Power, Authority, and Decision Making - Essay Example

Power, Authority, and Decision Making Introduction Accept it or not, power and authority are among of the most significant concepts that need to be understood prior to knowing the level of influence an organization or individual or group of people have over the level of obedience an individual or organization can voluntarily give especially on the decision-making process. There are different forms of power and significant sources of it. It is a fact that prior to fully understand power, there is a need to consider knowing its basic concepts and how they are usually viewed in our society. In the same way, there are different forms of authority and various sources that will lead to better understanding of this concept. Power and authority are important concepts involved in the context of decision making due to the fact that different organizations have various approaches in deciding things. For instance, every person is confronted with many forms of decision-making scenarios. What is common to this is the fact that at some point, decision-making process requires power or authority. At some point, power may just be enough for the decision-making process. In the same way, there are also times when what an individual or organization needs is authority in order to decide. Power and authority therefore are important concepts that need to be clearly understood especially from the point of view of decision-making context. In this paper, the proponent tries to understand the wider scope of power and authority and to the extent of understanding up to what level they overlap or differ in the decision-making context. What is power? We know for sure that all leaders have something in common and that is they all have power that causes followers to follow them (Silos, 2003). It is due to this power they can decide and have the higher opportunity to decide things at the higher level. However, how we define power depends on our perspective of the word itself. It is by experience most of us could determine power. Some says that if somebody is knowledgeable in a certain field, such somebody else got the power. Billionaires’ power What do Bill gates, Mark Zuckerberg, and Warren Buffett have in common? Of course they are all billionaires and we know for the fact that their richness has made them popular enough in the world. However, aside from that fact, certainly there is one basic common thing they have and that is power. Such power is their ability to create things as they wish with the use of their money. From this point of view, power is the ability to do or create things by the use of something else that will eventually make things happen as one might wish they would. For instance, billionaires such as Gates, Zuckerberg and Buffett have the power of what it takes to influence an individual because of their money. Their companies consist of employees who for the fact are working for them in exchange for something that will benefit them, their salary, promotion and other beneficial aspects for their lives. These billionaires have probably won the loyalty of some people because of their money. These billionaires have created an influence wherever they go because of their money. In this case, these billionaires achieved power because of their money. They possess all the things needed to what it takes to be billionaires. We know for the fact that achieving this level of status in life requires power. However, money alone is not the source of power in this case. Let us go back to the fact that Gates, Zuckerberg and Buffet did not start in life as billionaires. They work hard for it that eventually they finally were able to achieve their goals in life. Power therefore in this case is the ability to achieve goals or other objectives in life. We know that achieving something in life requires more work out, fun, experience, trial and errors and many other patterns. Such of these activities require power. Such power could be in a form of knowledge, strength, perseverance, endurance and many others. Power is what makes a person achieved his or her full potential in life. Self-discipline is a power therefore because it can be the strength that might be needed prior to achieving something else in life. In other words, these billionaires have control over their lives as the main reason why they excel in their endeavours. Such is a real source of power. Political power In politics, if one is influential enough and got the heart of majority of the people, such individual got what it takes to win and such is a kind of power that will allow him or her to dominate his or her opponents. The reason why Obama won the national election was due to the fact that he was competent for the position of presidency. Aside from that, he was able to gain support from his group and such is a good influence to affect the popular vote for him. Others may try to take a look at it from the perspective of thinking over the characteristics of Obama. He is more than eloquent than the opponent, has substantial wisdom and got what it takes to be the next president of the United States of America. In this case, again it proves that there is a need for power in order to achieve something. Such power could be in a form of advantage or something that will make somebody else a cut above the other. Again, there is a unit of control in this sense. Coercive power If somebody else demands to hold up one’s hand without anything else that will force someone to follow his or her will, then there is no power that is involved in it. However, if a man with a gun beckons somebody else to hold up his hand while a gun is aimed at that person; then there is a sense of power in this case knowing that the gun might end up a life from that very moment. The gun has become the source of one’s power in this scenario which has become the real source of control. Positional power Managers have certain power because of their position in the company. They can command obedience because they have the ability to fire and hire an employee. They also have the ability to decide things as far as there is an approval from the management. In short, their power comes from their position in the company and its underlying privilege which commands obedience on the part of staffs or personnel. Clearly, managers have control over the organization. Informal power Informal groups have power to influence somebody else. For instance, in a company, a new employee or new entrant may be pressured by peer groups. Such pressure brings power to the informal group to influence the will of the new employee. The same thing happens to young adults who are most likely influenced by their peer groups. A certain teenager may probably disobey his or her parents, but will obey his or her peer group due to a certain level of influence. In this case, the parent does no posses enough power to influence the will of the teenager but the peer group does due to peer pressure. In short, the peer group has significant control over the young adults compared to the parents. Parental power Parents have power over their young children because they can both punish and reward certain behaviour. They can inflict pain or even create a moment of happiness for their young children. The power involved in here is the ability of parents to be above in anything else over their children based on strength, wisdom, knowledge, money and more. These young children need the full support of their parents and such can be a source of power for the parents. The total reliance of children on their parents is one basic reason power is developed because of a specific level of control. Power from achieved knowledge Teachers have power over their students in the level of their achievement and knowledge on the subject they teach. A mathematics teacher for instance must have substantial knowledge in mathematics compared to their students. There is a sense of power in here considering that the students will most likely believe what their mathematics teacher teaches in the class. This is due to the fact that based on the level of knowledge that a mathematics teacher achieved in life, no students of him must be above him in terms of understanding calculus or linear programming for instance. Such of this level obtained by that teacher is another source of control. Bandwagon power Renowned actors, actresses, celebrities and athletes have certain powers at some point. There being familiar commands obedience at some point and such can be a source of power and advantage as viewed by various lines of products. For instance, Maria Sharapova, a tennis player is renowned for her dexterity in playing tennis. Her tennis fans are amazed by her grace, sharpness and accuracy of follow through when playing the game. As a result, Sharapova is endorsing various types of products in the hope to influence their fans to go try and use them. The ability of Sharapova to make extraordinary efforts on the tennis court is a source of power and such is viewed to influence her fans to believe what she will eventually say. Control in this case is found as the bandwagon appeal. The power of the law and state’s executive power Law enforcers for instance have the power to implement the law. What they got is an identification card, uniform and even weapons that will command obedience. Such of these role identities are real source of control. The president of the United States got a certain power. Being a president itself is a power because this is viewed as the highest responsibility in the country. Being the president of the United States means one of the most influential persons in the world. For some, there is power in it because it involves popularity, influence and control. The president of the United States is viewed as not an ordinary person and this what makes him politically influential. Such is another source of control. Power as a source of control The above issues are common observations on how we can actually take a point of view of power. Power is actually something that one must hold to take control of the situation. Power is a process that involves institutionalized relationship between individuals in which for instance one must be able to influence the decision of others according to his will, interests and values (Castells, 2009). This plainly talks about control. This is evident in the case of an individual with power to influence others according to his or her will, interests and values. In the case of an organization that has specialized power, it can actually influence people, individual or other organizations according to its will, interests and values. With power, an individual or an organization can actually influence others to something that may be far or in accordance to their will, interests and values. There is actual manipulation of one’s personal gain in this case and such can be properly implemented in a society that tries to define values and institutions (Castells, 2009). It is therefore implied that power cannot be substantially defined in a society that does not clearly define values and institutions in the first place. According to Weber, an exercised political power is an indication that one’s own will was asserted against the resistance of others (Silos, 2003). In this case, there is a strong emphasis on dominance. Power is a way to obtain and maintain dominance in the society, but some other recent theorists define it in line with the idea of empowerment (Bell, 2008). Dominance and empowerment therefore have something in common and they all both lie on the fact that it is by the use of power they can be substantially applied. Power is the ability to be able to achieve thoughts, to use resources and whatever it is that needs to be done or met (Kanter, 1994). This talks again of control. In countries like Sweden, Poland and Germany, business administration students were asked to illustrate organizational power (Joerges and Kranas, 1991). The study found that norms and expectations played significant roles in the process of creating the organizational experience. It is therefore clear in here that through substantial experience, power can be clearly defined and such is a way to better understand it to the fullest. One important implication in here is the idea of control. The entire process of creating power as an experience is control. This can be clearly explained by understanding the main sources of power. Types and sources of power The following are sources of power and they usually resolved conflicts of interest: formal authority; scarce resources control; organizational structure, rules, and regulations; decision process control; knowledge and information control; control of boundaries; ability to address uncertainty; technology control; interpersonal alliances, networks, and control of ‘informal organization’; control of counter organizations; symbolism and the management of meaning; gender and the management of gender relations; structural factors that define the stage of action; and the power from within each of everyone (Morgan, 1998). Conflicts of interests are therefore resolved by power because one’s own will, interest or value is necessary to be imposed along the process. This clearly points out that one must be able to hold such specific advantage over the other. This can be clearly pictured in the market advantage of a certain company. According to Porter (1980) competitive advantage is a must prior to dominate in the market. Such competitive advantage is a clear source of power because it talks about control. This supports the fact that the sources of power are means of enhancing organization’s or one’s interest and even on perpetuating organizational conflict (Morgan, 1998). Power is of many types but in the society, the most common are reward, coercive, expert, legitimate and referent (Hinde, 1997). All of these have been explicitly discussed from the stated cases above. What is authority? It is a fact that power and authority are used interchangeably or at some point synonymously. The truth is they are entirely different. One may be able to have a power but without authority or vice versa. How this is so? Let us take a look again at the stated examples above. Traditional and charismatic authority What do Gates, Zuckerberg and Buffet have in common is power and there is no point of arguing that knowing that they all both have plenty of money that will make their decisions influential enough to take control of the situation. However, there is a deeper sense to power in this case. These persons are without question very influential. Such influence of them gives them authority aside from power. Not everyone can be billionaire and such extraordinary achievement these billionaires possess in life paves way to giving them the authority they deserve. They possess traditional and charismatic authority because of their extra ordinary achievement. The achieved legal authority The winning of Obama in the presidency was not just entirely due to his power to dominate or take control of his opponent but it was because of the traditional authority he possesses. Obama is known as one of the most extraordinary people in modern times. He can write books, he can eloquently address the public with a sense of being a leader. Many people have admired his capacity and such give him the authority to possess the legal authority that will give him dominion over the United States. Parents have legal authority over their children. It is the right of children to have better education, but it is the responsibility of parents to give them high quality level of education. In this case, parents have given the authority to take responsibly the task they have for their children. Parents as a result of this authority have the right to discipline their children whenever they are not performing well at school. They have also the right and privilege to reward their children whenever there is a need to do so. All of these are possible because of such certain legal authority they possess over their children. Children in return have managed to listen and live by the rules and thus, enhancing the legal authority of their parents over them. For instance, it is of great consideration to understand that the society demands to pay respect for parents. This authority therefore that the parents have over their children are not freely given by their children but it is because out of what the society dictates to be the norm. On the other hand, the presence of love, respect and loyalty of children for their parents cannot be argued as integral parts of parent-and-children relationship. However, this is dictated by the society because it is pleasing to see to obey and show love for our parents. What is viewed well in the society is a matter of experience and such can be elaborated by understanding the level of authority involved. Teachers have legal authority over their students because society defines the major relationship between them. Teachers have to help their students in educating them. As a response to this, students are to necessarily obey and voluntarily be a part of the whole teaching process involved. Teachers therefore have the legal authority to give examinations and other forms of evaluations in order to measure the level of understanding of the students on the subject matter involved. Here is how the United States and Singapore define national authority. For Singapore, national authority is constituted by an act of parliament such as a ministry or other government body, but for the United States, it is somewhere found at the government’s central level (Bishop et al., 2005). Informal authority Informal groups at some point may have informal authority due to the fact that an individual may voluntarily submit his or her obedience due to peer pressure or eventually believing on the ideals and principles of the group. In this case, there is no power involved but the will of a person can signify the authority that he or she is freely giving to take control of him or her. Authority defined Authority is a power to create action choices, alter resource allocation, incentives or perception (Berhold, 1976). However, authority is associated with domination in which it may not necessarily include power or influence because its underlying principle comes to understand the will of somebody else to obey specific commands in a form of voluntary compliance or interest in obedience (Weber, 1978). Voluntary obedience is the central concept presented in this definition. However, obedience may be bound to obedience by custom, affectual ties, material complex of interest or ideal motives (Weber, 1978). On the other hand, authority also refers to set of legitimate rules which can be normative, formal or informal (Smith and Wolfish, 2001). Thus, when authority is exercised and followed, then its mere existence can be identified that is why it is relational in its nature (Smith and Wolfish, 2001). In politics, authority is primarily viewed as the right to rule (Grant, 2003). Applying this in the business context, authority therefore is the right to have the privilege to be on top of the other especially in the case of managers. In an organization, decision and responsibility are covered by hierarchical structure and constitutional law and under the latter, authority is defined (Drucker, 1992). Authority has three types: legal, traditional and charismatic (Weber, 1978). The grant of formal authority for instance entitled, empowered and authorized a person to act (Liebler and McConnell, 2004). The sources of authority in the criminal justice for instance is derived from the relationship between Constitution, Supreme Court, legislatures, elective chief executive and more (Newman and Anderson, 1989). Talents and traits of an individual may be the source of authority (Liebler and McConnell, 2004). States are other sources of authority due to their underlying politics and governance, which may differ from actors who eventually demand compliance when trying to exercise their authority (Smith and Wolfish, 2001). The relation of power and authority in decision making contexts At this point, I will make the necessary opinion for me to be able to better distinguish power and authority based on the above stated information. As mentioned earlier, formal authority is a real source of power. Because of authority, one may be able to take control of the situation. Therefore in the decision making process, authority is needed just to have power to take control of everything. Power and authority both cover the ability to influence and demand obedience. In a certain group, it is hard to decide on the basis of power or authority. However, most of the time, it is by basis of authority most managers can decide in behalf of the group. For instance, it is by authority that a sales manager can set specific sales quota for the personnel. However, prior to setting it, the manager will ensure if the set amount for quota can be achievable or not based on the capacity of the sales personnel. However, the entire decision process regarding this aspect is under the authority of the sales manager. In response to a target sales quota, the manager has the authority to decide whether to encourage more sales or not. In the same way, the sales manager has the power to demand obedience knowing that he or she has the authority given by the company. In this case, the power of the sales manager can also cover the influence to hire or fire employees or increase salary based on achieved performance. Such power is based entirely on the authority given by the company to the manager. Sales manager position already connotes power knowing that it is highly viewed with great authority. In this case, power and authority co-exist and to have them both in a leadership activity is an advantage to decide and lead for the team. As stated earlier, it is clear that both power and authority are something that an individual must possess in order to be influential. With power alone, an individual can be influential enough. With authority alone, an individual can also be influential enough. Therefore, power and authority are sources of one’s ability to make a difference and be above among any other. A father may decide things by his own because of certain power or authority he has with him. In either way, may it only be power he only has; still his capacity to decide is substantial knowing that he is the head of the family. However, this does not mean that such power will voluntarily command genuine obedience knowing that a wife must fully submit to him and voluntarily accepts his authority. In this case, the decision process may be not so substantial if the wife does not fully accept the authority because obedience out of power may not ensure willingness but at some point obedience might just because of total fear. This is just the same in the case of a person who is hold up by someone else with a gun and in any time can be shot to death. This is what Weber tries to emphasize in order to create better distinction between power and authority. Both power and authority are acquired. Someone has to work out for power and authority. These are not innate but they are acquired from the society. Acquiring power requires skills, knowledge and more. In the same way, acquiring authority requires power and vice versa. A legal authority is a real source of power. However, it does not necessarily mean that power is a real source of authority since at some point not everyone has the entire control for somebody else. The United States has real control over its people but it does not mean it has also control over the other countries in Europe for instance unless it has given the authority to do so. One of significant differences power and authority lies on the level of giving obedience. With authority, obedience is voluntarily given while with power at some point it does necessarily result to voluntary giving of obedience. Weber believes that authority has to be earned and obedience from it has to be voluntary. Therefore, authority has much level of influence than what power does. In power, one might be able to obey because of something else that is point or aimed at him by somebody else who got the entire control. With authority, an individual is genuinely influenced because of voluntary obedience. Authority and power therefore differs on how to be able to take hold of control and obedience. Authority is the deepest level source of power. As for the case of legal, traditional and charismatic authority, all of them can indeed a real source of power as what Weber tries to emphasize. Thus, power may be the end result of authority. However, power cannot be substantially a source of authority for it can be gained by creating personal control of any circumstance. Authority on the other hand is gained from the society in general as what Weber explicitly explained. Thus, dominion acquired through power cannot be voluntarily given at some point. However, dominion acquired through authority can be legal since it is not usually obtained by personal choice but from the society on the basis of Weber’s argument. Power and authority therefore are substantial aspects in any management activity especially on the decision making process. The issue is not so much of what to use between them but it depends on circumstances. In an organization for instance, there are set rules that the one assigned to implement them has the authority which can be a real source of power from personal perspective. Thus, theories regarding centralized power are drawn distinction with the idea on shared decision-making power (Wood, 1973). After all, there is a great consideration of authority when things involved are outside of personal control. Conclusion There is no question why power and authority are used interchangeably or synonymously. They are interrelated at some point. For instance, the achievement of authority means power at some instance, depending on the intention of the one who holds it. It also depends on the given situation. Power is most likely personal and it aims exactly of achieving control over a situation while authority is based on societal experience which particularly evolves into formal source of power. Therefore, having power does not necessarily mean authority. However, having authority means a real source of power due to an acceptable social experience. References Bell, N. (2008) ‘Power, Alternative Theories of.’ Encyclopedia of Violence. 1703-1709. Berhold, M. H. (1976) ‘Managerial authority in a decision analysis context.’ Omega. Vol. 4 (2): 165-173. Bishop, R. D., Crawford, J. and Reisman, W. M. (2005) Foreign investment disputes: cases, materials, and commentary. Netherlands: Kluwer Law International. Castells, M. (2009) Communication power. Great Britain: Oxford University Press. Drucker, P. F. (1992) The age of discontinuity: guidelines to our changing society. 2nd ed. USA: Transaction. Grant, M. (2003) Key Ideas in Politics. Spain: Nelson Thomes. Hinde, R. A. (1997) Relationships: a dialectical perspective. United Kingdom: Psychology Press. Joerges, B. C. and Kranas, G. (1991) ‘Power in the eyes of the innocent (Students talk on power in organizations).’ Scandinavian Journal of Management, Vol. 7 (1): 41-60. Kanter, R. M. (1994) Men and women of the corporation. 4th ed. New York: Basic Books. Liebler, J. G. and McConnell, C. R. (2004) Management principles for health professionals. 4th ed. USA: Jones & Bartlett Learning. Morgan, G. (1998) Images of organization. USA: Berrett-Koehler. Newman, D. J. and Anderson, P. R. (1989) Introduction to criminal justice. 4th ed. USA: Random House. Porter, M. (1980) Competitive Strategy. USA: Free Press. Silos, L. R. (2003) The power of the leader: mind and meaning in leadership. Philippines: Goodwill Trading. Smith, G. S. and Wolfish, D. (2001) Who is afraid of the state?: Canada in a world of multiple centres of power. Canada: University of Toronto Press. Weber, M. (1978) ‘The type of legitimate dominaion’, in G. Roth and C. Wittich (eds). Economy and Society, Volume 1. California: California Press. Wood, M. T. (1973) ‘Power relationships and group decision making in organizations.’ Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 79(5): 280-293. Read More