CHAPTER FIVE

ORGANIZATIONAL POWER, AND POLITICS

7.1 ORGANIZATIONAL POWER

7.1.1 THE MEANING OF POWER

Different authors have defined power differently. Of the many definitions, some are:

 Power is a potential force and in more detail “as the potential ability to influence
behaviour, to change the course of events, to overcome resistance, and to get people to do
things they would not otherwise do.”

 Power is the capacity of a person, team, or organisation to influence others. Power is not
the act of changing others’ attitudes or behaviour; but the potential to do so.

 Power refers to a capacity that A has to influence the behaviour of B so that B does
something he/she wouldn’t otherwise do. This definition implies (1) a potential that need
not be actualized to be effective, (2) a dependence relationship, and (3) that B has some
discretion over his or her won behaviour. Let’s look at each of these points more closely.

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 dependence. The
greater B’s dependence on A, the greater A’s power in the relationship. Dependence, in
turn, is based on alternatives that B perceives and the importance that B places on the
alternatives that A controls. A person can have power over you only if he or she controls
something you desire.

For A to get B to do something he or she otherwise wouldn’t do means B must have the
discretion to make choices. At the extreme, if B’s job behaviour is so programmed that
he is allowed no room to make choices, he obviously is constrained in his ability to do
something other than what he is doing.

Dependency: The Key to Power

The General Dependency Postulate

Let’s begin with a general postulate: The greater B’s dependency on A, the greater 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 super-rich, money is no longer power. But, as the old saying goes, “In the
land of 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.

What Creates Dependency?

Dependency is increased when the resource you control is important and scarce.

1
IMPORTANCE If nobody wants what you have got, it’s not going to create dependency. To create
dependency, therefore, you must control things that are perceived as important.

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 relationship
can help to explain how low-ranking members in an organization who have important
knowledge not available to high-ranking members, can gain power over the high-ranking
members. The need to obtain a scarce resource – in this case, important knowledge – makes the
high-ranking member dependent on the low-ranking member.

Usually definitions of power are intertwined with the concepts of authority and influence. For
example, the preceding definition uses the word influence in describing power, the pioneering
management theorist Chester Barnard defined power in terms of “informal authority,” & many
organizational sociologists define authority as “legitimate Power.” These distinctions among
concepts need to be cleared up to better understand power.

7.1.2 LEADERSHIP vs. POWER

Leadership and power are closely intertwined. Leaders use power as a way to attain group goals,
and power is a means for facilitating their achievement.

What differences are their between leadership and power?

1. One difference is related 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 the led.

2. The other difference deals with the direction that research on the two concepts has taken.
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 subordinates? In contrast, the research on power has tended to encompass a
broader area and focus on tactics for gaining compliance. It has gone beyond the
individual as exerciser because power can be used by groups as well as individuals to
control other individuals or groups.

7.1.3 BASES OF POWER

Having power can increase the effectiveness of a manager by enabling the manager to influence
people to what is wanted. Leaders in organizations typically rely on some or all of five major
types of power: legitimate, reward, coercive, expert and referent. The first three power bases are
derived from the power holder’s position; that is, the person receives these power bases because
of the specific authority or roles he or she is assigned in the organisation. The latter two sources
of power originate from the power holder’s own characteristics. In other words, people bring
these power bases to the organisation.

SOURCES OF POWER IN ORGANISATIONS & CONTINGENCIES OF POWER

1. Legitimate power is an agreement among organisational members that people in certain

roles can request specific behaviour of others. This perceived right generally comes from the
person’s position. These rights exist in formal job descriptions as well as informal rules of
2
 conduct. It exists when a subordinate or influencee acknowledges that the influencer has a
“right” or is lawfully entitled to influence-with in certain bounds. It is related to the position,
rather than to the person perse, so it is clearly a function of the leader's position in the
organization and is completely independent of any of the leader's personal characteristics.
Thus, the higher a manager is in the organizational hierarchy, the greater is the “perceived
power” thought by subordinates to exist.
 But obedience to authority depends on more than the rights assigned by senior
executives. It also depends on employees accepting this arrangement.
 People in high power distance cultures (i.e., those who accept an unequal distribution
of power) are more likely to comply with legitimate power than people in low power
distance cultures.
 Where legitimate power is strong, those receiving the order suspend judgement and let
the power holder guide their behaviour.
 Employees are generally becoming less willing to accept legitimate power. Thus other
forms, particularly expert and referent power must replace the command style of
leadership that often guided employee behaviour in the past.

2. Reward power is derived from the person’s ability to control the allocation of rewards
valued by others and to remove negative sanctions (i.e., negative reinforcement). Managers
have formal authority that gives them power over the distribution of organisational rewards
such as pay, promotions, time off, vacation schedules, and work assignments. The greater a
manager’s control over valued rewards, the greater the manager's reward power and the
more power to influence.

 Employees may have reward power by extolling praise and extending personal benefits
within their discretion to other co-workers.
 As organisations delegate responsibility and authority, work teams gain reward power
over their members.
 In some organisations, subordinates have reward power over their bosses through the
use of 360-degree feedback systems.

3. Coercive power (in the organisational context) is the ability to apply punishment. Forms of
coercion or punishment include criticisms, terminations, reprimands, suspensions, warning
letters that go into an individual’s personnel file, negative performance appraisals, demotions
and with held pay raises, (punishment may range from loss of a minor privilege to loss of
one's job).

Coercive power is usually used to maintain a minimum standard performance or

conformity among subordinates. The greater the freedom to punish others, the greater a
manager’s coercive power. And the more coercive power a manager uses, the more resentment
and opposition he/she faces from subordinates.

Labour Unions might use coercive power tactics, such as withholding services, to influence
management in collective agreement negotiations.
 Clients use coercive power by threatening to take their business elsewhere unless
certain improvements occur.
 During times of low unemployment, employees have coercive power over their
employees because they pose a higher risk of quitting.
 Team members sometimes apply sanctions, ranging from sarcasm to ostracism, to
ensure that co-workers conform to team norms. An increasing number of firms rely on
the coercive power of team members to control co-worker behaviour.

3
4. Expert power originates from within the person. It is an individual’s or work unit’s capacity
to influence others by possessing knowledge or skills they want. It is power based on the
possession of expertise, knowledge, skill or information. To the extent that a leader
possesses expertise and information that is needed or desired by others, the leader has expert
power. Physicians, lawyers, and university professors may have considerable influence on
others because they are respected for their special knowledge.
 Employees are gaining expert power in the work-place as our society moves from an
industrial to a knowledge based economy. The reason is that employee knowledge
becomes the means of production, not some machine that the owner controls. Without
this control over production, owners are more dependent on employees to achieve their
corporate objectives.

5. Referent power is held by people when others identify with them, like them, or otherwise
respect them. It is largely a function of the person’s interpersonal skills and usually develops
slowly. The strength of referent power is directly related to such factors as the amount of
prestige and admiration the influence confers up on the influencer. The more that a leader is
able to cultivate the liking, identification, and admiration of others, the greater the referent
power.
 Referent power is typically associated with charismatic leadership. Charisma is defined
as a form of interpersonal attraction whereby followers develop a respect for and trust
in the charismatic individual.

Although all five types of power are potential means of influencing others, in actual usage they may
engender somewhat different levels of subordinate motivation. Subordinates can react to a leader’s
direction with commitment, compliance, or resistance. With commitment, employees respond
enthusiastically and exert a high level of effort toward organizational goals. With compliance,
employees exert at least minimal efforts to complete directives but are likely to deliver average,
rather than stellar, performance. With resistance, employees may appear to comply but actually do
the absolute minimum, possibly even attempting to sabotage the attainment of organizational goals.
The details are shown under ‘consequences of power’ section.

CONSEQUENCES OF POWER

We use power to influence others, but the type of influence depends on the power source used.
Coercive power is generally the least desirable source because it generates resistance by the
person or department being influenced. In other words, the targeted person tends to oppose the
attempt to influence and actively tries to avoid carrying it out. Applying coercive power also
reduces trust between the parties and increases employee dissatisfaction. Resistance and distrust
also occur when other power bases are used arrogantly or in a manipulative way.

Reward and legitimate power tend to produce compliance, whereby people are motivated to
implement the power holder's request for purely instrumental reasons. Suppose that your boss
gives you a bonus for performing an extra task that you wouldn't otherwise accept. The reward
will get you to comply with the request, but not to perform the task with enthusiasm.
Commitment is the strongest form of influence, whereby people identify with the power holder's
request and are motivated to implement it even when there are no extrinsic benefits in doing so.
Commitment is the most common consequence of expert and referent power. For instance,
employees will follow a charismatic leader and do more than is asked because this power base
evokes commitment rather than compliance or resistance.

4
Power also affects the power holder. Some people have a strong need for power and are
motivated to acquire it for personal or organizational purposes. These individuals are more
satisfied and committed to their jobs when they have increased responsibility, authority, and
discretion. However, people who acquire too much power often abuse their position to better
their personal interests and to gain more power. Powerful employees tend to use their influence
more often than is necessary, devalue their less powerful co-workers, and reduce their
interpersonal associations with them. They also use their power to acquire more power. If
unchecked, powerful employees eventually become even more powerful. In short, there appears
to be some truth in Lord Acton's well-known statement that "power tends to corrupt; absolute
power corrupts absolutely."

5
7.2 ORGANISATIONAL POLITICS

A Political Perspective of Power in Organisations

The classical organisation theorists portrayed organisations as highly rational structures in which
authority meticulously followed the chain of command and in which managers had legitimised
power. The political perspective of organisations departs from the rational, idealistic model. For
example, Walter Nord dispels some of the dreams of ideal, rationally structures and humanistic
organisations by pointing out some of the stark realities of political power. He suggests four
postulates of power in organisations that help focus on the political realities:
1. Organisations 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 has dehumanising effects.
4. The exercise of power within organisations is one very critical aspect of the exercise of
power within the larger social system.

Individuals and subunits continually engage in politically oriented behaviour. Politically oriented
behaviour means a number of things:

1. Behaviour that usually is outside the legitimate, recognized power system

2. Behaviour that is designed to benefit an individual or subunit, often at the expense of the
organization in general
3. Behaviour that is intentional and is designed to acquire and maintain power

As a result of politically oriented behaviours, the formal power that exists in an organization often
is sidetracked or blocked. In the language of organizational theory, political behaviour results in
the displacement of power.

Organisational politics represents attempts to influence others using discretionary behaviours

to promote personal objectives. It involves actions by individuals / groups to acquire, develop,
and use power and other resources in order to obtain preferred outcomes when there is
uncertainty or disagreement about choices.

Research on organizational politics has identified several areas that are particularly relevant to the
degree to which organizations are political rather than rational. These areas can be summarized as
follows:

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 & complex the goals become, the more politics there will be.
4. Technology & 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 reorganisation or a planned organization development (OD) effort or even an
unplanned change brought about by external forces will encourage political manoeuvring.

The preceding implies that some organizations and subunits within the organization will be more
political than others. By the same token, however, it is clear that most of today's organizations meet
these requirements for being highly political. That is, they have limited resources; make ambiguous,
6
uncertain decisions; have unclear yet complex goals; have increasingly complex technology; and are
undergoing drastic change. This existing situation facing organizations makes them more political,
and the power game becomes increasingly important. Miles states: "In short, conditions that
threaten the status of the powerful or encourage the efforts of those wishing to increase their power
base will stimulate the intensity of organizational politics and increase the proportion of decision-
making behaviours that can be classified as political as opposed to rational."

Specific Political Strategies for Power Acquisition

Once it is understood and accepted that contemporary organizations are in reality largely political
systems, some very specific strategies can be identified to help organization members more
effectively acquire power.

For example, one recent research study found that a supervisor-focused political strategy resulted
in higher levels of career success, whereas a job-focused political strategy resulted in lower levels
of success. Another recent taxonomy of political strategies included the following:

1. Information strategy—targets political decision makers by providing information through

lobbying or supplying position papers or technical reports
2. Financial incentive strategy—targets political decision makers by providing financial
incentives such as honoraria for speaking or paid travel
3. Constituency building strategy—targets political decision makers indirectly through
constituent support such as grassroots mobilization of employees, suppliers, customers, or public
relations/press conferences
Political strategies for attaining power in Organizations
For over 20 years, various political strategies  Taking counsel
for gaining power in organizations have been  Maintaining manoeuvrability
suggested. Representative summary of these  Promoting limited communication
strategies is given in the table on the right. Re-  Exhibiting confidence
search is also being done on political tactics.  Controlling access to information and persons
For example, Yukl & Falbe derived nine  Making activities central and nonsubstitutable
political, or influence tactics that are commonly  Creating a sponsor-protégé relationship
found in today's organizations. These tactics  Stimulating competition among ambitious subordinates
used by individuals to influence their superiors,  Neutralizing potential opposition
co-workers, and subordinates to do what they  Making strategic replacements
wanted them to do. These tactics are:  Committing the uncommitted
 Forming a winning coalition
1. Consultation. Used to gain your support for  Developing expertise
a course of action by letting you participate  Building personal stature
in the planning for the action  Employing trade-offs
2. Rational persuasion. Used to convince you  Using research data to support one's own point of view
that a particular course of action is  Restricting communication about real intentions
"logically" the best course because it is in  Withdrawing from petty disputes
your best interest
3. Inspirational appeals. Used to gain support by appealing to your values or ideals, or by
increasing your confidence that the desired course of action will be successful
4. Ingratiating tactics. Used to create a sense of obligation because someone is doing something
nice for you. Designed to make it difficult for you not to support the course of action desired
by the ingratiatory.
5. Coalition tactics. Used to gain your support by seeking the help of others to persuade you, or
by using the support of others as an argument for you to also give your support

7
6. Pressure tactics. The use of demands, intimidation, or threats to gain your support for a
particular course of action
7. Legitimating. Used to gain your support by claiming the authority to ask for your support, or
by claiming that such support is consistent with organizational policies or rules
8. Personal appeals. Used to appeal to your feelings of loyalty and friendship in order to gain
your support
9. Exchange tactics. Used to gain your support by the promise that you will receive a reward or
benefit if you comply, or by reminding you of prior favours which you must now reciprocate

8
9