workforce.
 Trust building: Trust is crucial for empowerment to function. Organizations should strive for
"optimal trust," balancing trust with healthy skepticism. Building trust involves fostering
professional, collaborative relationships across all levels, encouraging information sharing, and even
incorporating fun activities to reduce stress.
 Careful evaluation: It's important to assess the organization's readiness for empowerment and
weigh its potential benefits and drawbacks. While some companies thrive with empowered
employees, others may require a different approach.
Empowerment Climate a relatively enduring atmosphere in the workplace that is supportive of
empowerment.
Research shows that organizations with strong empowerment climates, characterized by information
sharing, autonomy, and team accountability, experience multiple positive outcomes:
Enhanced Team Performance: Teams in such climates perform better according to manager ratings.
Increased Individual Empowerment: Employees feel more empowered, leading to...
Improved Individual Performance: Their own work performance improves.
Higher Job Satisfaction: They experience greater satisfaction and well-being at work.

POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS OF POWER:

Power and politics are deeply intertwined in organizations. Some see politics as a pragmatic way to get
ahead, while others view it as a necessary skill for acquiring power, especially in resource-scarce
environments. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for navigating organizational behavior effectively.
A Political Perspective of Power in Organizations
The classical organization theorists portrayed organizations as highly rational structures in which authority
meticulously followed the chain of command and in which managers had legitimatized powers. The political
perspective of organizations departs from the rational, idealistic model. For example, Walter Nord dispels
some of the dreams of ideal, rationally structured, and humanistic organizations by pointing out some of the
stark realities of political power. He suggests four postulates of power in organizations that help focus on the
political realities:
1. Organizations are composed of coalitions that compete with one another for resources, energy, and
influence.
2. Various coalitions will seek to protect their interests and positions of influence.
3. The unequal distribution of power itself has dehumanizing effects.
4. The exercise of power within organizations is one very crucial aspect of the exercise of power within the
larger social system.
In other words, the political power game is changing, but is still very real in today’s organizations.
Research on organizational politics has identified several areas that are particularly relevant to the degree to
which organizations are political rather than rational.
1. Resources. There is a direct relationship between the amount of politics and how critical and scarce the
resources are. Also, politics will be encouraged when there is an infusion of new, “unclaimed” resources.
2. Decisions. Ambiguous decisions, decisions on which there is lack of agreement, and uncertain, long-range
strategic decisions lead to more politics than routine decisions.
3. Goals. The more ambiguous and complex the goals become, the more politics there will be.
4. Technology and external environment. In general, the more complex the internal technology of the
organization, the more politics there will be. The same is true of organizations operating in turbulent
external environments.
5. Change. A reorganization or a planned organization development (OD) effort or even an unplanned
change brought about by external forces will encourage political maneuvering.
Today's organizations are inherently political due to factors like limited resources, ambiguous goals, and
rapid change. This creates a climate where power struggles thrive and individuals and groups compete for it.
Political strategies become crucial for navigating this landscape. Organizations might even resemble
"fiefdoms" with internal power players.
Reference:

Luthans, F. (2011, January 1). ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR: An Evidence-Based Approach (12th

Edition). McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Greenberg, J. (2011, January 1). Behavior in Organizations. Pearson.

Efforts done by Vasvi Jain, Kaneez Fatima, Aditi Saini