MCom I Semester Power polities Study Material Notes
Table of Contents
MCom I Semester Power polities Study Material Notes : A definition of Power Contrasting leadership and Power Bases of Power Dependency the Key to Power the General Dependence Postulate power Tactics What Creates Dependency power in Group coalitions Sexual Harassment Unequal Power Workplace Politics Power in Action Most Important Notes for MCom Students :
MCom I Semester Contemporary Issues Leadership Study Material Notes
Power and Politics
Power has been described as the last dirty word It is easier for most of us to talk about sex or money. then it is to talk about Power. People who Have it Deny it People Who want it Try not to Appear to be seeing it, and those who are good at getting it are secretive about how they got it
A major theme of this chapter is that power is a natural process in any group or organization. As such, you need to know how it’s acquired and exercised if you’re going to fully understand organizational behavior. Although you may have heard the phrase that “power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” power is not always bad. As one author has noted, most medicines can kill if taken in the wrong amount and thousands die each year in automobile accidents, but we don’t abandon chemicals or cars because of the dangers associated with them. Rather, we consider danger an incentive to get training and information that will help us to use these forces productively. The same applies to power. It’s a reality of organizational life and it’s not going to go away. Moreover, by learning how power works in organizations, you’ll be better able to use your knowledge to help you be a more effective manager.
A Definition of Power
Power refers to a capacity that A has to influence the behavior of B, so that Bacts in accordance with A’s wishes. This definition implies a potential that need not be actualized to be effective and a dependency relationship.
Power may exist but not be used. It is, therefore, a capacity or potential. One can have power but not impose it.
Probably the most important aspect of power is that it is a function of dependency. The greater B’s dependence on A, the greater is A’s power in the relationship. Dependence, in turn, is based on alternatives that B perceives and the importance that B places on the alternative(s) that A controls. A person can have power over you only if he or she controls something you desire. If you want a college degree and have to pass a certain course to get it, and your current instructor is the only faculty member in the college who teaches that course, he or she has power over you. Your alternatives are highly limited and you place a high degree of importance on obtaining a passing grade. Similarly, if you’re attending college on funds totally provided by your parents, you probably recognize the power that they hold over you. You’re dependent on them for financial support. But once you’re out of school, have a job, and are making a good income, your parents power is reduced significantly. Who among us, though, has not known or heard of the rich relative who is able to control a large number of family members merely through the implicit or explicit threat of writing them out of the will”?
Power polities Study Material
Contrasting Leadership and Power
A careful comparison of our description of power with our description of leadership in the previous two chapters reveals that the concepts are closely intertwined. Leaders use power as a means of attaining group goals. Leaders achieve goals, and power is a means of facilitating their achievement
What differences are there between the two terms? One difference relates to goal compatibility Power does not require goal compatibility, merely dependence. Leadership, on the other hand, requires some congruence between the goals of the leader and those being led. A second difference relates to the direction of influence. Leadership focuses on the downward influence on one’s followers. It minimizes the importance of lateral and upward influence patterns. Power does not. Still another difference deals with a research emphasis. Leadership research, for the most part, emphasizes style. It seeks answers to questions such as: How supportive should a leader be? How much decision-making should be shared with followers? In contrast, the research on power has tended to encompass a broader area and to focus on tactics for gaining compliance. It has gone beyond the individual as exerciser because power can be used by groups as well as by individuals to control other individuals or groups.
Bases of Power
Where does the power come from? What is it that gives an individual or a group influence over others? We answer these questions by dividing the bases or sources of power into two general groupings formal and personal-and then breaking each of these down into more specific categories.
Power polities Study Material
Formal Power
Formal power is based on an individual’s position in an organization. Formal power can come from the ability to coerce or reward, from formal authority, or from the control of information
Coercive Power
The coercive power base is dependent on fear. One reacts to this power out of fear of the negative results that might occur if one failed to comply. It rests on the application, or the threat of application of physical sanctions such as the infliction of pain, the generation of frustration through restriction of movement, or the controlling by force of basic physiological or safety needs.
At the organizational level. A has coercive power over Bif A can dismiss, suspend, or demote Bassuming that B values his or her job. Similarly, if A can assign B work activities that B finds unpleasant or treat B in a manner that B finds embarrassing, A possesses coercive power over B. Reward Power The opposite of coercive power is reward power. People comply with the wishes or directives of another because doing so produces positive benefits: therefore, one who can distribute rewards that others view as valuable will have power over those others. These rewards can be either financial-such as controlling pay rates, raises, and bonuses, or nonfinancial-including recognition, promotions, interesting work assignments, friendly colleagues, and preferred work shifts or sales territories.
Coercive power
and reward power are actually counterparts of each other. If you can remove something of positive value from another or inflict something of negative value on him or her, you have coercive power over that person. If you can give someone something of positive value or remove something of negative value, you have reward power over that person.
Positions of authority include coercive and reward powers. Legitimate power, however, is broader than the power to coerce and reward. Specifically, it includes acceptance by members in an organization of the authority of a position. When school principals, bank presidents, or army captains speak (assuming that their directives are viewed to be within the authority of their positions), teachers, tellers, and first lieutenants listen and usually comply.
Information Power The fourth source of formal power-information power-comes from access to and control over information. People in an organization who have data or knowledge that oth ers need can make those others dependent on them. Managers, for instance, because of their access to privileged sales, cost, salary, profit, and similar data, can use this information to control and shape subordinates’ behavior. Similarly, departments that possess information that is critical to a company’s performance in times of high uncertainty-for example the legal department when a firm faces a major lawsuit or the human resources department during critical labor negotiations-will gain increased power in their organization until those uncertainties are resolved.
Power polities Study Material
Personal Power
You don’t have to have a formal position in an organization to have power. Many of the most competent and productive chip designers at Intel, for instance, have power, but they aren’t managers and have no formal power. What they have is personal power-power that comes from an individual’s unique characteristics. In this section, we look at three bases of personal power-expertise, respect and admiration of others, and charisma.
Expert Power
Expert power is influence wielded as a result of expertise, special skill, or knowledge. Expertise has become one of the most powerful sources of influence as the world has become more technologically oriented. As jobs become more specialized, we become increasingly dependent on experts to achieve goals. So, although it is generally acknowledged that physicians have the expertise and hence expert power-most of us follow the advice that our doctor gives us-you should also recognize that computer specialists, tax accountants, economists, industrial psychologists, and other specialists are able to wield power as a result of their expertise.
Referent Power Referent power is based on identification with a person who has desirable resources or personal traits. If I like, respect, and admire you, you can exercise power over me because I want to please you.
Referent power develops out of admiration of another and a desire to be like that person. It helps explain, for instance, why celebrities are paid millions of dollars to endorse products in commercials, Marketing research shows that people like Amitabh Bachchan and Sachin Tendulkar have the power to influence your choice of chocolates and soft drinks. With a little practice, you and I could probably deliver as smooth a sales pitch as these celebrities, but the buying public doesn’t identify with you and me.
Charismatic Power The final base of power is charisma. Charismatic power is really an extension of referent power stemming from an individual’s personality and interpersonal style. As we noted in the previous chapter, charismatic leaders get others to follow them because they can articulate attractive visions, take personal risks, demonstrate environmental and follower sensitivity, and are willing to engage in behavior that most others consider unconventional. But many organizations will have people with charismatic qualities who, while not in formal leadership positions, nevertheless are able to exert influence over others because of the strength of their heroic qualities.
Power polities Study Material
Dependency: The Key to Power
Earlier in this chapter, it was said that probably the most important aspect of power is that it is a function of dependence. In this section, we show how an understanding of dependency is central to furthering your understanding of power itself.
The General Dependency Postulate Let’s begin with a general postulate: The greater B’s dependency on A, the greater the power A has over B. When you possess anything that others require but that you alone control, you make them dependent on you and therefore, you gain power over them. Dependency, then, is inversely proportional to the alternative sources of supply. If something is plentiful, possession of it will not increase your power. If everyone is intelligent, intelligence gives no special advantage. Similarly, among the superrich, money is no longer power. But, as the old saying goes, “In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king!” If you can create a monopoly by controlling information, prestige, or anything that others crave, they become dependent on you.
Conversely, the more you can expand your options, the less power you place in the hands of others. This explains, for example, why most organizations develop multiple suppliers rather than give their business to only one. It also explains why so many of us aspire to financial independence. Financial independence reduces the power that others can have over us.
What Creates Dependency?
Dependency is increased when the resource you control is important, scarce, and no substitutable
Importance If nobody wants what you’ve got, it’s not going to create dependency. To create dependency, therefore, the thing(s) you control must be perceived as being important. Organizations, for instance, actively seek to avoid uncertainty. We should, therefore, expect that the individuals or groups who can absorb an organization’s uncertainty will be perceived as controlling an important resource. For instance, a study of industrial organizations found that the marketing departments in these firms were consistently rated as the most powerful. It was concluded by the researcher that the most critical uncertainty facing these firms was selling their products. This might suggest that engineers, as a group, would be more powerful at Honda than at Procter & Gamble. These inferences appear to be generally valid. An organization such as Honda, which is heavily technology-oriented, is highly dependent on its engineers to maintain its products’ technical advantages and quality. And. at Matsushita, engineers are clearly a powerful group. At Procter & Gamble, marketing is the name of the game, and marketers are the most powerful occupational group
Scarcity
As noted previously, if something is plentiful, possession of it will not increase your power. A resource needs to be perceived as scarce to create dependency.
This can help to explain how low-ranking members in an organization who have important knowledge not available to high-ranking members gain power over the high-ranking members. Possession of a scarce resource in this case, important knowledge-makes the high-ranking member dependent on the low-ranking member. This also helps to make sense out of behaviors of low-ranking members that otherwise might seem illogical, such as destroying the procedure manuals that describe how a job is done, refusing to train people in their jobs or even showing others exactly what they do, creating specialized language and terminology that inhibit others from understanding their jobs, or operating in secrecy so activity will appear more complex and difficult than it really is. Ferruccio Lamborghini, the guy who created the exotic supercars that continue to carry his name, understood the importance of scarcity and used it to his advantage during World War II. Lamborghini was in Rhodes with the Italian army. His superiors were impressed with his mechanical skills, as he demonstrated an almost uncanny ability to repair tanks and cars that no one else could fix. After the war he admitted that his ability was largely due to having been the first person on the island to receive the repair manuals, which he memorized and then destroyed so as to become indispensable.”
The scarcity-dependency relationship can further be seen in the power of occupational categories. Individuals in occupations in which the supply of personnel is low relative to demand can negotiate compensation and benefits packages that are far more attractive than can those in occupations for which there is an abundance of candidates. College administrators have no problem today finding English instructors. The market for management faculty, in contrast, is extremely tight, with the demand high and the supply limited. The result is that the bargaining power of the management faculty allows them to negotiate higher salaries, lighter teaching loads, and other benefits.
When the IT sector was booming in India, software developers were offered high salary packages. However, when the demand decreased the engineers had to accept a fraction of their earlier salaries. Recently, the demand is on an increase because of projects outsourced to India.
No substitutability The more that a resource has no viable substitutes, the more power that controls over that resource provides. Higher education again provides an excellent example. At universities in which there are strong pressures for the faculty to publish, we can say that a department head’s power over a faculty member is inversely related to that member’s publication record. The more recognition the faculty member receives through publication, the more mobile he or she is. That is, since other universities want faculty who are highly published and visible, there is an increased demand for his or her services. Although the concept of tenure can act to alter this relationship by restricting the department head’s alternatives, faculty members who have few or no publications have the least mobility and are subject to the greatest influence from their superiors.
Power polities Study Material
Power Tactics
What power tactics do people use to translate power bases into specific action? That is what options do individuals have for influencing their bosses, coworkers, or employees? And are some of these options more effective than others? In this section, we review popular tactical options and the conditions under which one may be more effective than another.
Research has identified nine distinct influence tactics:
1 Legitimacy. Relying on one’s authority position or stressing that a request is in accordance with organizational policies or rules.
2. Rational persuasion. Presenting logical arguments and factual evidence to demonstrate that a request is reasonable.
3. Inspirational appeals. Developing emotional commitment by appealing to a target’s values, needs, hopes, and aspirations.
4. Consultation. Increasing the target’s motivation and support by involving him or her in deciding how the plan or change will be done.
5. Exchange. Rewarding the target with benefits or favors in exchange for following a request.
6. Personal appeals. Asking for compliance based on friendship or loyalty.
7. Ingratiation. Using flattery, praise, or friendly behavior prior to making a request.
8. Pressure. Using warnings, repeated demands, and threats.
9. Coalitions. Enlisting the aid of other people to persuade the target or using the support of others as a reason for the target to agree.
Some tactics are usually more effective than others. Specifically, evidence indicates that rational persuasion, inspirational appeals, and consultation tend to be the most effective. On the other hand, pressure tends to frequently backfire and is typically the least effective of the nine tactics. You can also increase your chance of success by using more than one type of tactic at the same time on sequentially as long as your choices are compatible. For instance, tising both ingratiation and legitimacy can lessen the negative reactions that might come from the appearance of being “dictated to by the boss.
But some influence tactics work better depending on the direction of influence. As shown in Exhibit 13-2 studies have found that rational persuasion is the only tactic that is effective across organizational levels. Inspirational appeals works best as a downward-influencing tactic with subordinates. When pressure works, it’s almost always to achieve downward influence. And the use of per sonal appeals and coalitions are most effective with lateral influence attempts. In addition to the direction of influence, a number of other factors have been found to affect which tactics work best. These include the sequencing of tactics, a person’s skill in using the tactic, a person’s relative power the type of request and how the request is perceived, the culture of the organization, and country-specific cultural factors
You’re more likely to be effective if you begin with “softer” tactics that rely on personal power such as personal and inspirational appeals, rational persuasion, and consultation. If these fail, you can move to “harder” tactics (which emphasize formal power and involve greater costs and risks) such as exchange, coalitions, and pressure. Interestingly, it’s been found that using a single soft tactic is more effective than a single hard tactic; and that combining two soft tactics, or a soft tactic and rational persuasion, is more effective than any single tactic or a combination of hard tactics.”
Studies confirm that a tactic is more likely to be successful if the target perceives it to be a socially acceptable form of influence behavior, if the agent has sufficient position and personal power to use the tactic, if the tactic can affect target attitudes about the desirability of the request, if it is used in a skillful way, if it is used for a request that is legitimate, and if it is consistent with the target person’s values and needs. “18
We know that cultures within organizations differ markedly-for example, some are warm, relaxed, and supportive; others are formal and conservative. The organizational culture in which a person works, therefore, will have a bearing on defining which tactics are considered appropriate. Some cultures encourage the use of participation and consultation, some encourage reason, and still others rely on pressure. So the organization itself will influence which subset of power tactics is viewed as acceptable for use.
Finally, evidence indicates that people in different countries tend to prefer different power tactics. For instance, a study comparing managers in the United States and China found that the Americans perceived rational persuasion to be most effective, whereas Chinese managers preferred coalition tactics. These differences tend to be consistent with the values in these two countries. Rational persuasion is consistent with the preference of Americans for direct confrontation and the use of reason to influence others and resolve differences. Similarly, coalition tactics are consistent with the Chinese preference for using indirect approaches for difficult or controversial requests.
Power polities Study Material
Power in Groups: Coalitions
Those “out of power” and seeking to be “in” will first try to increase their power individually. Why share the spoils if one doesn’t have to? But if this proves ineffective, the alternative is to form a coalition-an informal group bound together by the active pursuit of a single issue. 21 The logic of a coalition? There’s strength in numbers,
The natural way to gain influence is to become a powerholder. Therefore, those who want power will attempt to build a personal power base. But, in many instances, this may be difficult, risky, costly. or impossible. In such cases, efforts will be made to form a coalition of two or more “outs” who, by joining together, can combine their resources to increase rewards for themselves. 22 Successful coalitions have been found to contain fluid membership and are able to form swiftly, achieve their target issue, and quickly disappear.28
What predictions can we make about coalition formation:24 First, coalitions in organizations often seek to maximize their size. In political science theory, coalitions move the other way–they try to minimize their size. They tend to be just large enough to exert the power necessary to achieve their objectives. But legislatures are different from organizations. Specifically, decision-making in organizations does not end just with a selection from among a set of alternatives. The decision must also be implemented. In organizations, the implementation of and commitment to the decision is at least as important as the decision itself. It’s necessary, therefore, for coalitions in organizations to seek a broad constituency to support the coalition’s objectives. This means expanding the coalition to encompass as many interests as possible.
Another prediction about coalitions relates to the degree of interdependence within the organization. More coalitions will likely be created when there is a great deal of task and resource interdependence. In contrast, there will be less interdependence among subunits and less coalition formation activity when subunits are largely self-contained or resources are abundant.
Finally, coalition formation will be influenced by the actual tasks that workers do. The more routine the task of a group, the greater the likelihood that coalitions will form. The more that the work that people do is routine, the greater their substitutability for each other and, thus, the greater their dependence. To offset this dependence, they can be expected to resort to a coalition. This helps to explain the historical appeal of labor unions, especially among low-skilled workers. Such employees are better able to negotiate improved wages, benefits, and working conditions as a united coalition than if they acted individually. A one-person strike” has little power over management. However, if a firm’s entire workforce goes on strike, management has a serious problem.
Power polities Study Material
Sexual Harassment: Unequal Power in the Workplace
Sexual harassment is wrong. It can also be costly to employers. Just ask executives at Philip Morris Dial, and UPS. A Kentucky jury awarded $2 million to a Philip Morris plant supervisor who suffered through more than a year of sexual harassment by men she supervised. Dial agreed to pay $10 million to resolve widespread sexual harassment practices at its soap factory in Aurora, Illinois. And a former UPS manager won an $80 million suit against UPS for fostering a hostile work environment when it failed to listen to her complaints of sexual harassment.
Sexual harassment is defined as any unwanted activity of a sexual nature that affects an individual’s employment. Sexual harassment is unlawful discrimination against a person with respect to compensation, terms and conditions, or privileges of employment, because on account of his/her sex. Organizations have generally made considerable progress in the past decade towards limiting overt forms of sexual harassment. This includes unwanted physical touching, recurring requests for dates when it is made clear the person isn’t interested, and coercive threats that a person will lose his or her job if he or she refuses a sexual proposition. The problems today are likely to surface around more subtle forms of sexual harassment-unwanted looks or comments, off-color jokes, sexual artifacts (like posting pin-ups in the workplace), or misinterpretations of where the line between “being friendly” ends and “harassment” begins.
Most studies confirm that the concept of power is central to understanding sexual harassment This seems to be true whether the harassment comes from a supervisor, a coworker, or an employee
The supervisor-employee dyad best characterizes an unequal power relationship, where formal power gives the supervisor the capacity to reward and coerce. Supervisors give employees their assignments, evaluate their performance, make recommendations for salary adjustments and promotions, and even decide whether or not an employee retains his or her job. These decisions give a supervisor power. Because employees want favorable performance reviews, salary increases, and the like, it’s clear that supervisors control resources that most employees consider important and scarce. It’s also worth noting that individuals who occupy high-status roles (like management positions)
sometimes believe that sexually harassing employees is merely an extension of their right to make demands on lower-status individuals. Because of power inequities, sexual harassment by one’s boss typically creates the greatest difficulty for those who are bacing harassed. If there are no sitesses, it is the victim’s word against the harassets Are there others this boss bas harassed and, if so, will they come forward? Because of the supervisor’s control over resources, many of those who are harassed are afraid of speaking out for fear of retaliation by the supervisor.
Although coworkers don’t have legitimate power, they can have influence and use it to sexually harass peers. In fact, although coworkers appear to engage in somewhat less severe forms of harassment than do supervisors, coworkers are the most frequent perpetrators of sexual harassment in organizations. How do coworkers exercise power? Most often it’s by providing or withholding information, coop. eration, and support. For example, the effective performance of most jobs requires interaction and support from coworkers. This is especially true nowadays because work is often assigned to teams. By threatening to withhold or delay providing information that’s necessary for the successful achievement of your work goals. coworkers can exert power over you.
.
Although it doesn’t get nearly the attention that harassment by a supervisor does, as seen in the lawsuit against Philip Morris, women in positions of power can be subjected to sexual harassment from males who occupy less powerful positions within the organization. This is usually achieved by the employee devaluing the woman through highlighting traditional gender stereotypes (such as helplessness, passivity, lack of career commitment that reflect negatively on the woman in power. An employee may engage in such practices to attempt to gain some power over the higher-ranking female or to minimize power differentials.
The topic of sexual harassment is about power. It’s about an individual controlling or threatening another individual. It’s wrong. And whether perpetrated against women or men, it’s illegal. But you can understand how sexual harassment surfaces in organizations if you analyze it in terms of power.
Politics: Power in Action
When people get together in groups. power will be exerted. People want to carve out a niche from which to exert influence, to earn rewards, and to advance their careers.” When employees in organizations convert their power into action, we describe them as being engaged in politics. Those with good political skills have the ability to use their bases of power effectively.
Power polities Study Material
Definition
There has been no shortage of definitions for organizational politics. Essentially, however, they have focused on the use of power to affect decision-making in the organization or on behaviors by members that are self-serving and organizationally nonsanctioned. For our purposes, we shall define political behavior in organizations as activities that are not required as part of one’s formal role in the organization, but that influence, or attempt to influence, the distribution of advantages and disadvantages within the organization.
This definition encompasses key elements from what most people mean when they talk about organizational politics, Political behavior is outside one’s specified job requirements. The behavior political behavior Activities that are not required as part of one’s formal role in the organization, but that influence, or attempt to influence, the distribution of advantages and disadvantages within the organization requires some attempt to use one’s power bases. In addition, our definition encompasses efforts to influence the goals, criteria, or processes used for decision-making when we state that politics is concerned with the distribution of advantages and disadvantages within the organization. Our definition is broad enough to include varied political behaviors such as withholding key information from decision-makers, joining a coalition, whistle-blowing, spreading rumors, leaking confidential information about organizational activities to the media, exchanging favors with others in the organization for mutual benefit, and lobbying on behalf of or against a particular individual or decision alternative.
A final comment relates to what has been referred to as the “legitimate-illegitimate” dimension in political behavior. Legitimate political behavior refers to normal everyday politics complaining to your supervisor, bypassing the chain of command, forming coalitions, obstructing organizational policies or decisions through inaction or excessive adherence to rules, and developing contacts outside the organization through one’s professional activities. On the other hand, there are also illegitimate political behaviors that violate the implied rules of the game. Those who pursue such extreme activities are often described as individuals who play hardball.” Illegitimate activities include sabotage, whistle-blowing, symbolic protests such as wearing an unorthodox dress or protest buttons, and groups of employees simultaneously calling in sick.
The vast majority of organizational political actions are of the legitimate variety. The reasons are pragmatic: The extreme illegitimate forms of political behavior pose a very real risk of loss of organizational membership or extreme sanctions against those who use them and then fall short in having enough power to ensure that they work.
