Transcript Slajd 1 - Supernat

Power
in organizations
dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat
Institute of Administrative Studies
University of Wrocław
Power in organizations
Organizations
can be defined as
systems of power:
 an interconnected
series of order-givers
and order-followers
 tools by which those
people with power can
use other people to
achieve particular goals
Power in organizations
It is important to note that:
individuals who are not
formally designated as ordergivers in an organization may
also wield power, that is, be able
to get others to carry out their
wishes

individuals who are not official
members of the organization
may influence others in the
organization to do as they wish

From this point of view we can
think of power in and around
organizations.
Power in organizations
Relational character of power
Power has to do with relationships between two or more actors
in which the behavior of one is affected by the behavior of the
other.
Robert A. Dahl: A has power over B to the extent that he can
get B to do something B would not otherwise do.
This simple definition captures the essence of the power concept. It implies an important point that is often neglected: the
power variable is a relational one. A manager, a group or a department cannot have power in isolation; rather, the concept
describes a relationship between a given individual or organizational unit and another specified person or collectivity.
dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat
Robert. A. Dahl (born 1915)
Power in organizations
Types of power: authority
Richard H. Hall, Pamela S. Tolbert:
Authority is a type of power that is based on the acceptance by
others of a given individual’s legitimate right to issue orders or
directives.
Thus, orders are followed because it is believed that they ought
to be followed; recipients are expected to „suspend judgment”
and comply voluntarily.
The exercise of authority requires a common value system
among members of a collectivity: one that defines who has the
right to give orders to whom, and under what conditions.
dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat
Pamela S. Tolbert
Power in organizations
Max Weber: Authority (rational-legal, traditional, and charismatic
authority) is the probability that certain specific commands (or all
commands) from a given source will be voluntarily obeyed by a given
group of people.
Rational-legal authority rests on a belief in the legality of patterns of normative rules and the right of those elevated to authority under such rules to
issue commands. Rational-legal authority characterizes most power relationships in contemporary organizations.
Traditional authority rests on a belief in the sanctity of immemorial traditions (on a belief that an established set of social relations is divinely intended) and the legitimacy of the status of those exercising authority under them.
The system of pope, cardinals, archbishops, and so on in the Roman Catholic
Church reflects the belief in a divinely ordained set of relations.
Charismatic authority rests on devotion to the specific and exceptional
sanctity, heroism or exemplary character of an individual person and of normative patterns or order revealed or ordained by him. If a person with
rational-legal authority can extend this through the exercise of charismatic
authority, he has more power over subordinates than that prescribed by the
organization. This additional power may be harnessed to enhance the performance of the organizations.
dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat
Max Weber (1864-1920)
Power in organizations
Sanford M. Dornbusch and W. Richard Scott distinguished:
Endorsed power: subordinates accept and comply with the orders given by
their superiors (bottom-up view of authority). Herbert A. Simon: The most
striking characteristic of the „subordinate” role is that it establishes an area of
acceptance in behavior within which the subordinate is willing to accept the
decisions made for him by his superior. […] the superior is merely a bus
driver whose passengers will leave unless he takes them in the direction they
wish to go. They leave him only minor discretion as to road to be followed.
•
Authorized power: an individual’s orders are supported and enforced by
higher-level members of an organization, and ultimately, by the larger society
(top-down view of authority). E.g. M. Weber’s top-down approach is based on
the assumption that noncompliance with an order given by a person with
normatively approved authority will result in the application of sanctions by
the larger group.
•
The above distinction addresses an old debate over the locus of authority in
organizations. By distinguishing between endorsed and authorized power
they recognized that authority has both bottom-up and top-down aspects.
The distinction is useful in thinking about situations involving different types
of organizational conflicts over authority: mutiny, coup d’etat, civil disobiedence, revolution, and so forth.
dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat
Sanford M. Dornbusch
W. Richard Scott
Power in organizations
Other types of power
Although authority is an important type of power in organizations, it is
not the only type. Other types of power relationships entail
dependency: one party’s need or desire for something that another
party can provide. When two parties need each other equally, their
dependency is mutual. But when dependency is not balanced, then
one actor may have more power over another then vice versa.
The things that actors may possess or control that can be sources of
power are usually referred to as (power) resources. Basic resources
that may provide organizational members with power above and
beyond the formal authority they hold are:
 persons
 information
 instrumentalities (physical or tangible resources, such as machinery, office supplies, and money)
 nontangible, social factors (such as status and friendship)
dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat
Power in organizations
Access to resources of power
can be affected by:
the official/formal organizational position
an individual holds
 structural position (thought in terms
of network relations): links to others provide
access to information and power
 personal characteristics (e.g. social
attractiveness or intelligence)

Having access to resources that others desire isn’t
sufficient, by itself, to provide individuals with
power. Rather power rests on how much these
resources are highly valued or considered to be
important, whether their acquisition is difficult or
uncertain, and whether other resources can be
substituted for them or not.
It’s important to emphasize that the value,
uncertainty, and lack of substitutability of resources
are not necessarily given – these qualities can be
socially constructed, or manipulated.
Power in organizations
Shifts in power
There is not
a fixed amount of power
in the organization
for all the time;
the amount of power
can expand (or contract)
due to:

delegation
empowerment

employeeship

Power in organizations
Delegation
Delegation is the downward transfer of authority from superior to subordinate (or subordinates). The subordinate
is empowered to act for the superior, while the superior
remains accountable for the outcome. Delegation of authority is a person-to-person relationship requiring trust,
commitment, and contracting between the superior and
the subordinate.
dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat
Power in organizations
Good News Bible, Exodus; 18, 13-23:
The next day Moses was settling disputes among the people, and he
was kept busy from morning till night. When Jethro saw everything that
Moses had to do, he asked, „What is all this that you are doing for the people? Why are you doing this all alone, with people standing here from morning till night to consult you?”.
Moses answered, „I must do this because the people come to me to
learn God’s will. When two people have a dispute, they come to me, and I
decide which one of them is right, and I tell them God’s commands and laws”.
Then Jethro said, „You are not doing it the right way. You will wear
yourself out and these people as well. This is too much for you to do alone.
Now let me give you some good advice […] you should choose some capable
men and appoint them as leaders of the people: leaders of thousands, hundreds, fifties, and tens. They must be God-fearing men who can be trusted
and who cannot be bribed. Let them serve as judges for the people on a
permanent basis. They can bring all the difficult cases to you, but they themselves can decide all the smaller disputes. This will make it easier for you, as
they share your burden. If you do this, as God commands, you will not wear
yourself out, and all these people can go home with their disputes settled”.
dr hab. Jerzy Supernat
Power in organizations
Benefits of delegating:
• leaves delegator (superior) free to concentrate on more important
strategic issues
• increases job satisfaction for delegator and subordinate
• helps subordinate to develop new skills
• helps subordinate to grow in confidence
• provides an opportunity to assess subordinates’ potential
• fosters teamwork
• helps create a more motivated workforce
• enhances morale
• improves communication through feedback
• creates fresh insights into work issues
• helps create a climate for achievement
• ultimately speeds up results
• reduces costs (subordinate’s time is less expensive than delegator’s
time)
• increases chances of promotion for delegator
• ensures smooth succession when delegator is promoted
dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat
Power in organizations
Power outcomes
 compliance and involvement
- alienative involvement (associated with
the use of coercion)
- calculative involvement (associated with
the use of remunerative rewards)
- moral involvement (associated with the
use of symbolic rewards satisfying social
or psychological needs)


persuasion
- direct discussion with the person
who has issued an order
- going over the boss’s head
withdrawal
- complete departure from the
organization
- psychological disengagement (making
only the barest efforts required to remain
in the organization)
The recipient of exercised power 

conflict (the resistance to power)
Power in organizations
Conflict
Conflict arises
whenever
individuals
or groups
(organizational
units) perceive
differences in
their preferences
involving decision
outcomes, and
they use power
to try to promote
their own
preferences
over others.
Power in organizations
There is a strong tendency to view
conflicts as necessarily harmful,
or bad for organizations.
However, research indicates that
conflict can serve positive functions
in organizations.
The pervasiveness and constancy of conflict in
organizations calls into question the propensity to
attribute conflict to individual failings: trouble is due
to trouble-makers. Organizational conflicts stem
from differentiation, which leads people and units
to have different and opposing interests, from
overlapping or similarity in the functions of two
units, and from interest-group struggles over the
organizational rewards of status, prestige, and
monetary reward.
Power in organizations
Components of conflict situations:
parties involved (at least two)
 field of conflict (alternative outcomes toward which conflict can move)
 dynamics of the conflict situation (e.g. if one of the parties becomes
more militant, the other will probably do the same)
 management (control, resolution) of conflict

Methods of dealing
with conflict
as seen by
Mary Parker Follett
(1868-1933)

domination

compromise

integration
Power in organizations
Aftermath
The resolution of a conflict
leads to a stage that is known
as the aftermath. This is a useful
concept because conflict resolution
does not lead to a condition of total
settlement:
 if the basic issues are not resolved,
the potential for future, and perhaps
more serious, conflicts is part
of the aftermath
 if the conflict resolution leads
to more open communication
and cooperation among
the participants, that, too,
is part of aftermath
Concluding remark
We look forward to the time when the Power of Love will
replace the Love of Power. Then will our world know the
blessings of peace.
William E. Gladstone, 1809-1898
dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat