The Power And Leadership

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

Sony Chaudhary

Introduction:

Good leaders are made and not born. If you have the desire and determination, you can become an effective leader. Good leaders develop through a never ending process of self-study, education, training, and experience.

To inspire your workers into higher levels of teamwork, there are certain things you must be, know, and, do. It does not come naturally, but they are acquired through continual work and study. Good leaders are repeatedly working and studying to improve their leadership skills; they are not resting on their laurels.

Leadership is a process by which a person influences others to achieve an objective and directs the organization in a way that makes it more interconnected and consistent. Leadership is an organized process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal.

Trait and Process Leadership Models

Leadership behaviors can be expressed in many contexts and at many different social positions. It involves various combinations of power such as directing the attention of others, and the ability/power to control, guide, influence, encourage or coerce the behavior and values of others. Nearly all humans have the ability to adopt leadership behaviors. Even in simple two-someone may be more the leader than the other, although they may swap roles from time to time. Thus, leadership behaviors can emerge in just about any social relationship; e.g., playground, street gang, terrorist group, church fete society, local cricket team, the hospital ward, business organization, and government. Leadership research also makes the distinction between task orientated leadership and person orientated leadership. The person orientated leader will attempt to manipulate the values and emotions of subordinates, getting them `devoted to the cause' that they will lead.

Leadership Roles:

Once out of the family there are other groups and social relationships in which we must find our place. Leadership roles can be ascribed and defined by social groups and one passes some entrance test or exam to enter them (e.g., lawyer, doctor) which legitimizes the use of power. As we saw in chapter five, in some societies obtaining the recognition of manhood legitimizes the use of certain types of power and authority (e.g., over women). Historically, leaders could be given their roles `as of right' (e.g. by an institutionalized class or caste system). In fact many leadership positions (Kings, Emperors, and so forth) were family determined. Even today the family of origin and the social rank of the family can significantly influence a person's chances and aspirations to leadership positions. Top leaders of social institutions are rarely those who have risen through the ranks, but usually begin their claims from class-bestowed privileged positions. But the importance of the rank of one's family is also noted in many non-human primates. Females especially, usually obtain their rank from their mother's and aunt's rank. As it has been for millions of years, we leave the family and emerge into the social world where rank is everywhere.

Exercising Power:

People often seek out leadership positions from which to use power and once there, their personality will influence how that power and position is exercised. So even though a social group may legitimize the use of power, and select an individual for leadership roles, the way power is exercised depends on complex interactions between the person exercising it and those on whom it is exercised. Some may become leaders even against their wishes, via their popularity or the personal values they express. John Lennon, for example, along with other pop groups of the time, had an enormous effect on the values of the young. However, he consistently denied that he wished to be seen as any kind of leader. He wanted fame for his music.

Power, Influence, and Leadership:

A great deal of power people have in organizations comes from the specific jobs or titles they hold. In other words, they are able to influence others because of the formal power associated with their positions. For example, there are certain powers that the president of the United States has because of the office (e.g., signing bills into law, making treaties, declaring war, etc.). These remain vested in the position and are available to anyone who holds it. When the president’s term expires, they transfer to the new office-holder.

A true leader is able to influence others and modify behavior via legitimate and referent power. President Carter had a noble vision about the United States, as well as the world, but he could not coalesce groups or people to achieve his goals; the whole country suffered. Presidents Truman and Johnson used their position (or office or power) effectively and were much better able to manipulate groups and people to achieve their ends. Presidents Kennedy, Reagan, and Clinton relied on personal persuasion and were able to sway the nation as a whole, as well as Congress, business, and labor, by charisma and communication. President Roosevelt effectively used both position and personality.

The key to this framework is that leadership as an influence process is a function of the elements of the leader’s sources of power and the degree of acceptance with the interests and needs of the subordinates. In the figure, sources of power are divided into personal and organizational. Legitimate, reward, and coercive powers are organizational and are part of the leader’s job. Policies and procedures prescribe them. Expert and referent

Powers are personal and emanate from a leader’s personality:

Legitimate power can be depended on initially, but continued reliance on it may create dissatisfaction, resistance, and frustration among employees; if legitimate power does not coincide with expert power, there may be negative effects on productivity; and dependence on legitimate power may lead to only minimum compliance while increasing resistance.

Reward power can directly influence the frequency of employee-performance behaviors in the short run. Prolonged use of reward power can lead to a dependent relationship in which subordinates feel manipulated and become dissatisfied.

Organizational Power:

Legitimate

Reward

Coercive

Personal Power

Expert

Referent

Outcomes

Behavior

Performance

Task Completion

Job Satisfaction

Absenteeism

Turnover

Although coercive power may lead to temporary compliance by subordinates, it produces the undesirable side effects of frustration, fear, revenge, and alienation.

This in turn may lead to poor performance, dissatisfaction, and turnover.

Expert power is closely related to a climate of trust. A leader’s influence can be internalized by subordinates; that is, when a leader uses expert power, attitudinal conformity and internalized motivation on the part of subordinates will result.

This in turn requires less surveillance of employees by the leader than does reward or coercive power.

Referent power can lead to enthusiastic and unquestioning trust, compliance, loyalty, and commitment from subordinates. Like expert power, considerably less surveillance of employees is required. It is possible for a person to possess all of the sources of power at the same time. In fact, the most powerful leaders—like those mentioned previously—have sources of power that include all five forms. Of the three sources of organizational power (legitimate, reward, coercive) and two sources of personal power (expert, referent), which are the most effective? Generally, the personal sources of power are more strongly related to employees’ job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and performance than are the organizational power sources. One source of organizational power—coercive power—is negatively related to employee satisfaction, commitment, and job performance.

Furthermore, the various sources of power are interrelated. For example, the use of coercive power by managers may reduce their referent power, and the use coercive and reward power may lead to reduced expert power. However, managers with expert power are likely to have legitimate power because people accept their expertise as a basis for their authority. In addition, the higher a person’s rank in the organization, the more legitimate power that individual possesses.

This, in turn, tends to be accompanied by greater opportunities to use reward and coercive power. Thus, depending on the situation, leaders may use the various sources of power together in varying combinations.

One interesting finding is the role that procedural justice may play in the sources of power used by leaders. Although the sources of power are interrelated as well as related to work outcomes, they are also mediated by employees’ perceptions of social justify. What does this mean? It means that employees evaluate their perceptions concerning the fairness with which leaders use the sources of power and respond accordingly. Specifically, when employees perceive that the way leaders use the various sources of power seem fair, they respond more favorably. This research leads to a new concept of power: empowerment of organization members. Empowerment of Organization Members Diane Tracy, a New York management consultant, suggests a new concept of power in her bestselling book, The Power Pyramid: How to Get Power by Giving It Away

Advice is that you can achieve ultimate power by giving it to the people who work for you. Tracy says that power operates under the same principle as love: The more you give to others, the more you receive in return. Also, she suggests that leaders can maximize their own power and their opportunities for success by enabling the employees they supervise also to achieve their own sense of power and success. Today, many organizations are recommending a flattening of the pyramid. These leaders are beginning to see the need to involve organization members at all levels in making decisions and solving problems. Real power, according to Tracy, flows from the bottom up, rather than from the top down "… If you are successful in giving your people power, they will surely lift you on their shoulders to heights of power and success you never dreamed possible…"

Diane Tracy follows up her view of empowerment with practical suggestions on how to achieve a redistribution of power. She recommends ten steps to empowerment.

1. Tell people what their responsibilities are.

2. Give them authority equal to the responsibility assigned them.

3. Set standards of excellence.

4. Provide them with the needed training.

5. Give them knowledge and information.

6. Provide them with feedback on their performance.

7. Recognize them for their achievements.

8. Trust them.

9. Give them permission to fail.

10. Treat them with dignity and respect.

Four Framework Approach:

In the Four Framework Approach, Bolman and Deal (1991) suggest that leaders display leadership behaviours in one of four types of frameworks: Structural, Human Resource, Political, or Symbolic.

Four Framework Approach

This model suggests that leaders can be put into one of these four categories and there are times when one approach is appropriate and times when it would not be. That is, any style can be effective or ineffective, depending upon the situation. Relying on only one of these approaches would be inadequate, thus we should strive to be conscious of all four approaches, and not just depend on one or two. For example, during a major organization change, a Structural leadership style may be more effective than a Symbolic leadership style; during a period when strong growth is needed, the Symbolic approach may be better. We also need to understand ourselves as each of us tends to have a preferred approach. We need to be conscious of this at all time and be aware of the limitations of just favouring one approach.

Structural Framework

In an effective leadership situation, the leader is a social architect whose leadership style is analysis and design. While in an ineffective leadership situation, the leader is a petty tyrant whose leadership style is details. Structural Leaders focus on structure, strategy, environment, implementation, experimentation, and adaptation.

Human Resource Framework

In an effective leadership situation, the leader is a catalyst and servant whose leadership style is support, advocating, and empowerment. While in an ineffective leadership situation, the leader is a pushover, whose leadership style is abdication and fraud. Human Resource Leaders believe in people and communicate that belief; they are visible and accessible; they empower, increase participation, support, share information, and move decision making down into the organization.

Political Framework

In an effective leadership situation, the leader is an advocate, whose leadership style is coalition and building. While in an ineffective leadership situation, the leader is a hustler, whose leadership style is manipulation. Political leaders clarify what they want and what they can get; they assess the distribution of power and interests; they build linkages to other stakeholders, use persuasion first, and then use negotiation and coercion only if necessary.

Symbolic Framework

In an effective leadership situation, the leader is a prophet, whose leadership style is inspiration. While in an ineffective leadership situation, the leader is a fanatic or fool, whose leadership style is smoke and mirrors. Symbolic leaders view organizations as a stage or theater to play certain roles and give impressions; these leaders use symbols to capture attention; they try to frame experience by providing plausible interpretations of experiences; they discover and communicate a vision.

Leadership Styles:

Leadership style is the manner and approach of providing direction, implementing plans, and motivating people. This early study has been very influential and established three major leadership styles.

Authoritarian or Autocratic

Participative or Democratic

Delegative or Free Reign

Although good leaders use all three styles, with one of them normally dominant, bad leaders tend to stick with one style.

Authoritarian (Autocratic):

This style is used when leaders tell their employees what they want done and how they want it accomplished, without getting the advice of their followers. Some of the appropriate conditions to use it is when you have all the information to solve the problem, you are short on time, and your employees are well motivated.

Some people tend to think of this style as a vehicle for yelling, using demeaning language, and leading by threats and abusing their power. This is not the authoritarian style, rather it is an abusive, unprofessional style called "bossing people around." It has no place in a leader's repertoire.

The authoritarian style should normally only be used on rare occasions. If you have the time and want to gain more commitment and motivation from your employees, then you should use the participative style.

Participative (Democratic):

This style involves the leader including one or more employees in the decision making process (determining what to do and how to do it). However, the leader maintains the final decision making authority. Using this style is not a sign of weakness; rather it is a sign of strength that your employees will respect.

This is normally used when you have part of the information, and your employees have other parts. Note that a leader is not expected to know everything — this is why you employ knowledgeable and skilful employees. Using this style is of mutual benefit — it allows them to become part of the team and allows you to make better decisions.

Delegative (Free Reign):

In this style, the leader allows the employees to make the decisions. However, the leader is still responsible for the decisions that are made. This is used when employees are able to analyze the situation and determine what needs to be done and how to do it. You cannot do everything! You must set priorities and delegate certain tasks.

This is not a style to use so that you can blame others when things go wrong, rather this is a style to be used when you fully trust and confidence in the people below you. Do not be afraid to use it, however, use it wisely!

Power:

Power means many different things to different people. For some, power is seen as corrupt. For others, the more power they have, the more successful they feel. For even others, power is of no interest at all. The five bases of power were identified by John French and Bertram Raven in the early 1960’s through a study they had conducted on power in leadership roles. The study showed how different types of power affected one’s leadership ability and success in a leadership role.

The five bases of power are divided in two categories:

Formal Power:

Coercive

Coercive power is conveyed through fear of losing one’s job, being demoted, receiving a poor performance review, having prime projects taken away, etc. This power is gotten through threatening others. 

Reward

Reward power is conveyed through rewarding individuals for compliance with one’s wishes. This may be done through giving bonuses, raises, a promotion, extra time off from work, etc. For example, the supervisor who provides employees comp time when they meet an objective she sets for a project.

Legitimate

Legitimate power comes from having a position of power in an organization, such as being the boss or a key member of a leadership team. This power comes when employees in the organization recognize the authority of the individual. For example, the CEO who determines the overall direction of the company and the resource needs of the company.

Personal Power

Expert

Expert power comes from one’s experiences, skills or knowledge. As we gain experience in particular areas, and become thought leaders in those areas, we begin to gather expert power that can be utilized to get others to help us meet our goals. For example, the Project Manager who is an expert at solving particularly challenging problems to ensure a project stays on track.

Referent

Referent power comes from being trusted and respected.  We can gain referent power when others trust what we do and respect us for how we handle situations. For example, the Human Resource Associate who is known for ensuring employees is treated fairly and coming to the rescue of those who are not.