BUS 520 FINAL ASSIGN REY WRITER PLS

Assignment 3: Position Paper: Power, Politics, and Culture

Melissa Miller

Strayer University

BUS 520

Prof. Andrea Banto

May 28, 2018

Position Paper: Power, Politics, and Culture

Family Dollar is an American entity that specializes in an assortment of goods for example fashion products, beauty services, interior designing as well as home cleaning services and products. Family Dollar's shops spanning the states of the United States is recorded to be 8000 outlets. The success of the company regarding size is a façade given the derailing factors towards the company's throughput. An example of this factor is the absence of motivation for the employees especially as a result of the sick pay, unfavorable working conditions, and long work hours but to mention a few.

1. Sources of Power

The employee agreeability and to build the company’s anticipated discipline levels.

To have power is not the same as to use the force. For instance, a manager may have the ability to prize or to discipline an employee. This type of manager will have their command respected even if such a manager fails to reward his/ her employees. For the singular reason that the manager can prize or punish employees accordingly, the manager is automatically obeyed. So then, what makes the list of the bases of holding power over others? Scholars recognized six different foundations of power. These entailed; legitimate power, reward, coerced power, expert power, information-based power as well as referent power (French & Raven, 1959). An individual can attain power from any of the six forms conditional on the status quo. This paper will review each of the methods of acquiring power using Steve Jobs as the original case.

Legitimate Power

This type of power is the one that originates from an institution’s obligational title. Such cases include how a manager distributes projects, how some law enforcer arrests offenders or how teaching assistants award grades. Given the validity of these titles, subjective individuals bend to the authority without question. Steve Jobs, for example, has had legitimate authority at the helm as Apple CEO. The deadlines he scheduled would be adhered to by employees even if they thought the deadlines were beyond the mission of the company. In junior and still rising institutions, there have been seen managers who tap into the legitimate power to manipulate employees to work beyond regular time to improve the adaptability of the company amidst the competition.

Reward Power

Reward power describes the capability to prize employees for example through increasing their paycheck or giving a lucrative project to specific employees. This kind of power complements legitimate authority and is highly effective when rewards do not come most often. However, any individual can exercise reward power but in the method of public commendation or reward an individual to gain their loyalty or submission. At the helm of Apple, Steve Jobs utilized reward power by giving a raise or awarding promotions. Similarly, Bill Gross, the forefather of Idea lab, exerted reward power through his authority to initiate new companies (Hughes, Ginnet, & Curphy, 1995). In launching his company, Bill Gross used the idea of funding other upcoming companies provided they could give actionable ideas towards the development of his own company. If the groups convinced him that their views were profitable, he would offer them $250,000 as starting capital and a further 30% equity to the employees and the management team as well as a 10% equity of the company to the CEO. This strategy ensured that every individual owned some percentage of the capital of the company. Furthermore, the CEO’s salary was a flat rate of $75,000 to create a poise in the equity distribution. Subsequently, one company, City search was publicized, and the employees received their share in the property priced at $270 million.

Coercive Power

Different from the reward power, coercive power punishes the individual by taking away something as a result of disloyalty or alleged disrespect of the authority. This method of power banks on the fear of individuals and it, therefore, uses force to make individuals comply. The most common form of coercive power is government dictatorship which especially uses physical threats in cases of non-compliant citizens. Some parents also utilize this form of control by grounding their children as a form of punishment. Steve Jobs ironically has exerted coercive power sometimes. These include cases of yelling at workers and threatening to sack them.

There was an instance where John Wiley & Sons Inc. issued a biography of Steve Jobs that was not authenticated by Jobs and he subsequently forbade the auction and sale of accounts from the editor in all Apple outlets (Hafner, 2005). He wrote off his opponents through pricing. The highlight, however, was how he coerced the railroads do not offer transport services to his opponent's goods.

Expert Power

The knowledge and skillset drive expert power that an individual has. Steve Jobs, for example, is gifted with specialist power since he has an understanding of what the customers thirst for even before there can state it. More who have expert power in an institution are long-serving employees, for example, a steelworker that has knowledge of the temperature variations and the time intervals for achieving maximum output. Another example is the technology companies that rely heavily on expert power rather than legitimate power. These types of organizations, therefore, use matrix organizations where concise levels of legitimate authority are irrelevant since everyone interconnects despite the title of the individual employee.

Information Power

Information power quite resembles expert power though the sources are not the same. Specialist power most often has a vast amount of knowledge and skill set for specific tasks whereas information power is recognized by their connection to particular data. For instance, the experience of pricing of different commodities gives an individual the upper hand, especially in negotiations. In an institution, an individual’s public network can make them strangers where there is a poll of information or make them proficient in the department.

As shall be discussed in the latter stages of this paper, the individuals who are capable of crossing boundaries to connect different aspects of an institution often have mastered information power. For example, in the 1960s TV show Mad Men, the characters, especially the telephone exchange operators have learned information power, and they can manage the incoming calls for all the firm’s conversations.

Referent Power

Barrack Obama had legitimate power as the 44th president of the United States. Moreover, Obama exerts coercive power being the commander-in-chief of the U.S. Armed Forces. Given that Obama is afforded the legislation to appoint the cabinet titles, Obama exercises reward power. His level of expert and referent power is however debatable given he garnered 52% of the prevalent vote in the appointment of 2008. After his entry as the head of the government, he was provided with information power through the national and security briefing. Referent power mostly is dependent on the characteristics if an individual, for example, the level of a person's likeability and respect levels. Referent power is mainly what is described as an individual's personality and charm. This type of personality trait and grace is witnessed in the description given of the influence Steve Jobs influences.

2. Leadership Behavior and Culture

Most often, corporate officials are hesitant in their recognition of the interconnection between power in both individuals and an institutional relationship. Power and politics are mostly referred to as dirty concepts. In the process of finding a connection between these concepts, most managers avoid it entirely and prefer the discreteness of institutional operations.

As I recommend in this paper, there should be a brief acknowledgment of the benefits of unique personality traits especially the capitalization of fortes and limits of individuals in the distribution of roles and enhancing the productivity of institutional living. This kind of institutional construction is a result of compromise among corporates who have influential positions in institutions. When an executive is allowed to his power through his strengths, there is a higher chance of successful distribution of power. The first objection of problem-solving measures is curtailed by such issues that can slowly but eventually discourage the ethical and moral aspect of leadership. Thought the criticism is valid, the problems can effectively be solved by managers who can look beyond instant possibilities. This paper indeed attempts to show how the limits of some leaders have resulted in more problems.

3. Leadership Influence

The essential factors in the proposed leadership structure are Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS), that definitively are variable and that have several pyramids overlapping and interconnected in a network. Such a construction has also been referred to as “temporary constellations of people and units.” These constructions can creatively solve problems while adapting conveniently to the social structures.

The planned Complexity Leadership Theory (CLT), is reliant on the self-motivated proficiencies of CAS, emphasizes on the policies and patterns that enhance institutional ingenuity and adaptation especially when the relevant CAS varieties are employed. CLT comprises three wide varieties of leadership: administrative leadership which is reliant on ancient, hierarchy government, adaptive leadership, a procreative, self-motivated and where revolution activities rely on and empowering leadership, which shapes and facilitate situations that favor the problem-solving capabilities and creativity of CAS.

Operative leaders unite people and allow them to work as a team towards a mutual objective. To ensure institutional success, the leaders can establish visions, motivate individuals and promote communication. This way, a manager can beget an operative unit in an environment favorable for organizational and individual success (Hughes, Ginnet, & Curphy, 1995). A leader can therefore positively affect the institutional structure and productivity by creating leadership experiences and problem-solving techniques as well as personality development. Productive institutional routines depend on appropriate behaviors from both the managers and the workers. Management qualities can, therefore, be a developing process in a company. Leaders and employers who provide support for employees regarding leadership can transform them into treasured team players. An administration that involves employees gives them a sense of ownership

4. Executive Summary

Taking a review of the different modes that power can be exercised and the effects it has on the organization's throughput, it is essential to reach into these factors and pick out those that are beneficial and reviewing the deleterious ones. Legitimate power should not be abused. For effective governance, it should be regulated in cases where the individual leaders abuse their power. Similarly, reward power should only reward those that deserve but not exclude them. This goes hand in hand with constructive criticism when employees fail somehow.

As seen in the case of coercive power, it should be avoided. This is because it banks on the fear of employees which may reduce morale levels in the workplace. However, as a manager-manager scare tactic, this method seems to be the most effective. It builds the organization but is a self-preservation mechanism. In technological companies, expert power appears to the most accepted and the most efficient. This method is suitable because it relies on the employee expertise. For this method to be, however, every individual in the company must be of the same or similar expertise levels. Information power is a more professional method and is, in fact, useful in companies that rely heavily on the specificity of their information. Referent power, on the other hand, can be a developed trait. This kind of power is what can be used to shape employees into professionals because it would dictate the way the employees behave in the work setup.

References

French, J.R.P. and Raven, B. (1959). The Basis of Social Power, in Cartwright, D. (Ed.), Studies in Social Power, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI, pp. 529-69.

Hafner-Burton, E. M. (2005). Trading Human Rights: How Preferential Trade Agreements Influence Government Repression. International Organization, 59(3), 593-629.

Hughes, R. L., Ginnett, R. C., & Curphy, G. J. (1998). Contingency Theories of Leadership. Leading Organizations: Perspectives for a New Era, 141-157.