Nature, Forms and Consequence of Power

By: Group 2 San Guillermo National High School Humss 11-2

Introduction
What is Nature of Power?

What is the definition of Power?

According to www.elcomblus.com

Power is its broadest sense, power is one’s ability to achieve the desired outcome.

However, in political terms, power is the ability to influence another—the way one thinks or
behaves—in a manner not of his or her own choosing (Lasswell 1936). It thus involves one’s capacity
to get things done, and to make someone do something he or she would not otherwise do.

Political power involves three interrelated concepts: legitimacy, authority, and sovereignty.
According to Roskin et al. (2012), legitimacy refers to the people’s perception that their government
rules rightfully, and thus must be obeyed. Sovereignty, on the other hand, speaks of the ability of a
national government to be the sole leader, which has the last word of law in that society. Lastly,
authority is seen as the political leader’s ability to command respect and exercise power.

What is the Nature of Political Power?

According to https://slcc.pressbooks.pub/

A common element of all definitions of politics is the struggle over resources, rights, or privileges.
Lasswell’s shorthand for this struggle is who gets what. This struggle requires us to understand the
nature of power, which is a very important concept in political science. At the most basic level,
power is the ability to prevail in struggles over resources, rights, or privileges. This is an important
political concept because power is not evenly distributed in a polity. Some members of a polity are
more likely to succeed in their struggle than are others. When some actors have a historical track
record of prevailing in political struggles, it can warp the very system itself in ways that allow those
actors to continue to prevail. In this text, we will focus on three dimensions of power.

“There’s not enough understanding of the realities of power. In a democracy, supposedly we hold
power by what we do at the ballot box, so therefore the more we know about political power the
better our choices should be and the better, in theory, our democracy should be.”

–Journalist Robert Caro (1)

One of the central concepts and issues of political science is power:

Those one who wields it was Person on authority such as politicians. Politician is a person who is
professionally involved in politics, especially as a holder of or a candidate for an elected office.
As persons having the power to legislate and who represent the people, politicians will carry out
their responsibility for oversight, to ensure that public administration is conducted impartially and
neutrally.
How can power and its consequences be controlled to gain benefits?

Power and consequence are often closely related. The basic principle is that a person with power has
the ability to create consequences for the target person, who takes these consequences into
account when they are deciding whether to comply with a request or refuse it.

Power defines social and political relationships. Who gets what, when, and how much are usually
determined by power. From political systems characterized by democratic institutions or
dictatorships, down to interpersonal relationships between and among individuals, the struggle for
power is ever-present.

In the system of governance, power relations determine how resources are distributed. For instance,
the relationship between the leader and the governed is shaped by inequality in power. Such is
likewise evident in the global order. In world politics or international relations, according to realists,
power relations decide the type of relationship between states. Realists maintain that economic,
political, and military powers usually dictate the influence of one country over the affairs of another
—if not the global order. However, liberals argue that the adverse effects of inequality of power are
mitigated by a rules-based world order. Either way, there is a common recognition of the existence
of power even at an international scale.

Reference: https://www.elcomblus.com/definition-nature-dimensions-types-and-consequences-of-
power/

What is the purpose of power politics?

Power politics prioritizes national self-interest over the interests of other nations or the international
community, and thus may include threatening one another with military, economic or political
aggression to protect one nation's own interest.

What is the three consequences of power?

There are three consequences of power: compliance, commitment and resistance. Employing
certain types of power in particular, ways may result into these consequences. Compliance refers to
the readiness or act of agreeing to do something.

 Compliance- the act or process of complying to a desire, demand, proposal, or regimen or to

coercion
 Commitment- an agreement or pledge to do something in the future a commitment to
improve conditions at the prison especially: an engagement to assume a financial obligation
at a future date. b: something pledged the commitment of troops to the war. T he state or
quality of being dedicated to a cause, activity, etc.
 Resistance- The refusal to accept or comply with something; the attempt to prevent
something by action or argument.
First Part: All about power
Power in the natural sciences can be easily established through a single equation, which
signifies the quantifiable nature of physical power.

According to University of Hawaii System (The Fundamental Nature of Power)

There is a type of physical power, however, which is central to this interest. This is the power that
intentionally and physically affects a person contrary to his will, one oriented not towards
influencing, changing, or altering his choice, his will, but to directly opposing it physically. I will call
this force.

What is an example of physical power?

Physical power also comes from having things that are not designed to hurt people. Owning a
building or a machine or even a sewing needle are forms of physical power.

Power in society, and by extension, the social sciences, on the other hand, is more
complicated because it is continuously being molded by the dynamic nature of society and
the objective and subjective capacity of man.

Power in society- With social power, one can influence, or even change, society. Social power is used
to exert control over others according to the interests and motivations of the person(s) in power.
Generally, social power is characterized by tradition, charisma, and rational-legal authority.

What does it mean to have power within a society?

With social power, one can influence, or even change, society. Social power is used to exert control
over others according to the interests and motivations of the person(s) in power. Generally, social
power is characterized by tradition, charisma, and rational-legal authority

The Power in Society is continuously being molded because of constantly changing of society. Social
change can evolve from a number of different sources, including contact with other societies
(diffusion), changes in the ecosystem (which can cause the loss of natural resources or widespread
disease), technological change.

Is society constantly changing?

Social change is way human interactions and relationships transform cultural and social institutions
over time, having a profound impact of society. Social change is a concept many of us take for
granted or don't really even understand. No society has ever remained the same. Change is always
happening.

Dahl( 1950) defined power in society as the ability of person A or institution A to make person B or
institution B do something that person B or Institution B, on his/her/its own, would not do.
Who is Dahl (1950)?

Robert A. Dahl, in full Robert Alan Dahl, (born December 17, 1915, Inwood, Iowa, U.S.—died
February 5, 2014, Hamden, Connecticut), American political scientist and educator. A leading
theorist of political pluralism, Dahl stressed the role in politics played by associations, groups, and
organizations.

In “The Concept of Power” (1957), his first major contribution to the field of political science, Dahl
developed a formal definition of power that was frequently cited as an important (though
incomplete) insight into the phenomenon. According to Dahl, “A has power over B to the extent that
he can get B to do something that B would not otherwise do.” Dahl gave as an example a professor
threatening a student with a failing grade if he did not read a certain book during the holidays. In
this case, the amount of power held by the professor can be conceived as the difference between
the probability that the student would read the book before receiving the threat and the probability
that he would read it after receiving the threat. Dahl argued that his definition could be used to
compare the power of political actors in a given sphere—for instance, the influence of different U.S.
senators on questions of foreign policy. Critics, such as the social theorist Steven Lukes, argued that
Dahl’s definition failed to capture other important dimensions of power, such as the capacity of an
actor to shape the norms and values held by others.

Reference: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Robert-A-Dahl

In this Phrase was came from the book of Dahl (The concept of power)

What is “power”? Most people have an intuitive notion of what it means. But scientists have not yet
formulated a statement of the concept of power that is rigorous enough to be of use in the
systematic study of this important social phenomenon. Power is here defined in terms of a relation
between people, and is expressed in simple symbolic notation. From this definition is developed a
statement of power comparability, or the relative degree of power held by two or more persons.
With these concepts it is possible for example, to rank members of the United States Senate
according to their “power” over legislation on foreign policy and on tax and fiscal policy.

Part 2: Taxonomy of Power

In their attempt to classify and better understand power, Barnette and Duvall (Pallaver 2022) created
the taxonomy of power with four major types:

Who is Barnette and Duval?

The exercise of power permeates global governance processes, making power a critical concept for
understanding, explaining, and influencing the intersection of global governance and health. This
article briefly presents and discusses three well-established conceptualizations of power—Dahl’s,
Bourdieu’s, and Barnett and Duvall’s—from different disciplines, finding that each is important for
understanding global governance but none is sufficient.

Barnett and Duvall: power in global governance

Arguably the most influential effort to provide such a typology has been Barnett and Duvall’s 2005
article, “Power in international politics” [11], and their edited volume published the same year,
Power in Global Governance [23]. Like Bourdieu, Barnett and Duvall also argue for a more nuanced,
“polymorphous” conceptualization of power in the analysis of international politics. Rather than the
coercive realist concept of one state getting another state to do what “it does not want to do,”
Barnett and Duvall define power more broadly as “the production, in and through social relations, of
effects that shape the capacities of actors to determine their circumstances and fate [11].” Their
taxonomy of four types of power—compulsory, institutional, structural, and productive—seeks to
encompass both “power over” and “power to,” and to address the perennial debates over the
relative roles of agency vs structure.

Barnett and Duvall define compulsory power as “direct control over another,” and argue that it is
best understood through the eyes of the object (B, above) rather than the wielder of power (A,
above). In this category they include material (e.g. military, economic), symbolic, and normative
power, and argue that states, NGOs, international organizations, militias, multinational firms, and
many other types of actors may all wield it [11]. A drawback with this definition of compulsory
power, however, is that in focusing on the effects and objects of power it de-emphasizes the actors
who wield power and how they do so. Further, the actual exercise of truly compulsory power—in
which the object of such power, B, has no choice but to do what A wants—is relatively rare. In most
situations, actors retain at least some degree of agency; even when direct physical force is exercised,
they can choose to resist or submit, and only in the most extreme circumstances are they truly
robbed of all choice. B may choose to do what A wants in order to avoid negative consequences,
such as being physically harmed, impoverished, or socially stigmatized, for example—but,
alternately, B may accept those consequences. I argue that, in the typology offered below,
separating out the different kinds of power that Barnett and Duvall aggregate under “compulsory”
can provide important additional analytical traction.

Barnett and Duvall’s second category, institutional power, is defined as “actors’ control over socially
distant others” with a focus “on the formal and informal institutions that mediate between A and B,
as A, working through the rules and procedures that define those institutions, guides, steers, and
constrains the actions (or no actions) and conditions of existence of others [11].” A central
distinction that Barnett and Duvall emphasize is that compulsory power involves direct action by A
on B, whereas institutional power involves A exerting power indirectly on B (or many Bs) through the
diffuse channels of institutional arrangements. In contrast to their conceptualization of compulsory
power, which focuses on the effects of diverse types of power, their definition of institutional power
focuses on the source and channels by which a type of power is exercised. However, the distinction
between direct and indirect exertion of power is not always clear. Material, symbolic and normative
power (which the authors include under compulsory power) do not always act directly on the object,
but can also operate indirectly—through the rules and procedures that constitute institutions, or in
an even less structured manner through normative claims of advocates (for normative power) or of
an actor with high social status (for symbolic power). I argue for narrowing down the definition of
institutional power to focus on rules and decision-making procedures. Because institutions reflect
the distribution of power when they were created, but may persist long afterwards, they can also
perpetuate power disparities between those who are advantaged and disadvantaged by a particular
set of rules and procedures [3, 11].
Barnett and Duvall’s third category is structural power, defined as “the co-constitutive, internal
relations of structural positions that define what kinds of social beings actors are….that is, a direct
constitutive relation such that the structural position, A, exists only by virtue of its relation to
structural position, B [11].” Further: “the social relational capacities, subjectivities, and interests of
actors are directly shaped by the social positions that they occupy,” and such structures are likely to
privilege some over others [11]. Highly relevant for understanding global governance is the structure
of the Westphalian international system, based on the state as the principal authority over its
population and territory. Particularly relevant for global health are theories that pay attention to the
position of developing countries in the global structure, such as world systems theory (which divides
states into core, periphery and semi-periphery) [24]. Like their conceptualization of institutional
power, this category focuses on the source of power and not its effects. However, a key challenge is
distinguishing between institutional and structural power: both emphasize the social relations
between A and B. For example, the power a physician has over a patient can be considered both
structural—they directly co-constitute each other’s position in a given setting in society (e.g. a
hospital)—or institutional, as when physicians constrain what patients can do directly or indirectly
(e.g. through rules for prescribing medicines, or norms governing the functioning of complex
healthcare facilities and systems). Clearer distinctions are needed.

Barnett and Duvall’s fourth category is productive power, defined as “the constitution of all social
subjects with various social powers through systems of knowledge and discursive practices of broad
and general social scope.” They contrast structural power, which emphasizes relations of dominance
and subordination between two actors, with productive power, which refers to more “diffuse and
contingent social processes produc[ing] particular kinds of subjects, fix meanings and categories, and
creat[ing] what is taken for granted and the ordinary of world politics [11].” This broad
conceptualization of productive power usefully highlights that social processes of categorization,
framing, and knowledge-production do constrain and shape thinking, beliefs, and action. However,
this definition does not identify who wields this kind of power (to a greater or lesser extent) or how
it might be intentionally exercised—actors are ubiquitous, and agency is absent in this picture. The
definition is also very broad. Returning to the physician–patient example, classifying a person as a
patient can be seen as a result of both productive power (since the patient is a “particular kind of
subject”) and structural power (since the patient can be considered to be co-constituted in relation
to the physician, often in a relationship of dominance).

Barnett and Duvall’s argument for a broader typology of power was an important challenge and
major contribution to IR, which had long privileged a unidimensional realist conceptualization of
power as coercion. However, they ultimately adopted a limited conceptualization of power
—“restricted to the production of particular kinds of effects, namely those on the capacities of
actors to determine the conditions of their existence [11].” They did not go so far as to conceptualize
power as “the production of any and all effects and thus as nearly synonymous with causality” [11],
explicitly excluding persuasion and collective decision-making processes (but including the social
structures and constitution of social subjects that facilitate persuasion, collective-decision-making,
and many other pathways of influence). Thereby, their typology does not cover the full arsenal of
power that actors wield in global governance. Their typology also usefully emphasizes the distinction
between direct and indirect power, but simultaneously combines the effects, sources, and channels
through which power is exercised. The typology presented in Part 4 below, focused on the source of
an actor’s power, adapts and seeks to build on the foundation they constructed.

Compulsory Power

Compulsory power involves the direct control of one actor over the existence or behavior of another
actor. Institutional power is exercised through institutions that reflect the preferences of more
powerful actors. These two categories track to the familiar actor-oriented logic of most political
science analyses

An actor who has compulsory power can dictate how another individual should behave, using either
material resources or resources that carry a symbolic significance (Barnett and Duvall 2005). At
the beginning of the central coast struggle, the provincial government and the forest industry
possessed the majority of these resources. The government declared ownership of the land and
exercised control over where the forestry companies deployed their material resources in the form
of machinery and forestry crews.

Institutional Power

Institutional power is the power wielded by entities like governments, churches, and corporations to
control people and direct their behavior through the use of rewards and punishments

Institutional power flows from the rules and processes defined by institutions to guide and
constrain how actors may act(Barnett and Duvall 2005). At the beginning of the central coast
struggle, the provincial government held most of the institutional power in the region through its
ability to create laws, establish tenure agreements, and regulate the institutions that have formal
authority in the region. The forest industry was protected by its lease agreements with the
government, and thus also held considerable institutional power. At this time, the Coastal First
Nations and ENGOs lacked any formal institutional power that would have influence on the
government or forest industry’s actions.
Structural Power

Example of structural power in the international system is the universal embrace of sovereign
statehood as the only legitimate form of political organization.

Structural power is produced and reinforced through the social positions and relations of different
groups within a governance system, and is difficult to manipulate once established. For example, an
actor in a hierarchically superior position within an organization is able to constrain the actions of an
individual in a lower position within the hierarchy (true of many employer-employee
relationships). The changes to structural power and positions are very visible in the governance
transformation under study. Yet, without the Barnett and Duvall framework, structural power
could easily be confused with compulsory power and its use of material resources.

Productive Power

Productive power. Productive power constitutes actors, their interests, capacities, and self-
understanding through indirect and networked discourse. These discourses make certain kinds of
actions and behavior acceptable and others almost unthinkable.

Productive power is the diffuse power that stems from being able to shape, influence or embed
ideas, knowledge, norms, and discourse. Shifts in the perceptions of forestry practices and the
logging of old-growth forests were occurring internationally during the time of the Great Bear
Rainforest campaign. In 1992, the Rio Earth Summit put environmental issues and, in particular, the
destruction of rainforests, firmly on the global agenda. In fact, many of the members of ENGOsactive
in BC during that time had gained experience from working on similar campaigns in South American
rainforests. It is likely this helped them muster support for the Clayoquotblockade, but they still
did not hold the majority of the productive power in early 1992. The central coast area had relied
on forestry activity for its local economy for a long time. Consequently, a great deal of hostility was
initially directed at the ENGOs by local communities, both indigenous and nonindigenous. During
the Clayoquot Sound campaign, there was widespread disdain shown towards the
environmentalists. The Premier of BC branded the ENGOs “enemies of the state “and many local
residents joined in creating “Greenpeace-free zones.” The belief that ENGOs were troublemakers
persisted throughout the Great Bear Rainforest campaign, even when they eventually began to
negotiate with the forest industry. The fact that the industry engaged in the negotiations led to
widespread outrage. A key negotiator from the forest industry remembers being burned in effigy by
locals angry at what they saw as collusion with the ENGOs. The locals sided with the government, as
is evident in the comment of a forest industry participant: “The model in those days was: ‘We’re
the government, we’re the landlord, we own the land. You’re the company, when we say log, you
log,’ and ‘How dare you make these decisions about publicly owned resources?’

Part 3: Aristotle
(First Paragraph) There are situations where power in government is corrupted by the personal and
selfish goals of individuals

Politics by Aristotle Book 3

"He who has the power to take part in the deliberative or judicial administration of any state is said
by us to be a citizen of that state; and speaking generally, a state is a body of citizens sufficing for the
purpose of life. But in practice a citizen is defined to be one of whom both the parents are citizens;
others insist on going further back; say two or three or more grandparents." Aristotle asserts that a
citizen is anyone who can take part in the governmental process. He finds that most people in the
polis are capable of being citizens. This is contrary to the Platonist view, asserting that only very few
can take part in the deliberative or judicial administration of the state.

Political corruption is the abuse of public power, office, or resources by elected government officials
for personal gain, by extortion, soliciting or offering bribes. It can also take the form of office holders
maintaining themselves in office by purchasing votes by enacting laws which use taxpayers' money.

Who is Thomas Carlyle (1841)?

Thomas Carlyle (4 December 1795 – 5 February 1881) was a Scottish essayist, historian and
philosopher. A leading writer of the Victorian era, he exerted a profound influence on 19th-century
art, literature and philosophy.

(Second Paragraph)

Part 4: Classification of Power

There’s other Classification of Power

Coercive power is defined as “harsh” power, as the capacity to detect and sanction unlawful
behavior (Raven et al., 1998; Turner, 2005). Legitimate power is defined as “soft” power and refers
to the power of position, expertise, dissemination of relevant information, and identification (Raven
et al., 1998, cf. Tyler, 2006). 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
obtained through threatening others. For example, the VP of Sales who threatens sales folks to meet
their goals or get replaced.

Who has the coercive power?

Image result for coercive power meaning

Coercive power is the ability of a manager to force an employee to follow an order by threatening
the employee with punishment if the employee does not comply with the order. The most important
concept to understand about coercive power is that it uses the application of force

What might be the consequences of using coercive power?

  No one likes to be threatened. Department members may do what the head wants if they
are threatened with political, social, financial – or even physical(!) – retribution if they do
not, but coercion is also likely to cause anger and alienation. As a consequence, even if
department members appear to agree to a head's demand, they may follow the letter but
not the spirit of a new policy, refuse to enact it when no one is watching them, sabotage it,
and be less willing to accept the head's influence in the future.

Power of reward

Reward power is the formal power given to a work leader to give out rewards to other employees. It
is a position power, which means the source of power is based on a leader's position with a
company. An example of reward power is a manager or supervisor who incentivizes higher
performance from employees. Reward power is the ability to reward others when they follow your
wishes or instructions. For example, a manager may be able to reward raises, promotions, bonuses
or even simple compliments to sales employees who meet their quotas. These rewards can increase
employees' incentive to perform

Reward Power. A leader who has the ability to reward an employee or team member for compliance
has reward power. Rewards work best when they are appealing to all participants, for example, a
raise or bonus, a promotion, time off or other perks.

What might be the consequence of using reward power?

 Some people are motivated by rewards and may become more productive, but others find
the offering of rewards distasteful and become alienated. Doing something for a reward may
reinforce the perception that the recipient is in a position subservient to the person granting
the reward. Large rewards may spur activity, but the awards available in universities are
often small and may be divisive. Heads should be very selective in their use of reward power,
and only use it when they are fairly certain of how department members will respond to it.
While it can sometimes be constructive, it can also be disruptive.

Legitimate Power

Legitimate power is the formal authority given to a person within an organization. Because it comes
from a position or job title, legitimate power is a form of positional power. In any efficient system,
there are different levels of power. This creates a sense of order and adds structure to the working
environment.

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

What might be the consequence of using legitimate power?

 A head has a prescribed degree of legal authority through university bylaws and other legal
documents, and can exercise the legitimate power of the office without necessarily
generating either favorable or unfavorable feelings among department members. As long as
the head acts within the bounds of appropriate behavior, department members are likely to
be indifferent and to accept what the head says or does. However, an action taken by the
head outside the department's 'zone of acceptance', may lead to anger and alienation.

Expert Power
Expert power is the perception that a certain person has an elevated level of knowledge or a specific
skill set that others in an organization don't have. This perception leads to more influence within the
expert's place of work. An expert power example can be someone in the team who is the only
person around to understand a particular language, write code in a particular computer
programming language, or has first-hand experience of field or market conditions.

What might be the consequence of using expert power?

 Expertise is highly valued, particularly in universities. Heads with some particular area of
expertise that is recognized by the department as being related to its own success can exert
influence that is unlikely to induce alienation among those responding to it.

Referent Power

Referent power is a unique type of personal power. It is built on respectful interpersonal

relationships rather than manipulation or coercion. Today's organizations focus more on building
relationships and collaborating across teams. As such, referent power is becoming an increasingly
essential leadership tool.

Referent power comes from one person liking and respecting another, and identifying with them in
some way. Celebrities have referent power, which is why they can influence everything from what
people buy to which politician they elect.

What might be the consequence of using referent power?

 Department members are likely to give special attention to a head with whom they identify,
and who has their respect and admiration. Heads who are able to use referent power can
usually exert influence without creating alienation among their followers.

Purchasing Power

Purchasing power is the value of a currency expressed in terms of the number of goods or services
that one unit of money can buy. It can weaken over time due to inflation.

Purchasing power (or buying power) is the amount of goods and services that a single unit of
currency can buy. For example, if you purchase a can of soda for one US dollar, but the following
year a can of soda costs two US dollars, the purchasing power of a single US dollar changed.

Purchasing power means how much your money can buy—its “buying power.” Purchasing power
affects stock prices, as well as general economic health. Rising inflation will erode the purchasing
power of your investments, aka the amount of money you invest will be worth less when you need
to use it.

Part 5: Conclusion
Power is an inescapable feature of human social life and structure. This paper addresses the nature
of power. The standard theory is that power is the capacity for influence and that influence is based
on the control of resources valued or desired by others.

The nature of political power: A working theory of the State must, in fact, be conceived in
administrative terms. Its will is the decision arrived at by a small number of men to whom is confided
the legal power of making decisions. How that power is organized is rather a matter of form than of
substance.
Power, that is to say, is always a trust, and it is always held upon conditions. The will of the State is
subject to the scrutiny of all who come within the ambit of its decisions. Because it molds the
substance of their lives, they have the right to pass judgment upon the quality of its effort. They
have, indeed, the duty so to pass judgment for it is the plain lesson of the historic record that the
wants of men will only secure recognition to the point that they are forcibly articulate. The State is
not ourselves save where we identify ourselves with what it does

It becomes ourselves as it seeks to give expression to our wants and desires. It exerts power over us
that it may establish uniformities of behavior which make possible the enrichment of our
personality. It is the body of men whose acts are directed to that end. Broadly, that is to say, when
we know the sources from which governmental acts derive we know the sources of the State’s will.

Power politics prioritizes national self-interest over the interests of other nations or the international
community, and thus may include threatening one another with military, economic or political
aggression to protect one nation's own interest.

Power has existed for centuries and is one of the most important political ideas. Power can be
defined as “the ability to achieve goals in a political system and have others do as you wish them to”
(Maclean & Wood, 2013, p.5). Political power can be in the form of leadership, economic wealth,
strength from weapons, influence or the formation of groups. Although power can have many forms,
it can only exist when allowed to exist (Smith, 2011). When power exists, leaders can use it to
promote order and social cohesion or genocide and destruction. Furthermore, different forms of
power have more or less legitimacy over other forms. Finally, political power has the ability to
control and shape society, but individuals can also influence and hold.

Power is a critical resource for organizational actors. A person with power commands prominence,
respect and influence in the eyes of others. Possessing power means that a person is able to
influence others more easily and perform his/her job more effectively. Power relationships affect
how managers and employees work together to make decisions and manage. Therefore, it is
essential to understand how some individuals acquire power when others do not. What are the
origins of power in organizational settings? The possession of power transforms individuals
psychologically, shapes their behavior, and produces an enduring effect on individual status and
influence with teammates. Power casts a long shadow on the mental state of either powerful or
powerless actors. How does power affect those who have it and those who don't? The metamorphic
effects of power can lead to both positive and negative consequences, such as creative thinking or
cooperative behavior versus selfish, corrupt, and risky behavior.

Finally, if you wanted to be a leader as well as a manager, which forms of power would you be
most – and least – likely to use?

 While all forms of social power are potentially available to heads, not all of them should be
used by someone wishing to be a leader. Influence based on coercion or reward reflects
dominance rather than leadership (as does the use of legitimate power beyond the
department's zone of acceptance). It is likely to alienate department members in the long
run, and (if used excessively) may cause heads to forfeit any possibility of being identified by
the department as a leader.
Let us not seek the Republican answer or the Democratic answer, but the
right answer. Let us not seek to fix the blame for the past. Let us accept
our own responsibility for the future.

-John F. Kennedy

Reference:

https://slcc.pressbooks.pub/attenuateddemocracy/chapter/chapter-2/#:~:text=At%20the%20most
%20basic%20level,their%20struggle%20than%20are%20others.

https://www.politicalscienceview.com/the-nature-of-political-power/

https://www.britannica.com/topic/political-power

https://www.cram.com/essay/The-Importance-Of-Political-Power/PKF2TPX3UYKQ

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
3267102_Definition_and_Classification_of_Power_System_Stability_IEEECIGRE_Joint_Task_Force_o
n_Stability_Terms_and_Definitions

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9286772

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Taxonomy-of-power-adapted-from-Barnett-and-Duvall-
2005_fig1_271297018

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119168058.ch10

https://epigeum.com/downloads/ulm_accessible/us/02_leadership/html/course_files/
lm_4_20.html