How Theories of Power Explain Power-Related Phenomena in Contemporary Organisations - Assignment Example

Regarding the theories of power examined in Week 2, which one do you think is most relevant to explain power-related phenomena in contemporary organisations? Explain why you find this particular theory relevant and illustrate with examples.  In contemporary organizations I think the most relevant theory to explain power-related phenomena is Max Weber conception of Power because his definition of power that is “The probability that one actor within a social relationship will be in a position to carry out his (sic) own will despite resistance” (Weber 1922) best defines the power concept in modern organizations. Even though it was defined a century ago is still relevant and applicable. Weber’s (1922) power concept argues that power is not an individual’s property but it is a social phenomenon, an asymmetrical relationship between two individuals. He also stressed that power is intentional and through authority it is domination over other individual. Likewise in an organization power is formal, comes to an individual through the position he holds in the organization (Robbins et al 2001), it demands obedience from subordinates to the commands given by his superior, irrespective of subordinates personal goals and interests and his legitimacy of power comes from authority he exerts (PPK 2013). However Weber also pointed out that just because he holds the position, the position power does not become his property rather it is the relationship between him and the subordinate and how he is able to exert his authority (PPK 2013). Because I have seen that even though individuals hold same position in an organization they do not have the same influence on their subordinates. It shows that position in an organization gives power however it is the relationship between the superior and the subordinate that actually defines it and make it effective. It is the personal power base that is through the superior’s expert power that is “influence wielded as a result of expertise special skill or knowledge” and referent power that is based on the desirable personal traits of the superior, which defines power and is the most effective influence in an organization (Robbins et al 2001, p. 408). Also Weber’s leadership as charismatic domination is also relevant as of some of the most successful organizations is a result of their charismatic leaders who played a central role (PPK 2013) for example Bill Gates CEO of Microsoft, Steve Jobs former CEO of Apple etc., whose charismatic leadership not only resulted in one of the most successful products and services but also motivated and brought out the innovative qualities of their employees and used their creativity for a common goal that is organizational success. Their charismatic leadership and vision helped in establishing such huge and successful companies that are known for delivering innovative products with high quality example iPhone, iPad by Apple and Windows by Microsoft. • “The most basic prerequisite of power is that one person or group believes it is dependent on another person or group for a resource of value” (McShane et al 2013, p.318). Reflect on this claim from a critical perspective, and illustrate your answer with a real-life example derived from PPK materials or from your own experience or observation. Power is definitely a function of dependency, the greater an individual depends upon other for a resource of value, and the greater the other person has power over the individual in a relationship. One person can exert power on another only when that person controls something valuable that is desired by another. For example in an organization a superior enjoys power over subordinates because through his position controls their rewards which subordinates consider as valuable and thus their behaviour is influenced because of that dependency. Reward can be in financial or non-financial (Robbins et al 2001). It is not only true in organizational perspective but also true in personal relationships. For example when children are dependent upon their parents for financial support say for their college education, the parents power is more and children recognize it because it is valuable for them however if they are not dependent upon their parents for financial support then power does not exist and parents cannot control the child’s behaviour. However mere control of resources does not define the degree of power, it is the resource value to the individual that determines the degree of influence over other person. Resource should meet three criteria that it should be important, scarce and non-substitutable (Ratzberg 2009 and Robbins et al 2001). I have observed that power in international relations is also resource based, for example it is claimed that Middle East countries have high power because they control world’s 65 percent of oil and 45 percent of natural gas, that is very important, scarce and non-substitutable energy resource for western countries, without this resource control, Middle East countries would have very little power (Luft n.d.). However it is not always dependency on others for resources that defines power, it is relational for example husband has more power over wife because of cultural factors or stereotype, dominance through behaviour and person with nothing to lose or least interested has greater power over person who is dependent ( Fiske 1993 and Noel 2012). For example I have seen that people with louder voices and dominating behaviour and personality exert more power over others without controlling any resource of value, it happens in bullying, in personal relationships also when one person is least interested in the relationship exerts more power over the other person who wants that relationship to grow for example husband and wife’s relationship comes in that category, whoever is not interested in the relationship has more power than who wants to be in the relationship. • “For the most part, organisational politics is in the eye of the beholder.” (McShane et al 2013, p.67). Reflect on this claim and illustrate your reflections with one or two real-life examples derived from PPK materials or from your own experience or observation. Briefly consider the ethical implication of political behaviours in organisations. McShane et al, (2013, p.67) in his statement “for the most part, organizational politics is in the eye of the beholder” is referring to the subjectivity of organizational politics. One person may view an action or behaviour as political however another person might consider the same action or behaviour as fair and might term it as effective management in an organization (Vigod-Gadot 2006 and Robbins 2003) and some managers also believe that in organizational life, political behaviour is an integral part and necessary. For example certain actions in organization can be labelled political or effective management depending upon the perspective of the viewer like demonstrating loyalty by one person can be labelled as apple polishing by other and vice versa, likewise ambitiousness can be career-minded, cunning as practical minded etc., In an organization, conflict over organizational resources does exist due to limited resources and therefore it cannot satisfy everyone’s interest and people or groups whose interests are not satisfied or who have not got gained these resources often perceive that politics is at hand and think that it is at their expanse that others have gained resources which might or might not be true. The thin line between effective management and political behaviour gets blurred when organizations in allocating resources are not fair, transparent and facts used to allocate resources are also debatable (Robbins 2003). Everyday politics like coalitions forming, chain of command bypassing, complaining about peers to supervisor is legitimate political behaviour however whistle blowing, sabotage, harassment violates the rules of political behaviour and termed as illegitimate which is also unethical. And illegitimate political behaviour has serious consequences like imposing of extreme sanctions and losing membership of organization. Employees also respond negatively to organizational behaviour, it reduces their job satisfaction, increases their stress and anxiety, employer turnover increases and performance gets reduced (Robbins 2005 and Aronow 2004). However people indulging in illegitimate and unethical political behaviour are good at arguing that their actions are just and fair and using their power clout and get away with anything, therefore people with power should always consider whether their actions are in any way causing harm to others (Robbins et al 2001). For example the recent controversy surrounding FIFA about selecting Russia and Qatar to hold FIFA world cup in 2018 and 2022 is alleged to be illegitimate ethical behaviour by many countries. It was alleged that these two countries gained the venues by bribing FIFA officials to vote for them during selection process and presidential election however Qatar and Russia defend themselves saying that they have done nothing wrong and just because other countries have not been selected are crying foul (Pielke Jr 2013). In normal school life also I have experienced such cases that proves that politics is in the eye of the beholder, a student who obeys, studies well, tries to outdo others to be in the good books of the teacher and always get good scores, other students label it as political behaviour however from the students point of view he is just being a good student not buttering the teacher. But when the student sabotages other’s work, or tells lies or copies to get good marks without the teachers knowledge and then get good marks it is definitely illegitimate political behaviour. References Aronow, JA 2004, ‘The impact of organizational Politics on the work of the Internal Human Resource Professional’, Research Paper, University of Wisconsin, viewed 25 Mar, 2013, . Fiske, ST 1993, ‘Controlling other people: the impact of power on stereotyping’, American Psychologist. Vol. 48. No.6, pp 621-628. Luft G n.d, ‘Dependence on Middle East energy and its impact on global security’, Institute for the Analysis of Global Security. IAGS Org, viewed 27 Mar, 2013, McShane, LS and Gillnow. MAV and Sharma RR 2013, Organisational Behaviour. Tata McGraw Hill Education. Noel, J 2012, ‘Interpersonal power and dominance’, Quizlet, viewed 27 Mar, 2013, . Pielke Jr. R 2013, ‘How can FIFA be held accountable, Sport Management Review. Xxx (2013) xxx-xxx. Elsevier. viewed 29 Mar, 2013, PPK 2013, ‘Week 2: key theories of power’. School of Business, UWS. Ratzburg, WH 2009, ‘Power defined’, Reocities, viewed 28 Mar, 2013 Robbins, SP 2003 Organizational Behaviour: Global and Southern African Perspectives. Pearson South Africa. Robbins, SP 2005, ‘Power and politics’. Chapter 13, Organizational Behaviour, 11th Ed. Prentice Hall Inc. Robbins, S.P, Judge. T.A and Vohra, N 2001, Organizational Behaviour, 14th Ed. Prentice Hall Inc. Vigoda-Gadot, E and Dory A 2006, Handbook of Organizational Politics, Edward Elgar Publishing. Weber, M 1922, 1978. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Berkley, CA: U. California Press,, pp. 24-6, 215-6, 217, 223-6, 237-8, 241-6, 251-4, 266-70. Read More