|









@This lecture examines how managers &

organisations obtain control and
engage in power processes. It focuses
on

@theories of power and control

@examples of power at work.

2





 

@ 





@ organisations portrayed as logical, functional, bland, impersonal,
passionless entities ± neutral rules of efficiency & economy.
@ ×





@ language, conversation & experience.
@ We talk & argue, maintain, justify & reinforce structures of
membership, acceptance & decision-making.
@ Political forces ± a source of dynamic energy for change
@







 

@ legal & emotional ownership, membership & control, language
@ human frailty, willingness, passion & self-centredness
@ skill, ability, learning capacity
@ opportunism, altruism & virtue
@ ingenuity & disingenuousness
@ 

 








J
 



 




@ ontrol derived from

@ Organisational & institutional structures eg. hierarchy
@ French & Raven - sources of power
@ Influence thru
@ ompliance
@ Surveillance
@ Technology (the expansion of the gaze).
@ Pay and rewards
@ power to set the agenda
@ power to exclude

u





  
|-

 !"
 



×

  
×r

@ 

 (to give +ve benefits or remove -ve ones)
@ 
 
 (to punish those who do not conform)
@ ‰

 (authority) (someone seen to have a right to
prescribe behaviour e.g election or job responsibility)
@ 
 (association with others possessing power)
@  ! 
 (distinctive knowledge, expertise or skills)
@ 



 (controlling information needed by others)
#
Power & influence involve relations between agents. Recipient reaction
is the best focus for explaining social influence & power.$




×


% coercive power
decreases attraction & causes high resistance. Reward power
increases attraction & creates less resistance.

-








|& 

 



Resource-based
 ureaucracy-based

ecision control
now-How
The ontingent Hero
anaging boundaries
Technological dependence
lliances & networks
ountervailers´
Symbolism
ender
+ roupthink (Janis)
]










@ Organisation
evel signifies change, and for change to occur in

an organisation, power must be exercised.
'(|)2

@ Power «.the ability to get one¶s way in a social situation.

@ intentional influence
@ the capacity to effect (or affect) organisational outcomes
 
 |-

@ Senior managers argue that in reality they have little power

@ orporatism and oppression.
ominance of the corporate,

managerial hegemony? Fact or antipathy?
@ Libertarianism vs. egalitarianism.

&
 ‰' 




r  has power over , in that  can get to do something against her will.

r  has the power to exclude from entering the decision making process.

r  has power in that their definition of the situation is accepted by .

*×

@ a] power is held by individuals
b] power is embedded in institutions
@ c] it is maintained by conversation and standard behaviours and
expectations
@ c] it is used to obscure real interests
@ d] it is limited by resources

)
 
 
 +
#, -


@ expands Weber¶s formulation of legitimate authority to fit modern

organisations. Etzioni (odern Organisations) classifies
@





 
 
 
.|/
 # application of physical restraint/threat
.2/
# allocation & access to rewards
.J/

r manipulation of symbols.
@  
×
#
.|/

# intense negative orientation.
.2/
 


#low intensity -ive or +ive orientation.
.J/

# high intensity, value-based positive orientation.


 -

 × 

 
 

@ 
  @ ,


@ 
 å @ 
 


*×(×

(
 
(*
(



@ 1

 @



*(
(2
 (
'(


(





|0
 

#
×2 

@ a view with a insidious, pervasive, hegemonic aspect

@ power is not wholly in the hands of one person who can exercise it
alone and totally over others
@ It is a machine
@ no one owns it but in which everyone is caught up
@ Foucault, . µ6



 
  
 

 
 


. In ordon, . (ed.) Power / nowledge. (
r )]

@ Foucault, power is invested in

@ architecture, the layout of classroom, hospitals, dormitories
@ institutional interactions
@ complexes of knowledge.

||
 


 

@ +


#
@ entham's ideas on the design of a prison
building .
@ rchitecturer
a] inspection from a central hub.
b] the mass can¶t see their observers.
c] they don¶t know if they are being watched.
d] but all their actions are deteremined as if they were
being watched.
@ a "metaphor-model" for hospitals, prisons,
schools«economical and self-disciplined.

|2
 


 

@
espite some attempts (Russian work house, US prison«), the design
never caught-on in th & 
th century.
@ Yet, in contemporary work & organisational design there is increasing
attention to re-structuring the ¶gaze¶ of the organisation.
@ Three areas of interestr

|  

 - organisationally related and committedr quality, delighting
customer, problem-solving, learning, performance, econo-efficiency within team
culture.
2





3

J 


   

'
r open plan office, flexitime,
teleworking, email, semi-autonomous work group (cell technology), general
empowerment, tagging of offenders
@ Is there anything different here or do these still reflect the power in
membership of a unitary, controlled organisation?

|J
 
 
4
'

@ Taylorism focuses on .... set methods, fixed pattern(s) of work activity

and systems defined from above
@ team-based organisations focus on monitoring & remaking employee
attitudes.
@ high involvement workplaces aim not at detailed managerial
choreography of bodies but constant improvisation at work with
unobtrusive orchestration of employee values. cinlay & Taylor, 


@ rchitecture & designr expanding the gaze, open plan, limited sight of
colleagues, supervisor can see all...
@ 

Every call is subject to a series of strict and exceptionally detailed
measurements, which, when statistically collated, are compared with
conformance criteria laid down in the company contract. (Taylor & ain,


)
@ Is this really so? Is the all entre system so oppressive?
@ Evaluate/research.

|u





55

You are a manager responsible for a section of 

accounts clerks. Other managers have complained about
your groups low quality and speed. They have asked you
to improve the groups performance. How?


5
Setting standards for quality & quantity?
easuring individual performance
reating three mini-teams
Introduce a hierarchy (supervisor, senior super)







|-
 
   

@ $
# a consensus based framework which assumes

fundamentally common interests between those in the workplace
and in society at large.
@ 
# recognise a variety of interests and potential for conflict
but develop and apply conflict reduction mechanisms i.e. social and
institutional devices. (Sophisticated form of unitarism)
@ 
- peace for now. It is the best we can get
(pragmatism) but the tension & potential for resistance remains
@ 

# unequal power differences are an inherent feature of
industrial capitalism - upset it to change it

|]





 

@ Sub-sets of power.
@ Pluralism - conflicts of interests
@ argaining power / leverage
@ ability to block, resist, + claim rights
@ onflict or competition for status, attention
@ ompetition for scarce resources
@ Informal power? Illegitimate in nature?
@ Stakeholder analysis - formal/contractual vs. 'voice'

|&



 

 
5





 

 @ ompetence

'

×
 @ Political access & sensitivity
×

(


(



 @ Sponsorship

'(

 @ Stature & credibility
  

 

@ Resource management



@ roup support


( 
! 
 |)0"

(
(

×


! 

|)
 


#6
-- 
 


@ Recipe knowledge of 'practical theorist'

@ Theories-in-use
@ onscious, self-critical intervention
@ Improvisations
@ II, IV, V then a diminished progression
@ Ensemble ± artin ± Wolfie ± ensemble ± J -
ensemble
@ oves & behaviour informed by models, experiences,
assumptions, values. Workable knowledge
@ hoose tactics, deploy, judge, justify/change
@  



|
"The politically unskilled will fail".

|
 
 
 


@






@ 4
 78


87"
@ 


 (
 


 
"
@ +
9 !
3
3


@

3

 

"creativity thru. alternatives & debate"«vs. "now I've got you, you SO "
@ 


  
 +

:
"
@ ,

 ×

("«leave well alone")
@ ,



("«yield")
@ 
 
 ("«find a middle way")
@ 

×


("«lets work this out together")

20
 





@ social construction/language  
(

 
 .
@ uthoritarianism, self-interest, pluralism &

  
alliances prevail.

 
×

@ Fist louder than words. ction takes power. ×


  
@ We can block you - scissor-pat-brick






@ ediated by social values & debate + law -
@
ismissal, redundancy, strike, media
scrutiny & commentary
@ Positioning & influencing are structurally &
processually inherent.
@ onsultation & manoeuvering (politicking),
advances the views & preferences of
individuals & groups
I'll get my big
brother on to
you!
2|
*
  





@ communicates imperative, rights, position, expectation, manoeuvring &

inclusion/exclusion.
@ Such speech is not neutral butr
@ imparts necessity, urgency & acceptability to actions
@ flavours the scripts of the powerful who
@ distribute patronage & devolve authority
@ define imperatives & take action
@ mobilise the support of others
@ she who speaks fluently is empowered & empowers others.
@ iconic words/phrases may better explain managerial behaviour than shallow
propositions about leadership.
@O textbooks under-play these & the drama of politicking.
@ We should not gloss over the contradictions of owner/manager
dominance.
@ Utilitarianism vs. egalitarianism
@ label "politicking" as abnormal or dysfunctional behaviour
22
*

(


(×
 


@ power to rule (reek - ratia- cracy) rests with the people

(demos). Exercised thru e.g. participative representation, co-
determination or coalition.
@



individual or small group - force + ability to reward followers.
@
efine rights, privileges and rules of behaviour .
@ Patronage - distribute limited power/privilege to others.
@ ×
 

- control via " rationally " defined, accepted procedures &
regulations which guide. Those who know & can use the rules can
control decisions & action.
@ 
 






experts & problem-solvers acquire power & influence according to
the "know-how" they contribute.

2J

  

@ intrigue - often unseen by outsiders.

@ Positioning thru. conversations & favours, sharing of
passions, establishing the interests & tensions of others
@ ctors interpret interaction & alliances according to how
they align with various points of view.
@ If visible, we note
@ the scriptsr the essences, interpretations & interests of
the actors. What they say, flow of action on a stage.
Time and place may cast light on conflicts and
purposes. For-against-waiverers
@ Personal agendas significantly shape the scripts.

2u
 

# 


 
‰

"When an individual plays a part he implicitly requests his

observers to take seriously the impression that is fostered
before them." -  pp 
7 

7 '"
 a dramatic meaning
 the "mask" we wear wherever we go
 we present ourselves (self-concept) to ourselves & to others.
 the mask we think we have, that we project & others perceive
 "Self" is socially constructed. People attribute characteristics to me.
 I/you cannot be understood separately from the social melées we
mingle in.

2-
 *

 

 

 

  

@ persona´, on/off a stage (various audiences) manifested thru

@ performance & roles, scripts used, delivered & interpreted
etc.
@ Individuals & audiences are taken in with performances -
"reality". If performance does not convince - interpreted as
insecure or a masquerade of self-interest.
@ judgements of others may be cynical or dismissive.
Ë


 

 




 


 
 

   












  




Ë 

2]
  ‰
  

|+*


@ actors give meaning to selves, others & their situation.
@ performances before observers deliver impressions (actor's goals).
@ Information exchanged to confirm identity & significance of behaviour.
@ The actor may have no "intent" yet others impute attributes to them.

2

@ audience requires "idealised" front. elievable performance.
Stereotypical repertoires - "expressive equipment " to establish self´.

ramatic realisation - "impression management". ust be convincing +
"in-line" with expectations, conventions, mores, rules
@ redibility won byr satisfying expected duties & role performance +
consistency in communicating activities & traits.

J 
2 
  


2&
, 

 



, 

 
@ an element of "front". Expectations within a culture (more varied
today ± fragmentation).
@ Selective "appearance signs" (uniforms). Ritual communication of
status - formal or informal, gender, age & personal commitments.


@ how we play the role; the personal touch - forewarns how performer
will act in role - dominant, aggressive, yielding, receptive etc.
@ the manner expected (consultant/guru, doctor, Ratner & low value
baubles)

 
@ may confuse/ upset an audience
@ gather information on what is coherent & what is not.

2)




 
×

@ 

# consensus + conformity in behaviour.

inimise dissent. aintain front to fit performance
expectations. Things that "unify" may be thin & partial but
projected externally as strong.

@ +

 # maintain "front" for each setting to

guide actors & audience in consistent relationships.
Pressure to stick to required front. Public arguments lose
credibility.

2
 

(×
'
(



udience setting for team performance

@ 


@ visible formal, official position (conventions have
meaning for audience).
@ ×
'




 


@ contradict front stage impression? Less bound by
public demands?
@ elaborate "truth of the performance" - (off-the-
record)?

J0
6
 ; 

 +'

@ ohesive group, distorted decision-making

@ strong leader & interaction
@ illusions of righteousness & invincibility.
@ inward-looking, self-regulating &
stereotypical behaviour
 

@ failure to explore purposes & alternatives
fully. Rejected options seldom re-examined
@ insufficient exploration of costs & risks
@ assumptions unchallenged
@ negative outcomes too readily discounted
@ superficial information searches. Exclude
data that "does not fit the picture"
@ onsequences & risks glossed over. Weak
implementation, monitoring, contingency
planning, worst case scenarios etc.
J|
,



 +'

@ ssign roles to evaluate group processes & contributions.

@ Focus on doubts & uncertainties. e tenacious. hallenge
assumptions. et full information. hallenge the data
(significance + reliability).
@ Leaders to solicit & receive feedback/criticism re- his/her
judgements. See this as a contributor to quality - not a gripe or
complaint mechanism.
@ void grudges & punishment of "critics".
@ Time-out to let individuals re-think, re-formulate, gather more
data and re-present.
@ Sub-groups to do more detailed work for re-presentation.

ecompose tasks & synthesise alternatives properly.

J2
 


@ Wilson F, Organisational ehaviour & Work, OUP,  .

hapter  - on Power, ontrol and Resistance
@ organ , Images of Organisations, Sage, chapters , , ,

@ Ezzamei, ., & Willmott, H. (

). ccounting for Teamworkr 

ritical Study of roup- ased Systems of ontrol, dministrative
Science Quarterly, Vol.4 , pp -
.
@ Fincham, R., & Rhodes, P. (

). Principles of Organisational
ehaviour. rd Ed. OUP (h).

JJ