Power and Politics: Definition, Distinctions between Power, Authority and Influence;

Bases of Power; Organizational Politics: Definition and Nature.

Defining power
Salancik and Pfeiffer have defined power as the ability of those who possess power bring about
the outcomes they desire.

Power is the influence over the beliefs, emotions and behaviors of others at the personal or the
professional level.

In simple terms, we may define power as the ability of a person (or group A) to induce another

S
person (or group B) to behave in a way that the former desires.

E'
Two faces of power

Most of us think and perceive power to be negative in nature , even though we are well aware
that whatever happens in the world is a game of power and people exert power over others who
N
have lesser bargaining power usually.

Nevertheless there are two faces of power, one negative and the other positive.
N
The negative face of power is characterized by a primitive, unsocial zed need to have dominance
over submissive people.
.A

The positive face of power is characterized by a socialized need to initiate , influence and lead
others in a well desired and aspired direction.

Sources of Power in Organizations

ST

The main sources of power are formal position in the organization and the personality
characteristics of the leader.

Formal position in the organization: generally it is the power attached to a position in the
organization which is more potent than the person who occupies the position. E.g. the position of
the president of America is the most prestigious formal power irrespective of the person who
mans it . the same can be understood true for all the official positions in the organizations like
that of a president, vice president, CEO etc.
Personality characteristics of the leader: this refers to the charisma or personality of an individual
which makes him powerful in his personal or professional setup, where people tend to follow
whatever he does owing to the sheer magic of his persona.

BASES OF POWER

John French and Bertram Raven identified five types of interpersonal power that managers use.
They are reward, coercive, legitimate, referent and expert power. These sources of power are
cal1ed interpersonal because they involve the relationship between the person who holds power
and those who are influenced by him or her.

S
Reward Power
When the source of power is a person’s control over rewarding outcomes, the power is called

E'
reward power. For example, managers control the rewards of salary increases, bonuses and
promotions. Reward power can lead to better performance, but only as long as the employee sees
a clear and strong link between performance and rewards. To use reward power effectively, then,
the manager should be explicit about the behavior being rewarded and should make the
connection between the behavior and the reward clear. Non management employees also may
N
have reward power. For example, one employee might offer another praise and approval, an
invitation to a desirable social function, or an interesting task in a group project.
N
Coercive Power
A manager who exerts power by evoking fear has coercive power. To coerce someone into doing
.A

something means to force the person to do it, often with threats of punishment. Managers using
coercive power may verbally abuse employees or withhold support from them. Coercion can
create stress and anxiety for employees. In extreme cases, it can even lead to increased
absenteeism and turnover and may encourage sabotage at the workplace. Employees at all levels
may exert coercive power through such tactics as ridicule or exclusion of a co-worker. Sexual
ST

harassment can be an unethical and illegal use of coercive power. Coercive power influences
others by inducing compliance. Coercion merely prevents undesirable behaviour rather than
stimulating desirable behavior.

Legitimate Power
Legitimate power which is similar to authority, it is the power that is based on position and
mutual agreement. The agent and target agree that the agent has the right to influence the target.
For legitimate power to be effective, the employees must believe the manager has the right to tell
them what to do. Legitimate power stems from a person’s occupation of a particular position in
the organization. It is based on the presumption that the organization’s structure gives people in
some, positions the right to influence other people. Legitimate power – especially when wielded
by someone higher up the organization’s hierarchy’- is authority.

Responses to Legitimate Power: The basic response to legitimate power is internalization. This
means we comply because a degree of intrinsic satisfaction results from complying with the
orders of a person in authority. The satisfaction is independent of whether that person doles out
reward or punishments.

Limitations of Legitimate Power: Because legitimate power arises from a person’s position in
the urbanization, it is effective only for influencing behaviour that employees’ belief falls within

S
the authority of that position. When an employee’s request or directive falls outside this “zone of
acceptance”, other (Subordinate or peer level) employees will question it and may reject it.

E'
Referent Power
Some people influence others through the force of their attractiveness, the mysterious personal
magnetism we call ‘charisma’. This influence is called referent power. The agent has referent
power over the target because the target identifies with – or wants to be like – the agent.
N
Charismatic individuals are often thought to have referent power. An advantage of holding
referent power is that it can lead people to do things that may not result in a tangible reward; the
reward comes instead from the relationship with the charismatic person. However, asking for
N
more than people who are willing to do can reduce a person’s referent power.

Expert Power
.A

Power that arises from a person’s expertise, knowledge or talent is called expert power. People
with expert power are influential because others believe they can benefit from the information
experts can provide. For expert power to work, three conditions must be in place.
First, the target must trust that the information given is accurate.
Second, the information involved must be relevant and useful to the target.
ST

Third, the target’s perception the agent as an expert is crucial.

DIFFERENTIATING POWER FROM AUTHORITY AND INFLUENCE

Usually, the term power is interwined with another concept, authority. But there is a difference
between the two concepts.
Power refers to the capacity to influence others. The person who possesses power has the ability
to manipulate or change the behaviour of others.
Authority, on the other hand, is the source of power. Authority is legitimate and it confers
legitimacy to power. Power itself need not be legitimate. Authority exists where one person has a
formal right to command and another has a formal obligation to obey. Authority may be seen as
institutionalised power.
For example, a police officer has authority to ‘stop’ a motorist. The motorist is legally obliged to
comply. Managers are said to possess a ‘right to manage’. Employees are legally obliged to obey
the employer’s instructions provided these are lawful and within the scope of the contract of
employment. Whereas power and authority are potentially mandatory, influence, by contrast
implies persuasion. Influence is usually conceived of being broader in scope, than power,
Influence is more closely associated with leadership than power, but both obviously are involved
in the leadership process. Marx was highly influential but not powerful. in contrast Stalin was
powerful but not influential. In organisations, employees may influence decisions through joint
consultative committees and other mechanisms, yet the organisation reserves the final say.

S
WHY ARE ORGANISATIONS POLITICAL?

E'
In theory, politics have no place in organisations. Organisations are supposedly rational entities
engaged in the pursuit of particular goals. Also the decisions are based upon the principle of
optimum utility. However, in reality organisations are typically composed of different
sub-units/departments espousing different cultures, different outlooks and priorities. Decisions
are often surrounded by considerable uncertainty. The importance of the political aspects of
N
power comes to the forefront in the realistic view of organisations. Organisations, particularly
large ones, are like governments in that they are fundamentally political entities. To understand
them, one needs to understand organisational politics, just as to understand governments, one
N
needs to understand governmental politics (Pfeffer 1982).

POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE OF ORGANISATIONS

.A

If everyone in an organisation agree all the time, there will be no politics. In other words, the
potential for political activity arises wherever disagreement exists. One factor which can prompt
disagreement is diversity. Some units in an organisation are more powerful than others and each
may have different goals. For example, software engineers may want to provide the organisation
with a highly sophisticated and technologically advanced IT system. On the other hand, line
ST

managers may simply want a design which enables them to communicate with one another.
Scarcity can prompt political activity if there are competing claims upon resources. For example,
the scope for conflict exists where department A requires twenty additional items and department
B the same number, but the budget is allocated only for twenty. A central feature of politics is the
notion of interest. Interests are defined as positions which people wish to protect or goals they
seek to achieve (Miller 1962). If no one cares whether company A is awarded a contract for
supplies in preference to company B, then there is no disagreement about the matter and
potentiality, no politics. Even in such a matter like celebration of a festival, politics plays its role
in its choosing, fixing the date, time and place. Interests may be classified into (a) task interests,
(b) external interests, and (c) career interests.
Task interests concern an individual’ s work in the organisation. For instance, a hospital
manager’s interest would be to discharge patients as quickly as possible. On the contrary, a
medical consultant’s interest would be to continue to allow the patients to remain in hospital.
External interests include domestic pressures, obligations to professional associations and trade
unions, and relationships with subcontractors, suppliers and customers. For instance, obligations
to a trade union may compel an employer to recruit people from a particular locality or language.
Career interests can prompt to resist change or to support decisions which are against an
organisation’s best interests. For instance, managers may appoint mediocre candidates to
subordinate positions in order to protect themselves from challenge.

Organizational Politics

S
Organizational politics are informal, unofficial, and sometimes behind-the-scenes efforts to sell
ideas, influence an organization, increase power, or achieve other targeted objectives (Brandon &

E'
Seldman, 2004; Hochwarter, Witt, & Kacmar, 2000). Politics has been around for millennia.
Aristotle wrote that politics stems from a diversity of interests, and those competing interests
must be resolved in some way. “Rational” decision making alone may not work when interests
are fundamentally incongruent, so political behaviours and influence tactics arise.
N
Today, work in organizations requires skill in handling conflicting agendas and shifting power
bases. Effective politics isn’t about winning at all costs but about maintaining relationships
while achieving results. Although often portrayed negatively, organizational politics are not
N
inherently bad. Instead, it’s important to be aware of the potentially destructive aspects of
organizational politics in order to minimize their negative effect. Of course, individuals within
organizations can waste time overly engaging in political behaviour. Research reported in HR
Magazine found that managers waste 20% of their time managing politics.
.A

Politics are a part of organizational life, because organizations are made up of different
interests that need to be aligned. In fact, 93% of managers surveyed reported that workplace
politics exist in their organization, and 70% felt that in order to be successful, a person has to
ST

engage in politics (Gandz & Murray, 1980). In the negative light, saying that someone is
“political” generally stirs up images of backroom dealing, manipulation, or hidden agendas for
personal gain. A person engaging in these types of political behaviours is said to be engaging in
self-serving behaviour that is not sanctioned by the organization (Ferris et al., 1996; Valle &
Perrewe, 2000; Harris, James, & Boonthanom, 2005; Randall et al., 1999).

Examples of these self-serving behaviours include bypassing the chain of command to get
approval for a special project, going through improper channels to obtain special favours, or
lobbying high-level managers just before they make a promotion decision. These types of
actions undermine fairness in the organization because not everyone engages in politicking to
meet their own objectives. Those who follow proper procedures often feel jealous and resentful
because they perceive unfair distributions of the organization’s resources, including rewards
and recognition (Parker, Dipboye, & Jackson, 1995).
Organisational Politics Definition

According to Cropanzano et al, “Organisational politics can be defined as strategically

designed behaviours that maximise self-interest”.

As per Mayes and Allen, “Organisational politics is the management of influence to obtain ends
not sanctioned by the organisation or to obtain sanctioned ends through non-sanctioned means”.

S
According to Farrell and Peterson, “Politics in an organisation refers to those activities that are
not required as part of one’s formal role in the organisation, but that influence or attempt to
influence the distribution of advantages and disadvantages within the organisation”.

E'
According to Tushman, “Politics refers to the structure and process of the use of authority and
power to affect the definition of goals, direction and the other major parameters of the
organisation. Decisions are not made in a rational way but rather through compromise,
N
accommodation and bargaining”.

Nature of Organisational Politics

N
The nature of politics can be described as follows:
.A

1) Uses Some Sort of Power: Organisational politics involves some sort of power either directly
or indirectly. Organisational politics can be employed by those who are in official positions and
enjoy authority in the organisation. It can also be influenced by other people close to those who
hold formal authority.
ST

2) Self-Serving: Organisational politics involves self-serving behaviour. It suggests that either

organisational resource is used for personal welfare or other benefits are given to another person.
In both cases, the decision is not rational from the organisation’s point of view.

3) Outside One’s Job Requirements: Political behaviour is outside the requirements of one’s
specified job. It involves ways of accomplishing things that are not formally recognised practices
or procedures
4) Influenced by the Behaviour of Others: Politics takes place when an individual recognises
that the success of his goals is influenced by others’ behaviour. In such a case, politicking
involves the eradication of the influential manoeuvres of a member of the organisation.

5) Irrational Decisions: From the organisation’s point of view political decisions are not
rational. These decisions are based on injustice and are usually undertaken to attain more power.

Causes of Organisational Politics

Several factors are responsible for political behaviour. These factors are shown in the figure

S
given below:

E'
N
N
.A
ST

1) Individual Factors

Factors contributing to political behaviour at the individual level are:

i) High Self-Monitors: A high self-monitor is someone concerned about how they are perceived
by others and will change their behaviour to fit different situations. They tend to be more skilled
in political behaviour.
ii) Internal Locus of Control: People with an internal locus of control are proactive and prone
to manipulate situations in their favour.

iii) High Machiavellian Personality: People with high Machiavellian personalities are
characterised by the will to manipulate and desire for power. They use politics to further their
self-interest.

iv) Investment in Organisation: Investment in terms of expectations forces the individual to

use illegitimate means.

S
v) Perceived Job Alternatives: More job opportunities an individual has, results in more
political behaviour.

E'
2) Organisational Factors

Organisational factors contributing to political behaviour include:

N
i) Reallocation of Resources: The reallocation of resources is necessary when the resources
available either increase or decrease. These situations force individuals to resort to politics.
N
ii) Promotion Opportunities: Normally, the opportunities for promotion or advancement are
fewer than the candidates expecting a promotion. This situation leads to competition and thereby
.A

political behaviour by the competing candidates.

iii) Low Trust: Low trust in organisations leads to tight control which in turn makes the
subordinates behave illegitimately.
ST

iv) Role Ambiguity: The unclear expectation from the employee makes him act politically.

v) Unclear Performance Appraisal System: Employee does not know what to do. And to what
level of perfection does he have to do? etc., under the unclear performance appraisal system.
This situation leads to political behaviour and creates ambiguity.

vi) Zero-Sum Reward Practices: The win-lose approach in reward allocation is called the
zero-sum approach. People perceive that they will win double if others lose. For example, if only
one employee is promoted have employee’s joy is immense. Therefore, this situation makes
people take the chance, even through illegitimate means.
vii) Democratic Decision Making: The traditionally autocratic managers cannot make the
decision Demically in their true sense. Therefore, they refer the issues to committees and
commissions to offer recommendations, and finally, they make the decisions they desire.

viii) High-Performance Pressures: High-performance pressures make people find shortcuts and
politics to show superfluously high performance or through window-dressing.

ix) Self-Serving Senior Managers: The political behaviour by the top management with
rewards encourages the people at the lower level to resort to politics.

S
Examples of organizational politics

E'
Here are some examples of what organizational politics could look like in practice:

Example 1: Building alliances

N
Employees or managers may form alliances with others within the organization to support their
ideas, projects, or proposals. For instance, a manager might build a coalition with other
department heads to support a new corporate initiative they believe in, making sure it receives
the necessary resources and attention.
N
Example 2: Gaining favor
.A

Employees might engage in activities to gain favor with influential members of the organization,
such as their superiors or key decision-makers. This organizational politics example could
involve supporting the leader’s ideas, taking on additional tasks to relieve their workload, or
aligning with their views in meetings to build rapport and gain their support for future
ST

opportunities.

Example 3: Sabotage

In negative instances, organizational politics can lead to efforts to sabotage another person’s
work or reputation to diminish their influence or derail their projects. This could be through
spreading rumors, providing misleading information, or excluding them from important meetings
or communications.
The impact of organizational politics

Studies have shown that employees with political skills are better at gaining more power and
managing stress, are more productive, and have a greater impact on organizational goals. Plus, as
a company grows, organizational politics may be the reason it survives.

However, unchecked organizational politics can destroy a company when left to spiral out of
control. Here are some of the common negative impacts on employees:

●​ Increased stress from fear of the unknown or losing their job

●​ Decrease in concentration and productivity as they are distracted by politics

S
●​ Increase in cynicism, which leads to low morale and job satisfaction
●​ High employee turnover, which can lead to a lack of qualified employees and a

E'
knowledge and skills gap
●​ Miscommunication as neither employees nor managers fully know what’s going on
●​ Resentment and lack of organizational trust.

N
N
.A
ST