Search This Blog

Thursday, March 11, 2010

Power and Politics

Jenna Doucet (2010).


Power and Politics

Power is commonly given a negative connotation. For example, the color red, which is a symbolism for power, is much less frequently used in advertisements than the color blue because of its obtrusiveness. Furthermore, a popular political slogan during the cold war days was “better dead than red” (Pigments through the ages, 2009, n.p). The meaning of power has been misunderstood because of abuses made by individuals in positions of authority and power. However, according to McShane (2006) the true meaning of power is simply the ability of an individual or organization to influence. Although power and influence can be exercised positively or negatively and for both positive and negative outcomes, it would be a mistake for organizations to allow negative connotations to limit the benefits of power within an organization because. Rather, organizations should avoid promoting and instead condone political behavior. Organizational politics is an influence tactic exercised at the expense of one’s coworkers, and the entire organization (Gilmore, Ferris, Dulebohn, & Harrell-Cook, 2010). Power and organizational politics, frequently intertwined, make drawing the line between the two a difficult task. A throughout understanding of both, however, may serve as an important first step.

Organizational power

One of the most important factors to bear in mind is that power is a two-way relationship. To this effect Ambur (2009) states: “ Power and authority come from the person being influenced- not the person in the more powerful position. If the follower chooses to not follow them, they are no longer leaders. Leadership is really followership” (p. 3). Furthermore, McShane (2006) believes that “ The most basic prerequisite of power is that one person or group believes it is dependent on another person or group for something of value” (p. 345). Interdependence between parties forges the relationship of power and hierarchy in organizations. Power can only really exist in relationships in which each individual has something of value to offer. Five categories make up organizational power, which identify the various ways individuals extrude and perceive power. The key to organizational power is the perception of others as legitimate, reward, coercive, expert, or referent power. It is important to note that the perception of power extends beyond the individual’s position of authority within an organization (McShane, 2006). In evaluating the bases of social power identified by French and Raven (also depicted above by McShane) Ambur (2009) illustrates the relationships between the various expressions of power. Ambur (2009) says that:
“Reward power results from the ability to provide reinforcement for desired behavior. Conversely, coercive power reflects the potential to inflict punishment. In a sense these are not so much two different types of power as they are opposite ends of a continuum. The common and essential element for both reward and punishment is that they are controlled by the superior person and are conferred upon subordinates based upon relationships that are less than perfectly aligned with their behaviors. Referent power is a function of the respect and esteem accorded to an individual by virtue of personal attributes with which others identify. By contrast, legitimate power is based upon authority recognized in accordance, with position in an organizational structure. Referent power is person oriented, while legitimate power is depersonalized. Expert power is a form of referent power resulting from recognized expertise” (p. 1).
Organizational politics
Within any organization there is bound to be a struggle between the power of individuals to influence positively the organization and self-serving politics played around situations or people for selfish reasons. Organizational politics are influence tactics exercised at the expense of one’s coworkers, or the entire organization (Gilmore, Ferris, Dulebohn, & Harrell-Cook, 2010). McShane (2006) states that, “organizational politics is either supported or punished, depending on team norms and the organization’s culture” (p. 345). An important question is to consider why an organization allows such behavior if research shows that it has negative consequences. Political tactic are attributed to conflicts in the workplace, stress, and job dissatisfaction, to name a few (McShane, 2006 and Gilmore, Ferris, Dulebohn, & Harrell-Cook, 2010). The answer can be found by a combination of the following. A work environment with scarce resources will support political behavior if it allows individuals to pursue their goals. A lack of clear structure and decisions may leave more room for ambiguity in political power. Furthermore, team leaders who value personal power have higher propensities to use and support political tactics (McShane, 2006). Gilmore, Ferris, Dulebohn, and Harrell-Cook (2010) state, “ the political environment is created by the actions of organizational members and is influenced by the policies, practices, and culture of the organization” (p. 482). “ Organizational politics can be minimized by providing clear rules for resource allocation, establishing a free flow of information, using education and involvement during organizational change, supporting team norms and a corporate culture that discourage dysfunctional politics, and having leaders who role model organizational citizenship rather than political savvy” (McShane, 2006, p. 347).
Real life applications of power and politics
Conflicts of interest and the use of political tactics to influence individuals within an organization or society make headlines in business on a regular basis. Take for instance the U.S. propaganda of the Bush administration and voting machines controversy. The chief executive officer of the machines manufacturing company at the time, Wally O’Dell, openly declared that he would “deliver” Bush as president. Over the years, there has been much controversy surrounding the public support of political campaigns from influential individuals living public lives. One article devoted to the Winfrey and Obama controversy questions if Oprah is misusing her power and influence to sway the political campaign in her own favour. To this effect, Kohut (2007) says “ there is no telling whether Winfrey can do for Obama what she has done for the countless books and products she's endorsed over the years” (p. 1). What is unique in the O’Dell and Bush controversy is that O’Dell had the potential to ‘fix’ the election. Although never charged with fixing the election, O’Dell’s actions had significant consequences on the company he was working for. In other words, O’Dell was displaying a classic political stunt, in which he was exercising his influence and power for his own self-serving purposes at the expense of the company’s well being. Further complications aroused when O’Dell openly declared upon investigation of his company’s stock performance by the SEC “ There is a lot of pressure in the corporation to make the numbers: We don’t tell you how to do it, but do it” (p. 1). In response, Byrne (2005) states “O’Dell is probably the number culprit putting pressure on people” (p. 1). This type of behavior occurs more often than one wants to believe. Political pressures and power struggles can be found in almost any industry and if the appropriate guidelines in the use of power are not well defined it becomes easy for individuals to abuse their influence.

Power plays an important role in organizations. The consequences can yield positive results or if used in conjunction with political tactics can yield negative results. In practice, power is a two-way relationship in which parties interact accordingly to the resources or values they hold or control. Conflicts arise when resources are scarce, and when there is pressure to achieve goals that may not be realistic. To compensate individuals often manipulate their power to jockey for position and serve their own needs at the expense of others.



References

Ambur, O. (July, 2000). Bases of social power. University of Maryland. Retrieved on

March 9, 2010 from: http://www.slideshare.net/viteriange/bases-of-social-power-

2009.

Bryne, J. (2005) Diebold CEO resigns after reports of fraud litigation, internal woes.

The raw story. Retrieved on March 11, 2010 from:

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2005/Diebold_CEO_resigns_after_reports_of_12

12.html.

Gilmore, C., Ferris, G., Dulebohn, J., & Harrell-Cook, G. (2010). Organizational politics

and employee attendance. Group & Organization. Retrieved on March 9, 2010

from: Sage database.

Kohut, A. (September, 2007). The Oprah factor and campaign 2008. The Pew Research

Center. Retrieved on March 11, 2010 from: http://people-press.org/report/357/the-

oprah-factor-and-campaign-2008

McShane, S.L. (2006). Canadian Organizational Behaviour (6th ed). McGraw-Hill:

Ryerson.

Pigments through the ages. (2009). Retrieved on March 9, 2010 from:

http://www.webexhibits.org/pigments/.
.

No comments:

Post a Comment