What Types of Power Do Managers Exercise - Essay Example

Power and Politics in Organisations Introduction Managers exercise powers such as coercive, normative or utilitarian in order to achieve the cause of an organisation. Normative power is the most important among other traits. The following discussion proves this contention. In addition, this work analyses various theories of management and opinions of eminent scholars to support this argument. Normative power is the best among the management attributes, since it prioritizes shared values in the organisation. The exercise of normative power is achieved by means of socialisation. Such power is exercised into the promotion of professional pacts and common standards[Bru01]. The top management of an organisation constitutes the centralised decision taking body. Managers either assume power or it is delegated to them, and this enables them to arrive at decisions. Such decision making authority is employed while hiring employees, or dismissing, punishing, promoting or demoting employees. [Man10]. Such managerial power determines the benefits, status, and freedoms provided to employees. The managers of the organisation bestow economic benefits and rewards upon their subordinates. This ensues from the power structure to which managers belong and the specific power vested in them by the organisation[Man10]. Thus, power in the organisation is effectively controlled by the designated managers. In addition, the theory of stakeholder salience and identification suggests that the prominence of stakeholders is associated with power, legitimacy and urgency. These attributes are assumed to be possessed by managers. Stakeholder salience has been described as the extent to which the managers of a business organisation, accord importance to contending stakeholder claims[deB]. This conjecture found support among the subsequent empirical research projects with corporate chief executive officers (CEOs). From this perspective, power, legitimacy and urgency have been deemed to possess three important attributes. The first of these states that these are variables and not constant. Second, these are constructed socially and determined by perception and not objective reality. Finally, stakeholders in possession of one or more of these traits could remain unaware of them or could select to utilise them[deB]. The stakeholders who possess just one of these attributes are described as latent stakeholders. Those who possess two of these attributes are termed as expectant stakeholders. Finally, definitive stakeholders are those who possess all three attributes. By referring to the work of Etzioni, Pfeffer and Weber; Mitchell et al., described power in a relationship as the degree to which a party enjoys access or can obtain access to coercive, normative, or utilitarian means to impose its will[deB]. As such managers should have access to coercive, normative, or utilitarian means to implement their decisions to promote the success of the organisation. In addition, coercive power refers to physical force. On the other hand, utilitarian power entails the employment of material rewards. Moreover, normative or social power depends upon the use of symbols. Some of these symbols are acceptance, esteem, love and prestige. The capacity of stake holder groups to attract media attention towards their objectives constitutes a cardinal instance of normative social power in a political context[deB]. It had been conceded by Mitchell et al., that power and legitimacy were usually correlated, if not intersecting. This had also been highlighted in the work of Phillip and other scholars, who emphasised that power was frequently deemed to be a basis for legitimacy. All the same, Mitchell et al., had claimed that legitimacy and power could be considered distinct attributes. Other scholars, notably Weber had contended that although in combination power and legitimacy gave rise to authority, these attributes retained their individualistic form[deB]. As such, with regard to the realm of organisations, power demonstrates its influence via its control upon communication. Jackall had highlighted the influence of public relations upon attitude and opinions. In addition, Jackall brought to the fore the fact that the authority figures and power structure of an organisation had the maximum impact. In this scenario, the first casualty was truth, which was deemed to be inconsequential, as the fundamental aim was to entertain the public and motivate it to promote the cause of the organisation[Des11]. Another scholar, Pascal, has declared that power was gained by fine discourse. This is similar to the views expressed by Jackall. Rhetorical mastery and the capacity to entertain are important. Truth is not of much significance, due to the fact that in the ultimate analysis what really matters is that persuasion culminates in adherence[Des11]. The correlation between the dominated and the dominators consists of considerable ambiguity. The chief goal is to please superiors to the maximum extent possible. This is regardless of the cost. Jackall had provided a commentary regarding the prominent negative features of organisations. This transpired a couple of decades ago. Jackall had stated that the control of public relations was one of the intermediaries of domination. An illusory world of publicity posturing had been created by press agents, which amazed, amused and delighted the multitude. At the same time these publicity stunts attracted the public towards the clients or other goods[Des11]. In this regard, Jackall has provided a detailed explanation regarding the benefits, ambiguities, and costs involved in emerging a winner. The winner has to always bear in mind that his defeated opponents will be keenly observing him, awaiting an opportunity to bring about his downfall. The adoption of a stance of humility in public, feigned or genuine, can deflect envy among the losers to some extent. Thus, the winner could don the mask of self-effacing modesty to subsume his natural sense of triumph upon achieving victory[Buc08]. There are quite a few instances, wherein winning will require the involvement of the defeated. This usually happens in policy disputes. Under these circumstances, the winner has to protect himself, while simultaneously engaging in the necessary artifices to ensure the required cooperation. In such instances, social grace that disarms the opposition proves to be of immeasurable benefit. Such social grace is a sine qua non of optimal managerial style[Buc08]. In addition, anecdotes tend to make organisational change meaningful to its participants. This has been highlighted in the work of Buchanan and Dawson, in the year 2007. In other words, communications regarding personal experience that are narrated in everyday discussion help organisational entities in understanding change and challenging it. Consequently, shared interpretations of change and the challenged altered narratives are central to managing change[Rei11]. However, contested change stories tend to be marginalised, as they have the capacity to express secrecy, stealth and subversion, or tend to recall the supposedly golden past. All the same, these constitute crucial segments of the reality of the organisational entities. In addition, these features facilitate them to provide legitimacy to their specific stance regarding change[Rei11]. Making sense is a narrative interpretive process that enables organisational entities to attribute meaning to unexpected or unknown developments. This provides a basic procedure for addressing the contradiction that exists between expectation and experience, on account of organisational change[Rei11]. Moreover, sense making allows organisational actors to discuss and disseminate their interpretations and experiences regarding such events. Moreover, at the impersonal level, organisation change can be regarded as a process that transforms the form, function or state of an organisation with the passage of time. This frequently presents organisational actors with an array of unexpected or unknown events that contest the established frames of reference and produce ambiguity, fear and uncertainty[Rei11]. Furthermore, in the words of Søderberg, the members of an organisation understand activities or processes in their organisation, by regarding them as integral to an interpretive scheme or system of understanding that has evolved from experience and socialisation. The members of an organisation that undergoes drastic change, frequently realise that their extant interpreting schemes or frames of reference are not sufficient to understand the situation[Rei11]. In addition, one of the cardinal human resource functions of an organisation is that of staffing. This is especially true of organisations that place a high premium upon knowledge. It is the fundamental objective of organisations to attract, select, develop and retain employees with exemplary performance[Deb07]. Such employees depict the desirable qualities promoted by the organisation. Some of the processes that facilitate this process are described in the sequel. A major process, in this connection, is that of workforce planning. It permits organisations to engage in careful consideration of the strategic transitions in the functions and requirements of the workforce, the organisational trends regarding staffing, and the general placement of new staff[Deb07]. The forecasting of potential alterations and demands upon employee functions in a variety of situations, simplifies the task of identifying the long term needs of new staff. It also makes it possible to avert costly appointments that have no strategic value[Deb07]. Nevertheless, the presence of a strong leadership is indispensable for achieving a transition from the traditional idea of employing a new individual who enacts the same role, to a more organisationally oriented perspective regarding staffing. The managers of administrative units, in general, tend to promote the necessity for replacing their staff, unless there is a rational workforce plan that unambiguously provides a mechanism for the adoption of new strategies and directions[Deb07]. The presumption that people work in organised units and will remain in the same role for an extended period, underlies the operation of the traditional organisations. With the resignation of an employee, another is recruited to undertake that employee’s function. Several of the companies replicate their traditional structures by imitating the past. While undertaking such exercises, companies pay scant regard for the changes to be effected for altering their future[Deb07]. Moreover, a gradual transition has been noticed among organisations. This change is aimed at having a workforce that is endowed with greater flexibility, as this will promote their strategic focus. The adaptability related to viewing and taking advantage of opportunities imposes different expectations upon the staff. The profile of an organisational employee could change with the advent of novel external challenges, competition, and transformed internal processes of innovations. For instance, increase in the information technology base of a knowledge organisation could cause it to spread its workforce across locations and regions. Such an organisation could also change over to self-managed knowledge teams, instead of the traditional operational units. These moves would influence staffing profiles[Deb07]. Organisations tend to be staffed in multifarious ways. Businesses with greater stability could rely upon tenured staff who are employed for extended periods. On the other hand, organisations desirous of achieving greater flexibility in their staffing profile could resort to a wide range of other approaches. For instance, contract staff could be engaged, in order to address short – term requirements. Such moves have seen to be quite common, especially with regard to executive positions in an organisation, wherein high performance is demanded[Deb07]. However, with regard to contract workers, knowledge security tends to be less as the contract nears its end. In addition, there could be a reduction in individual loyalty, leading to reduced willingness to share experience. The expenditure associated with employment and induction of new staff members will be greater than in the situations where the appointment is for a longer term. Moreover, collaborative alliances with other partners could have the outcome of temporary appointments from other firms[Deb07]. It is possible to attach several meanings to the notion of winning. A major feature of change is that it generates winners and losers. The employment of certain strategies ensures that one increases the chances of emerging a winner on a greater number of occasions. With regard to conflict of interests, competition of ideas, or clash of wills, the utilisation of political tactics enhance the chances of becoming a winner[Buc08]. However, with regard to reputation, the idea of winning denotes a wider and subtly different importance. This could indicate the achievement and retention of a position to which one hopes to ascend. It could also signify intentionally selecting to concede or to become a loser in order to promote long term personal, interpersonal, and organisational objectives. Thus, winning constitutes a socially constructed result. This is determined by what one aims to achieve and the extent to which one desires to be noticed[Buc08]. It could entail actions that one may not be keen to acknowledge in public. Conclusion After analysing various theories and opinions of eminent scholars, it can be surmised that normative power proves to be the best for managers to adopt, with respect to the best interests of their organisation. In the present era, organisations are continuously under transition. Thus, the effective manager has to depict a keenness to fight for achieving dominance, so as to realise the managerial objectives. In the real world of business, individuals who adamantly adhere to secular democratic principles could run the risk of failing to realise the organisational objectives. In the final analysis, winning denotes achieving what a person regards as being correct. In fact, the majority of the people are determined to struggle to the best of their ability to achieve that objective. Hence, the involvement of all the stakeholders become indispensable for realising development. As such, managers should have access to all the power traits discussed above, if they are to make the organisation a success. However, normative power is the best attribute for enabling a manager to achieve objectives effectively. References Bru01: , (Brudney , et al., 2001, p. 176), Man10: , (Mandal, 2010, p. 124), deB: , (de Bussy & Kelly, 2010, p. 291), deB: , (de Bussy & Kelly, 2010, p. 292), Des11: , (Deslandes, 2011, p. 64), Des11: , (Deslandes, 2011, p. 63), Buc08: , (Buchanan & Badham, 2008, p. 277), Rei11: , (Reissner, 2011, p. 594), Rei11: , (Reissner, 2011, p. 595), Deb07: , (Debowski, 2007, p. 119), Read More