![]() ![]() But the truth differs as the difference between the two bases does not really exist and is on a superficial level(rollinson,2008 p). As mentioned above we all are under the impression that power has two bases. Contextual power on the other hand is of seven types organisational culture, knowledge and information ,external environment,resources,networks ,organisational structure,and finally decision making(Rollinson,2008 p). The referent power and expert power fall under the sub-topic of the personal origins whereas the first three fall under the sub-topic of organisational power. Interpersonal power can be categorised into five types reward power, coercive power ,legitimate power ,referent power and lastly expert power. In the interpersonal level power can be exercised personally by one individual over others. Power typically has two bases interpersonal base and a contextual base. Authority is the most visible forms of power in an organization. Situations but can be challenged if it exceeds its limits. Authority can be used by people to exercise power in some Power is a separate entity in itself whereas authority is a type of power. ![]() There exists a huge difference between power and authority. For a long time authors have tried to use power and authority in the same context but they were highly mistaken. Many feel they do not possess power but when they look closely power does exist with them in one form or other. Power is entirely situational and benefits people who take the advantage of power at the right time. Rollinson ,2008:p stated that there are many implications to power ie power cannot exist in isolation,and has to exist between two people or a group. The one thing we all know about power is that power is an attribute and can be defined in the following way “Power is the ability of a person or group to influence over others to have their desires fulfilled without having to compromise on them”(Tawney cited in Rollinson,2008). The history of organization will be incomplete without the mention of power. It is a known fact that power exists everywhere. In most of the cases though conflicts are self stimulating and can increase like parasitic growth. Lastly conflicts in majority of organizations are He/she should be careful enough that people do not come to know their vested interests. ![]() Thirdly, political tactics always involve a risk. Because power is very tempting people tend to be attracted towards it and people at higher posts generally managers tend to exploit their position in an organization. So what are then the implications of power ,politics and conflicts ?There are four highly significant implications given by Rollinson 2008,as follows: Firstly power exists in all the organizations ,so instead of trying to eradicate power or try finding solutions for it people should learn to accept it. Since both politics and power are concerned with forcibly taking power conflicts are bound to develop. Power concerns the capacity of an individual to exert their power over others whereas politics are the techniques used to influence others unknowingly(Rollinson,2008). Power and politics are the two sides of the same coin and one cannot exist without the other. Conflicts are the rivalries or the internal competitions in an organization. There is a saying that “No science is immune to the infection of politics and corruption of power”(Jacob Bronowski,n.d). ![]() The words power ,politics and conflict are enough to arouse controversial topics into discussion. Power ,politics and conflict POWER POLITICS AND CONFLICTS : CONTROVERSIAL OR OVERHYPED? ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |