|
Power Dynamics in Organizations |
|
|
|
Power
is understood as the ability to influence other people and events. It
refers to a capacity that A has to influence the behavior of B, so that B
acts 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.
The dynamics of power can be studied from several
angels, viz., distribution, dependency, uncertainty, compliance,
indicators, power determinants, power consequences, symbols and
reputation. There is no rational in the distribution of power among organizational
members. Some may yield more power than others. Others, the power wielded
by one member may be disproportionate to the organizational position he
holds. Those in power try to grab more of it. They strongly resist any
attempt to weaken the power they wielded. An individual cannot have power
at all times and at all places. He may be forced to forgo his power or he
may be stripped of it. He resists attempt to weaken his power, in the
event of failure, he will try to form coalition. As mentioned earlier, power largely depends on dependency relationship.
The greater B depends on A, the greater the power of A on B. The greater
the dependency of an organization on a limited number of individuals, the
greater the power these individuals enjoy. A person who cannot be easily
displaced enjoys more power than others whose services can be easily
replaced. Organizations seek to avoid uncertainty as far as possible. People who
can absorb uncertainty wield more power. Uncertainty depends on the nature
of the organization. In a marketing firm, for instance, sale executives
confront uncertainty and naturally wield more power. Of all the types of power, people generally comply with legitimate
power. People perceive reward and coercive powers as weak for complying
with manager's requests. It is difficult to tell when power is being used. Those who use power
usually do not want other to know about it. Indeed, power is most
effective when it is not visible. People tend to resist the use of power
when they see themselves being influenced in a way that is contrary to
their own desires. However, if the attempt to influence appears to be
legitimate and rational, we are more willing to comply and subject
ourselves to the wishes of others.
Frequently, individuals who are using power fail to recognize what they
are doing. They honestly feel they are exerting rational influence that
can be justified for legitimate reasons other than their personal wishes.
They sincerely think their influence is rational rather than political. One method of assessing power focuses on the potential to exert
influence and consists of measuring how many determinants of power are
available to each member. One of the bases of power is expertise;
therefore, individuals who possess better knowledge and expertise can
exert better influence in situations where their knowledge is important.
In assessing the relative power of students who have formed a study group,
we find that the student who seems to possess the better knowledge will
have greater power. The distribution of power can be assessed by examining the consequences
of a decision making process. Since power is used to influence decisions,
those with the greatest power should be the ones who obtain the most
favorable decision outcomes.
Typically we assume, that the most powerful people are
the ones who can persuade others. Therefore, they would usually be on the
winning side of a vote. Sometimes, however, the outcome of a decision is
obvious long before it is made, and to avoid being on the losing side,
individuals will jump on the bandwagon to become part of the winning team. Examining how many symbols of power they possess can assess the power
of different individuals. Symbols include such things as titles, office
size and location, special parking privileges, special eating facilities,
automobiles, airplanes, and office furnishings. Since the executive
offices are typically on the top floor of a building, the location of
offices on other floors often reflect the relative power of the office
holders. Another way of assessing power in organizations is to ask members of
the organization who possess the greatest power or exerts the greatest
influence. This method measures the reputation on organizational members
as perceived by others and assumes that people are knowledgeable about
power relationships and willing to report what they know. These
assumptions are often incorrect, especially when power is effective,
because then it is not perceived as an exercise of power. Consequently,
the potential activities of the most powerful and influential individuals
may be understated or overlooked by both themselves and others.
Finally, the last way of assessing power is to
determine which individuals and groups re the most heavily represented on
committee and other significant administrative posts. As a group rule,
individuals who are invited to participate on significant administrative
council acquire greater power for their departments, such as when
accountants participate in executive committee meeting or when engineers
participate in quality circles. A few years ago the word "power"
was not worthy of discussion in the subject of Organizational Behaviour.
Not any more. Today it has acquired respectability because of its
significant impact on the behavior of people in the organizations.
References:
* Robbins Stephen P. (2003), Organizational Behavior
(Tenth Edition), Prentice Hall of India Private Ltd. |
