CHAPTER 10 Power and Politics Chapter Overview This chapter addresses the topic of power and politics in organizations by focusing on seven major subjects: the concept of power, the bases of interpersonal power, the need for power, structural and situational power, interdepartmental power, the illusion of power, and political strategies and tactics. The chapter begins with a definition of power and a discussion of the distinction between power and authority. Concerning interpersonal power, French and Raven's five bases of interpersonal power are described (legitimate, reward, coercive, expert, and referent) and the relationships among the bases are discussed. McClelland's need for power variable is defined and several characteristics of individuals high in the need for power are discussed. Concerning structural power, the impact of structure on formal power and authority is discussed and three major bases of structural power (resources, input into decision-making, and access to important information) are explained. The upward flow of power is also briefly discussed. Concerning interdepartmental power, much attention is focused on the viewpoint that departments gain power by controlling strategic contingencies - events that are critical in accomplishing organizational goals. Coping with uncertainty (via prevention, information, and absorption) as a source of power is discussed, as are the power concepts of centrality and substitutability. The infamous Milgram experiment is described as an insightful example of the impact of the illusion of power. The chapter continues with a discussion of politics in organizations, including four primary political tactics (rule evasion, personal political, educational, and organizational) and six political games frequently played in organizations (insurgency game, counterinsurgency game, sponsorship game, coalition building game, line versus staff game, and the whistle blowing game). The chapter concludes with a discussion on the relationship of ethics and power/political behavior and presents three criteria used to assess whether behavior is ethical (the criteria of utilitarian outcomes, individual rights, and distributive justice). Learning Objectives By the end of the chapter, students should be able to: 1. Understand the difference between power and authority. 2. Describe the five interpersonal power bases. 3. Discuss how subunits within an organization acquire and use power. 4. Identify when an individual is using impression management tactics. 5. Comprehend the reasons perceived authority can influence a person’s behavior. Lecture Outline PowerPoint Slide Material from Text to Support Slide / Additional Comments Great leaders have one thing in common: they realize that having a vision is not enough to achieve the kinds of revolutionary and large-scale ideas they dream of. To make things happen and to influence others, great leaders need to be passionate about their vision and have the personal power to enact it. Great leaders make things happen by utilizing four different types of personal power. These include the power to Communicate their visions to others. Overcome resistance to change. Mobilize resources in the required direction. Manage their own ambitions so they don’t lose perspective in the process of leading. Power is a pervasive part of the fabric of organizational life. Getting things done requires power. Every day, managers in public and private organizations acquire and use power to accomplish goals and, in many cases, to strengthen their own position. A person’s success or failure at using or reacting to power is largely determined by understanding power, knowing how and when to use it, and being able to anticipate its probable effects. How organizational subunits and individuals are controlled is related to the issue of power. In an organizational setting, power is simply the ability to get others to do what one wants them to do. Power involves a relationship between two or more people. Robert Dahl, a political scientist, captures this important relational focus when he defines power as “A has power over B to the extent that he can get B to do something B would not otherwise do.” A person or group cannot have power in isolation; power has to be exercised or have the potential for being exercised in relation to some other person or group. Some feel that power is best used in isolation by one person over other people. Conversely, the power-sharing argument asserts that unless some power is shared, productivity, quality, and customer satisfaction will never reach their highest potential levels. However, this raises the problem of determining how to implement power sharing. Power sharing requires time to develop within an organization’s culture. It cannot be forced on people, and proper leadership and vision are needed to implement the process. Time is needed to develop (1) better lines of communication, (2) more trust, and (3) openness between the power sharers—managers and subordinates or subunits. Because organizations have for many years relied on authority hierarchies to accomplish goals, it is unreasonable to expect managers simply to begin sharing their power with others without some resistance. The literature distinguishes between power and authority. Max Weber was the first to call attention to differences between these two concepts. He believed that power involves force and coercion. Authority, however, is a subset of power. Much narrower in scope, authority does not carry the implication of force. Rather, it involves a “suspension of judgment” on the part of its recipients. Authority is the formal power that a person has because of the position in the organization. Authority has the following characteristics: 1. It is vested in a person’s position. An individual has authority because of the position that he holds, not because of any specific personal characteristics. 2. It is accepted by subordinates. The individual in an official authority position exercises authority and can gain compliance because she has a legitimate right. 3. Authority is used vertically and flows from the top down in the hierarchy of an organization. Power can be derived from many sources. How it’s obtained in an organization depends to a large extent on the type of power being sought. Power can be derived from interpersonal, structural, and situational bases. John French and Bertram Raven suggested five interpersonal bases of power: legitimate, reward, coercive, expert, and referent. David McClelland proposes that power can be responsibly sought and used. The need for power (or nPow as he refers to it) is defined by McClelland as the desire to have an effect on others. This effect may be shown basically in three ways: (1) by strong action, by giving help or advice, by controlling someone; (2) by action that produces emotion in others; and (3) by a concern for reputation. Power is primarily prescribed by the structure of the organization. The organization’s structural arrangements allocate decision-making discretion to various positions. Structure also establishes patterns of communication and the flow of information. Thus, organizational structure creates formal power and authority by specifying certain individuals to perform specific jobs and make certain decisions. Rosabeth Kanter argues convincingly that power stems from access to resources, information, and support and from the ability to get cooperation in doing necessary work. Power occurs when a person has open channels to resources (money, workers, technology, materials, and customers). In organizations, vital resources are allocated downward along the lines of the hierarchy. The dependency relationship exists because of limited resources and division of labor. The division of labor (e.g., positions in the hierarchy) grants upper management, by position, the privilege of allocating limited resources. Without adequate compliance with top management’s goals and requests, a lower-level manager cannot receive the necessary resources to do the job. On the other hand, a wise top management team knows that to improve performance, lower-level managers must be given adequate power and resources to control their destinies. The degree to which individuals or subunits can affect decision making determines their level of power. A person or subunit with power can influence how the decision-making process occurs, what alternatives are considered, and when a decision is made. Having access to relevant and important information gives power. Information is the basis for making effective decisions. Thus, those who possess information needed to make optimal decisions have power. The accountant’s position in the organization structure may not accurately portray the power she wields. Accountants do not generally have a particularly strong or apparent interpersonal power base in an organization; they have power because they control important information. Likewise, a person’s power may be weakened by sharing too much information, for it reduces his relative share of this valuable commodity. Most people think of power as being exerted in a downward direction. It’s true that individuals in positions at the lower end of the power hierarchy generally have less power than do individuals in higher level positions. However, power can also be exercised up the organization. In sociological terms, a person exerting power upward has personal power but no authority. Two important sources of upward influence have been referred to as manipulative persuasion and manipulation. Manipulative persuasion is a person’s direct attempt to disguise the true persuasion objective. This is the hidden-agenda ploy. Manipulation refers to the form of influence in which both the objective and the attempt are concealed. To this point, the primary focus has been on individual power and how it’s obtained. However, interdepartmental power is also important. The strategic contingency theory focuses on subunit power. A strategic contingency is an event or activity that’s extremely important for accomplishing organizational goals. The model in Figure 10.1 suggests that subunit power, the power differential between subunits, is influenced by (1) the ability to cope with uncertainty, (2) the centrality of the subunit, and (3) the substitutability of the subunit. Uncertainty itself does not give power; coping gives power. If organizations allocate to their various subunits task areas that vary in uncertainty, then those subunits that cope most effectively with the most uncertainty should have the most power within the organization. Coping activities comprise three types. In coping by prevention, a subunit works at reducing the probability that some difficulty will arise. Coping by information is another type. The use of forecasting is an example. Coping by absorption, the third type, involves dealing with uncertainty as it impacts the subunit. The subunits most central to the flow of work in an organization typically acquire power. No subunit has zero centrality since all are somehow interlinked with other subunits. A measure of centrality is the degree to which the work of the subunit contributes to the final output of the organization. Substitutability refers to other subunits’ ability to perform activities of a particular subunit. If an organization has or can obtain alternative sources of skill, information, and resources to perform the job done by a subunit, the subunit’s power is diminished. Admittedly, some individuals and subunits have vast amounts of influence to get others to do things the way they want them done. However, there is also obedience to perceived authority. Where a person’s or a subunit’s influence starts and stops is difficult to pinpoint. Individuals who seemingly possess only minor authority can influence others. A series of classic studies by Stanley Milgram focused on the illusion of power. The Milgram experiments indicate that exercising power in an authoritative way isn’t the only way that power can be exerted. Power is often exerted by individuals who have only minimum or no actual power. An individual may be able to significantly influence others simply because she’s perceived to have power. The “eye of the beholder” plays an important role in the exercise of power. Subjects in the experiments were adult men from a variety of occupations and social positions in the New Haven, Connecticut, area. Upon arriving at the laboratory, each subject was introduced to his supposed cosubject, a man of about 50 who was actually working with Milgram. The two were asked to draw lots to determine who would be the “teacher” and who the “learner.” The drawing was rigged. The real subject always became the teacher. The experiment was ostensibly designed to find out about the effects of punishment on learning. Whenever the learner made a mistake, he was to be punished with an electric shock. A shock-generating machine was used. It had 30 switches on it, the first delivering 15 volts, the second 30, and so on up to 450 volts, where the switch was labeled, “Danger— Severe Shock—XXX.” The teacher (the real subject) then took his place at the shock-generating machine, where he could not see the learner (Milgram’s confederate). The plan was for the learner to make many mistakes in repeating words given to him by the teacher. With each mistake, the teacher was told to increase the shocks. At 75 volts, the teacher could hear grunts coming from the learner, who was actually faking as instructed by Milgram. At 150 volts, the learner shouted, “Let me out,” and said his heart couldn’t stand the pain. He began to yell. He let out an agonizing scream at 285 volts and refused to go on, but seemingly kept trying and made even more mistakes. Most teachers became very upset. Some asked the experimenter whether it was proper to continue. No matter what the teacher asked or how he protested, the experimenter only said, “The experiment requires that we go on.” The subjects were also told, “You have no other choice; you must go on.” Milgram wanted to know how many subjects would defy the orders to go on and how many would continue. Before these experiments were conducted, 40 psychiatrists were asked their opinions about whether the subjects would quit. Only 4 percent of the subjects, the psychiatrists predicted, would continue to shock learners who failed to respond. But look at Figure 10.2 to see what actually happened. Individuals and subunits continually engage in political behavior. By political behavior, we mean 1. Behavior that is usually outside the legitimate, recognized power system. 2. Behavior that is designed to benefit an individual or subunit, often at the expense of the organization in general. 3. Behavior that is intentional and is designed to acquire and maintain power. As a result of political behavior, the formal power that exists in an organization is often sidetracked or blocked. A study on political tactics found the following practices deployed: 1. Rule evasion—evading the organization’s formal procedures. 2. Personal-political—using friendships to facilitate or inhibit an action. 3. Educational—attempting to persuade others 4. Organizational—attempting to change the formal or informal interaction patterns. These four political tactics were outside the legitimate power system. Impression management refers to the behaviors individuals use to preserve their self-image and/or influence the ways in which others perceive them. In other words, individuals who engage in impression management attempt to control information about themselves so as to create a favorable impression with important others in the workplace. Impression management can also be used by organizations that attempt to influence constituents’ impressions to gain specific rewards; such rewards can include regaining stakeholder confidence after a controversial event. Although impression management tactics have been categorized in a number of different ways, we will refer to them as falling into one of two categories: self-presentation strategies are employed by an individual in an attempt to make him/herself more appealing to important others, and are accomplished through verbal and nonverbal means (e.g., smiling, eye contact); and other-enhancement tactics focus on agreement with important others. Table 10.1 includes a list of impression management tactics. If anything, the available research indicates that politics exists in organizations and that some individuals are very adept at political behavior. Mintzberg and others describe these adept politicians as playing games. The games that managers and nonmanagers engage in are intended to resist authority (e.g., the insurgency game); counter the resistance to authority (e.g., the counterinsurgency game); build power bases (e.g., the sponsorship game and coalition-building game); defeat rivals (e.g., the line versus staff game); and affect organizational change (e.g., the whistle-blowing game). In all, Mintzberg describes and discusses 13 political games. Six are briefly presented here. Issues of power and politics often involve ethical issues as well. For example, if power is used within the formal boundaries of a manager’s authority and within the framework of organizational policies, job descriptions, procedures, and goals, it’s really nonpolitical power and most likely doesn’t involve ethical issues. But use of power outside the bounds of formal authority, politics, procedures, job descriptions, and organizational goals is political in nature. When this occurs, ethical issues are likely to be present. Managers confront ethical dilemmas in their jobs because they frequently use power and politics to accomplish their goals. Each manager, therefore, has an ethical responsibility. Recently researchers have developed a framework that allows a manager to integrate ethics into political behavior. Researchers recommend that a manager’s behavior must satisfy certain criteria to be considered ethical. Utilitarian outcomes. The manager’s behavior results in the optimal satisfaction of people both inside and outside the organization. In other words, it results in the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Individual rights. The manager’s behavior respects the rights of all affected parties. In other words, it respects basic human rights of free consent, free speech, freedom of conscience, privacy, and due process. Distributive justice. The manager’s behavior respects the rules of justice. It treats people equitably and fairly, not arbitrarily. What does a manager do when a potential behavior cannot pass the three criteria? Researchers suggest that it may still be considered ethical in the particular situation if it passes the criterion of overwhelming factors. To be justified, the behavior must be based on tremendously overwhelming factors in the nature of the situation, such as conflicts among criteria (e.g., the manager’s behavior results in both positive and negative results), conflicts within the criteria and/or an incapacity to employ the first three criteria. Review objectives. Lecture Tips Lecture Ideas 1. To enhance student understanding of French and Raven's five bases of interpersonal power, have your students identify a leader for whom they have worked and assess the leader's power in terms of the five bases. In discussing their power profiles, have them consider: (1) The limits of expert power (the boundaries of the power base). (2) The potential costs of coercive power (why its use can have unpredictable effects). 2. In your discussion of the upward flow of power, ask students for examples of this flow, drawing from their own work experiences. Have they experienced situations where subordinates possessed substantial influence in the organization? What was/were the base(s) of their influence? 3. Students should also be able to provide numerous examples of subunit/departmental power based on substitutability, centrality, and in particular, the ability to cope with a key strategic contingency. Ask your students: in an organization in which you've worked, what department was the most powerful? Why? 4. Most people at some point have experienced an illusion of power, believing that someone or some unit was more powerful than was actually the case. Ask your students whether they've ever observed a power illusion and discuss why the individual or unit appeared to possess more power than was actually so. What was the source of this illusory power? Project Ideas 1. Have students prepare a brief written profile of a department in an organization in which they've worked. The report should diagnose the department's level and bases of power using chapter concepts (e.g., centrality, substitutability, coping via absorption, prevention, and information). 2. Have students distinguish top down from bottom up sources of power. How should managers utilize both sources? 3. Have students research the correlation of power versus politics within an organization. Should managers utilize power and politics within the department? If so, where and when? Discussion Questions 1. If you could only have one type of interpersonal power, which would it be and why? Answer: This question is intended to enhance student understanding of the different bases of power. Students should be able to identify a particular power base they think is most advantageous (e.g., legitimate, reward, coercive, expert, and referent) and the conditions that contribute to its presence. I would choose expert power because it derives from possessing valuable knowledge or skills. This type of power fosters respect and credibility, enables influence based on expertise, and contributes to effective problem-solving and decision-making, making it versatile and impactful in various situations. 2. Think of a co-worker, fellow student, or friend who seems to have a high need for power. What methods or tactics does this person use to try to influence others? Explain. Answer: While student responses may vary, a high need for power is derived from individual behavior. According to McClelland a high need for power is defined as the desire to have an impact on others. The impact of an individual having a need for power may be demonstrated in three ways: (1) by strong action, by giving help or advice, by controlling someone, (2) by action that produces emotion in others, and (3) by a concern for reputation. A person with a high need for power often uses tactics such as assertiveness, setting clear expectations, and leveraging their influence to shape decisions. They might also engage in networking to build alliances and use their authority or expertise to sway opinions and drive outcomes. 3. There is an old saying that “information is power.” What strategies should you follow to acquire and use information in a politically powerful manner? Describe. Answer: The old saying “information is power” is politically astute. Having access to relevant and important information gives power. Those who possess information needed to make optimal decisions have power. A true picture of a person’s power is provided not only by the person’s position but also by the person’s access to relevant information. Powerful managers exist because they allocate required resources, make crucial decisions, and have access to important information. Powerful managers also seek out and use information from all their employees. 4. Given the seemingly limitless amount of information on the Internet and the fact that anyone can access it with a few keyword searches in Google, do you believe that “information power” is easier or harder to develop nowadays? Explain your answer. Answer: Students may see the increase in access to the information highway as a means of equalizing information power in many instances. However, there will always be situations where one person or a small group of people have the ability to control important information. This access or special skill to control access may make information power harder to create and maintain. Information power is harder to develop nowadays because the sheer volume of accessible information makes it challenging to stand out. With so much data available, distinguishing oneself as a credible and authoritative source requires not only having accurate, relevant information but also effectively curating and communicating it to build trust and recognition. 5. Within the context of a hospital, what makes such subunits as the emergency room and critical care units so powerful? Explain. Answer: The strategic contingency theory focuses on subunit power. A strategic contingency is an even or activity that is extremely important for accomplishing organizational goals. Researchers found that a combination of high values on power indicators (substitutability, work flow pervasiveness, uncertainty, and workflow immediacy) gave a subunit dominant, first-rank power. By their vary nature, emergency rooms and critical care units score high on these power indicators. 6. Subunit power is an important topic for many managers. Assume you are the CEO of MTV or some other music television company. Which of the following two subunits would likely be more powerful within the company: The subunit responsible for creating cutting edge music videos? Or, the subunit responsible for deciding which MTV programs to be shown, when they’ll be shown, etc.? Choose one subunit and defend your answer. Answer: Answer will vary by student. Coping with uncertainty – the subunits more capable of coping with uncertainty typically acquire power. For this element it would appear that the programmer would be able to acquire more power. Centrality – the subunits most central to the flow of work in an organization typically acquire power. The programmer is definitely more central to the flow of work, with the potential for more power. Substitutability – refers to other subunits’ ability to perform activities of a particular subunit. In general it would appear that creative, forward-thinking video producers would be harder to replace than programmers, who would at least have statistics available to help them in their decisions. Because a subunits’ power increases by assuming activities critical to the organization, the programming subunit will likely be the more powerful, especially in the case of MTV. Cutting edge videos are no longer the focus of the programming schedule. The subunit responsible for deciding which MTV programs to be shown and their scheduling would likely be more powerful. This subunit controls the company’s content strategy and audience engagement, directly impacting viewership and revenue. Their decisions influence the overall brand image and financial performance, giving them significant leverage within the organization. 7. Why is it unrealistic to assume that little or no political game playing exists in an organization such as McDonald's or Chrysler? Answer: Political games are played in all organizations. It is naive to believe otherwise. Organizational structure is not perfectly designed in the sense of meeting the needs of all employees at all times. Thus, it is necessary for some individuals to engage in political behavior to obtain influence outside the authority structure to serve their needs and goals. 8. The sponsorship game has also been referred to, in a more negative tone, as “riding someone’s coat tails.” Why do you think some view this game in a negative way? Answer: Perhaps one reason this game is viewed negatively is the belief that the person who has the sponsor receives rewards and status that is undeserving. For example, a promotion may be granted solely because of a person’s connection to a sponsor, not for performance reasons. Another reason for the negative view may be the belief that the costs associated with this game are too high - i.e., loyalty to the sponsor at all costs. 9. If someone blows the whistle on his company’s actions because the action endangers lives, do you believe he should be fired? If not, what do you think should happen to this employee? Answer: This question should produce some interesting responses, especially in light of the recent media and regulatory attention that the tobacco industry has received. Several examples of whistle blowing and retaliation exist in this context. No, the employee should not be fired. Whistleblowing in the interest of public safety is a critical ethical action. Instead, the employee should be protected from retaliation and supported for their integrity. 10. Do you believe there is any type of organization that frequently operates without ethical standards in order to maintain success and profitability? Why or why not? Answer: Expect a good deal of divergence on this question. Have students use concrete examples to illustrate their point of view. Yes, some organizations may operate without ethical standards to maintain success and profitability, often in industries with weak regulations or high competition. This can lead to practices like exploitation, corruption, or misleading consumers. While such approaches might yield short-term gains, they often result in long-term damage to reputation, legal consequences, and loss of stakeholder trust. Case for Analysis: Terry’s Dilemma Case Summary This case illustrates the types of power one can acquire and the choices that must be made about that power when transitioning to a new job or department. Answers to Case Questions 1. Apply French and Raven’s bases of power to Jake and Terry. Explain your answer. Answer: Because Terry is a senior customer service representative, he has some legitimate power, although less than his supervisor. This is supplemented by expert power, because he is “the man” with all the answers, and coercive power, because he uses the work schedule to punish or reward colleagues in the department. Jake, on the other hand, is assumed to have had legitimate power, because he acted as a mentor to Terry and others. Although retired, he still receives calls both from his mentees and from the HR department asking for his opinion and advice. This implies a great deal of expert and/or referent power. 2. If Terry takes the job of supervisor, his bases of power may shift. Explain this change. Answer: If Terry takes the supervisory job, he will be moving from a well-established expert and coercive power base that one that is based on legitimate power. If he gets along well with others, he may also be able to develop referent power. It will take months of training and experience, however, to regain any expert or coercive power. This means that he will be moving well out of his comfort zone. 3. The chapter reintroduces McClelland’s need for power. How would you rate Jake and Terry’s “nPow”? Referring back to the chapter on motivation, how else might you apply McClelland’s theory to these two individuals? Explain your answer. Answer: Student answers will vary. However, McClelland says that the need for power expresses itself in three ways; (a) by strong action, by giving help or advice, by controlling someone; (b) by action that produces emotion in others; and (3) by a concern for reputation.. In this scenario, it would appear that both Jack and Terry have a strong need for power, as both thrive on giving help or advice. Terry also likes to control others, as illustrated by his manipulation of the schedule. Both men appear to have a concern for their reputation. Jack expresses it by meeting with and coaching Terry before making giving him an endorsement. Terry expresses it by worrying about having to walk away from the skills and respect that it has taken him years to earn in his current position. 4. What actions would you suggest to Terry for him to be successful in his new position? be sure to include political tactics in your answer. Answer: Student answers will vary, depending on their experience with organizational politics, their own preferred power bases, and the power bases that they feel will most appeal to Terry. To be successful, Terry should: 1. Build Relationships: Develop strong alliances with key stakeholders and influential colleagues. 2. Understand the Power Structure: Identify and navigate the internal power dynamics and influential figures. 3. Communicate Effectively: Regularly update stakeholders and seek feedback to align interests and gain support. 4. Show Results Early: Deliver quick wins to build credibility and demonstrate competence. 5. Leverage Influence: Use networking to gather support and advocate for necessary resources or changes. These actions will help Terry establish credibility and influence effectively in his new position. Experiential Exercise: Office Diplomacy: The Do's and Don'ts Objectives 1. To examine situations where power and office politics impact social decisions. 2. To illustrate the difficulties of office etiquette. The Exercise in Class This exercise is challenging because it deals with the ambiguity inherent in power and politics in organizations. It forces students to consider some tricky situations that often arise in organizations and have no easy or clearly "right" solutions. Expect some variability in the answers that students select for each scenario. 1. Individually and in groups, students should consider both the short and long term implications of their choices. 2. Have students comment on the power relationships and/or political tactics and games evident in each scenario. Ten Term Paper Topics 1. (Select example): A Profile of the Use of Referent Power 2. The Five Bases of Interpersonal Power: An Overview of Research 3. The Potential Benefits/Costs of the Use of Coercive Power 4. (Selected example): A Profile of Whistle-blowing and Its Consequences 5. Topic for Term Paper Debate: Is Politics Necessary and Beneficial for Organizations? 6. Hitler's Nazi Party: A Profile in Power 7. (Selected example): Profile of a Subunit's Substitutability/Centrality and Its Resulting Power 8. Crozier's Maintenance Workers and their Power: A Closer Look 9. Milgram's Study of Authority and Power: A Closer Look 10. (Selected example): Profile of an Illusion of Power Instructor Manual for Organizations: Behavior, Structure, Processes James L. Gibson, John M. Ivancevich, James H. Donnally, Robert Konopaske 9780078112669, 9781259097232, 9780071086417, 9780071315272
Download
Close
Close
