Power and Politics in Organizations

This technical note discusses the notion of power and power dynamics in organizations. It describes sources of power and discusses politics with our organizations. Excerpt UVA-OB-0423 POWER AND POLITICS IN ORGANIZATIONS Power and power dynamics are uncomfortable concepts for most people to discuss, usually conjuring up images of Machiavellian deception and manipulation aimed at achieving less-than-honorable goals. Americans, in particular, distrust those who actively seek power, and those in positions of power often downplay its importance and their use of it. Only in recent years have academics and management experts been able to seriously study the sources and uses of power and to gain an understanding of the vital role it plays in healthy, well-functioning organizations. While it is true that abuses of power occur every day in organizations around the world, it is also true that effective management requires a great deal of skill in the acquisition and use of power. In fact, the problems and failures of many businesses can often be directly traced to a lack of power on the part of a company's CEO or a failure to empower those in middle-management positions. The notion that power can be a very positive force in an organization, particularly when it is properly distributed throughout an organization, is important to understand. Empowered managers are able to accomplish far more and get more out of subordinates than managers who are kept under tight control. Empowerment is not a zero-sum game. Spreading power down the chain of command does not reduce power at the top—it expands power and influence for all. Employees prefer to have bosses with clout, and when they perceive their immediate boss as having influence in the company, their status is enhanced by association, their morale is generally high, and they feel less critical and resistant to their boss. More powerful managers are more likely to delegate, to reward talent, and to build a team that gives subordinates more significant roles. Powerlessness, on the other hand, too often breeds bossiness rather than true leadership. Accountability without power creates frustration and failure that inevitably results in an ineffective, dictatorial management style. In the face of subordinates losing respect and resisting direction, powerless managers may resort to more punishing forms of influence, which, of course, creates greater disrespect and resentment. It is easy to see how lack of power, at virtually any level of an organization, can only serve to impede the progress of that organization in reaching its goals. Power should be understood as the capacity to mobilize resources necessary for achieving the desired goals of an organization. It need not connote dominance, control, or oppression, but rather, efficacy—the ability to get things done. The real sign of power is accomplishment; when the power is “on,” the organization is productive and running smoothly; when the power is “off,” the organization breaks down. Power in organizations is the ability to make things happen. . . .