"Power," say Montana and Charnov, "is the ability to influence subordinates and peers by controlling organizational resources" (p.217). They provide one typology of power frequently found in management textbooks, in which the kinds of organizational power are categorized as

• legitimate
• reward
• coercive
• expert
• referent
• information

Mintzberg in his book Power (Prentice-Hall, 1983) discusses power in terms of systems of influence. He says one system is authority. This is the power of office, sometimes called legitimate power. a second system is ideology, which is informal but also legitimate. It involves positive identification with the norms and traditions of the organization. Ideologic power rests on the sharing of a single set of beliefs. Expertise is the third major system of influence that is often sanctioned by formal authority although it functions outside of it.

A fourth system of power identified by Mintzberg is political power, which he characterizes as outside the legitimate system of influence and often clandestine and in opposition. Political power is designed to benefit an individual or a group often (but not always) at the expense of the organization. Political is typically divisive, pitting individuals and groups against one another.

Organizations typically set up long-term stable goals and translate these into quantifiable, measureable objectives. But some goals are difficult to operationalize in this way (eg., a university's goal of advancing knowledge). When an organization can not or does not operationalize its goals, the authority system is weakened and power devolves to experts, to ideology, or to a political process.

Other situations where an organization may become politicized include:

1. Unit goals may become overemphasized and the broader perspective lost.
2. Rules may become the goals in a means-ends inversion. "We are here to produce a catalog, service is only a by-product."
3. A group that feels threatened may exert pressure to reduce the effectiveness of the authority system.
4. External influences may lead to goal displacement. For example, the board of directors may exercise too much influence (micro-management), or particular departments may seek preferential treatment for their working partners (Ex. the acquisition department may seek to support the interests of its suppliers.
5. Insiders in the organization may seek satisfaction of their own needs at the expense of the organization as a whole. Ex., managers want growth; analysts want moderate but continuing change; clerical workers want excellence.

If the authority system is the most powerful, then whe the person with position power gives an order, it will be carried out. If an ideological system is the dominant force, things will happen by themselves because of commitment and the single-mindedness of the members. If an expertise system dominates, the technical experts will make the decisions and means may triumph over ends. If a political system dominates, then those with the will to act, the capacity to expend energy, and the skill to know where and when to apply pressure will dominate, and the organization will become a gaming arena.

Taking a somewhat different tack, John Kottler ("Power, Dependence and Effective Management," Harvard Business Review, 55 (1977)) suggests that power is limited and balanced and that managers are dependent on many other people -- superiors, peers, and subordinates -- to get work done. Managers use several types of power to manage their dependencies. Among these are:

• Developing a sense of obligation in others. Anybody can generate power in a relationship if he/she can create a sense of obligation in the other person. Norms of reciprocity seem to be strong among all cultures, so if you do me a favor, I will feel obligated to return it.

• Building a reputation as an expert. this type of power is usually established by visible achievement. It can take the form of publications or speeches or satisfactory completion of visible projects.

• Projecting an idealized image. An individual may embody ideas that people identify with. This is characteristic of charismatic leaders.

• Encouraging dependency. If people believe they are dependent on the manager for help (or not to be hurt) they will be inclined to cooperate.

The last author I want to discuss is Rosabeth Moss Kanter. You were to read her classic article, "Power Failure in Management Circuits," in which she makes some very important points about positions of powerlessness and their negative consequences.

Kanter's argument rests on resource power. She says there are three sources of power in the organization:

1. Lines of Supply -- the capacity to bring in needed materials, money, reward, prestige)
2. Lines of information -- being "in the know"
3. Lines of support -- for innovative, risk-taking activities

Thus, Kanter says, power comes from jobs with discretion, visibility, and relevance to the organiation, as well as from close contact with high level people (sponsors), peer networks, and subordinates empowered to act on their own.

To illustrate her point that power can be expanded by sharing it, Kanter uses three groups of people who may exhibit symptoms of powerlessness:

• First line supervisors who become rules-minded, do not delegate, and who have resistant subordinates
• Staff professionals who try to control information, protect their turf, and resist change
• Top executives who dictate, encourage yes-men, and focus on short-term results.

She ascribes this behavior to limitations in the three sources of power described above and asserts that, even in these cases, the organizational power of these groups of people will grow by being shared. By empowering others, greater sharing of resources, information, sources of supply, and support can take place, making everyone more effect in his/her job. When power is shared, the organization becomes more productive.