Understanding individuals: The theoretical and practical aspects of power
and authority, role and conflict

This section covers: 

• Power and authority
• Role and Role Relationship
• Understanding conflict and its management

Section 1: Power and Authority

Understanding Power

Power is the intentional influence over the beliefs, emotions and
behaviours of people (French and Bell 1999).

The phenomenon of power is ubiquitous. Without influence (power), people
would have no cooperation and no society. Without leadership (power) in medical,
political, technological, financial, spiritual and organizational activities,
humankind would not have the standard of living as it does today. However, many
problems with power stem from the goals of persons with power and the means they
use, not the possession of power as such.

Most of the current theories about power use the analysis conducted by French
and Raven over 40 years ago. They identified five principle sources or basis of
power:

• Coercive power: the crudest form, which uses threats and punishment
  to achieve its ends; e.g. sanctions against suppliers, dismissals for
  non-co-operating staff, demonstrations.
• Reward power: the use of rewards to influence people’s
  compliance. To be effective the rewards must be desired by the target group;
  e.g. financial inducements.
• Legitimate power: generally known as ‘authority’, and implies
  the power to act as well as the power over resources and is invariably
  limited in some way.
• Expert power: which comes from possessing specialist knowledge and
  skills and is dependent on the expertise being recognised by those
  concerned, thus ‘credibility’ is vital; otherwise, no-one will take any
  notice!
• Referent power: generally known as personal power, or charisma and
  comes from the high regard he or she is held by others. Should this falter
  or wane then this form of power vanishes, but is often employed in
  conjunction with other sources.

Other sources of power include knowledge (as information) and personal
contacts and alliances. Legitimate power can carry with it elements of other
sources e.g. information or internal contacts. Greiner and Schein’s work
demonstrates the strategies for holding the power to gain the support of others,
in order for change to be achieved.

The table below identifies the work of Greiner and Schein(1988) who
demonstrate the three most successful power strategies and how they relate to
individual power bases.

(after Greiner and Schein 1988)

Power is not the same as leadership, nor is it the same as authority.
Although in one sense it is larger than both and in another it is the servant of
both. Neither is power the same as responsibility, which is the accountability
(and usually the formal accountability) that each individual has for his or her
job in the organisation.

Understanding Authority

Authority refers to the formal power to act, conferred on an
individual to enable him to fulfill his responsibilities. It is usually fairly
well-defined in order to limit the powers available to the individual (Cole
1998).

Weber (1968) outlined three major types of authority, which he termed, ‘legitimate
forms of domination’, as traditional, charismatic, and legal or rational.

1. Traditional Authority is the type of authority where the
   traditional rights of a powerful and dominant individual or group are
   accepted, or at least not challenged, by subordinate individuals. These
   could be (i) religious, sacred, or spiritual forms, (ii) well established
   and slowly changing culture, or (iii) tribal, family, or clan type
   structures.
   
   Different types of traditional authority might be (i) gerontocracy or rule
   by elders, (ii) patriarchalism where positions are inherited.
2. Charismatic Authority defined by Weber as, "resting on
   devotion to the exceptional sanctity, heroism or exemplary character of an
   individual person, and of the normative patterns or order revealed or
   ordained by him" (Weber 1968, p215). That is, charisma is a quality of
   an individual personality that is considered extraordinary, and followers
   may consider this quality to be endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or
   exceptional powers or qualities. Whether such powers actually exist or not
   is irrelevant – the fact that followers believe that such powers exist is
   what is important.
   
   Although Weber did not deny that a charismatic leader may have outstanding
   characteristics, his sense of charisma was more dependent on the group of
   disciples and the way that they define the charismatic leader.
3. Legal or Rational Authority. This is authority or legitimate
   domination resting on "rational grounds – resting on a belief in the
   legality of enacted rules and the right of those elevated to authority under
   such rules to issues commands" (Weber 1968, p.215). There are various
   ways that legal authority could develop. Systems of convention, laws and
   regulation develop in many societies, and there are many different
   principles of legality that occur.
   
   This rational-legal form of authority may be challenged by those who are
   subordinate. This challenge is generally unlikely to result in dramatic
   changes in the nature of the system very quickly.
   
    

Section 2: Role and Role Relationship

Understanding Role and Role Relationship

Role is the pattern of behavior expected by others, from a person
occupying a certain position in an organizational hierarchy (Huczynski and
Buchanan 1985).

The concept of role is one that has been used extensively to understand the
behavior of people in organizations. A person may be observed in a single role,
e.g. nurse, engineer, but he may also play many different roles at the same time
in his normal working life. Definitions of role can depend on how they are to be
used. For example:

• A prescriptive definition, which is concerned with what a person,
  should do when he plays a certain role e.g. a job description.
• An evaluative definition can assess how well or badly the role is
  being performed, against established standards or criteria.
• A descriptive definition, which is based on the actual duties,
  performed by the person and could include the content of the work done as
  well as the interactions engaged with.
• An action definition specifies the actions involved in its
  performance.

All four aspects of role are interrelated and interdependent.

Role relationship is that intangible mixture of feelings and emotions
that exist between two or more people (Huczynski and Buchanan 1985).

A relationship can be considered in the way in which one uses oneself in a
disciplined and responsible way when dealing with a group or individual.
Individuals have role relationships with each other and these can help them to
achieve their aims at work. Organizations can be thought of as a set of
overlapping and interlocking role sets. A role influences the behaviour of an
individual by setting limits within which he is expected to act. Many of the
tasks involved in a job have been learned and assimilated so well that they
become accepted a being part of the person. Role relationships therefore are the
field within which behaviour occurs.

People’s behaviour at any given moment is a result of:

• Their personalities
• Their perception and understanding of each other
• Their attitudes to the behavioural constraints imposed by the role
  relationship.
• The degree of their socialization with respect to constraints
• Their ability to inhibit and control their behaviours.

An important function of role relationships is to reduce the areas of
possible uncertainty to manageable proportions. The expectations of other people
in related roles, and an individual’s own beliefs learned through the process
of socialization insode and outside the organization, will affect their
decisions as to what is and what is note appropriate behavior in a specified
role (see
Health Knowledge 5a: Interactions between managers, doctors and others).

Section 3: Understanding conflict and its management

Conflict is the friction or opposition resulting from actual or
perceived differences or incompatibilities with others and their roles (Huczynski
and Buchanan 1985).

Most of us seek harmony but conflict is everywhere.  Conflict is not
necessarily unhealthy and some groups thrive on it. It might be most active when
groups have just formed: remember forming, storming, norming, performing.
The best teams are those able to use conflict productively i.e. they can
challenge in a non-threatening way, discuss, resolve and move forward.

Conflict is a natural and very typical phenomenon in every type of human
relationships, at every level: From intrapersonal (the realm of psychology) to
global.

Conflicts at every level have very significant common characteristics and
dynamics. People get involved in conflicts because their interests or their
values are challenged or because their needs are not met.

The opportunities for role conflict can occur as the various roles interact
with one another. Other types of role conflict occur when an individual receives
inconsistent demands from another person. Role conflict tends to increase an
individual's anxiety and frustration. Sometimes they motivate him to do more and
better work. Other times they can lead to frustration and reduced efficiency.
When the causes of team ineffectiveness are based on people’s behaviours, that
they are unwilling to change because it would mean a loss of power or influence
to the individual, a technique called ‘role negotiation’ can be used.

'Conflict resolution' is a peaceful and mutually satisfactory way to end or
significantly - and hopefully permanently - de-escalate a conflict. You can end
a conflict through violence or war and by destroying your opponent. You can also
end a conflict by surrender and capitulation. Or, you can temporarily
de-intensify a conflict by deceiving your opponent. Yet, we do not regard such
options as conflict resolution. And they do not resolve a conflict, anyway. The
conflict remains; it may or may not just lose its intensity.

Conflict negotiation intervenes directly in the relationships of
power, authority and influence within the group (French and Bell1999).

It is easier to resolve or help resolve a conflict stemming from a clash of
interests. It is more difficult to deal with a conflict that emanates from a
clash of values. And it is even more difficult to handle a conflict in which at
least one party's basic human needs are not satisfied. That is why such
conflicts usually are deep-rooted and intractable.

The change effort is directed at the work relationships among members. The
technique is an imposed structure for controlled negotiations between parties in
which each party agrees ion writing to change certain behaviours in return for
changes in behaviour by the other. The behaviours relate to the job.

However, sometimes it does need to be managed.

• define the type of conflict: fights, games, debates, underground
  resistance
• determine the level of conflict: high, medium, low
• determine if the reason for conflict is because those involved do not
  share the same goals, or there is a status issue

There are three main methods of handling conflict:

1. Negotiation
2. Mediation
3. Group Arbitration

Resolving conflict

Brooks (2001) writes: 'Unresolved conflict costs organisations millions of
pounds every year. I am referring not only to the conflict of the
management-versus-union kind but also to more widespread symptoms of 'them and
us' that appear in organisations going through rapid change. Conflict can appear
in many situations - for example, during restructuring, when two organisations
merge, or when problems occur between a company and outsourcing partner.

When organisations fundamentally change the way they operate, shifts in power
and conflicts of interest are not only likely - they are inevitable. These
differences can be healthy for an organisation and its members, or they can sap
energy from the people involved, and result in missed deadlines, increased
costs, and broken promises to customers and other stakeholders.

To reduce the opportunities for conflict long-term the following
organisational values can be introduced and constantly re-stated:

• mutual respect - acceptance that other people have different views - to
  achieve this you need time, effort, and good communication skills
• find shared values and keep restating these
• be honest
• find shared objectives
• combat dis-information (rumour with correct information)

Eight Key Steps that will help identify and bring resolution to
conflict.

1.  Assess the symptoms

Use the test below to assess whether a conflict is being approached
positively or is becoming unhealthy. If there is a 25 per cent difference
between the current situation and your desired state, there is a problem to
address.

Do not assume that your assessment is self-evident. A programme such as this
will never get off the ground unless enough key stakeholders agree there is a
problem with the relationship, not merely with performance. It is also important
not to delay taking action. When relationships have deteriorated beyond a
certain point, the downward spiral builds its own momentum and is unlikely to
get better without positive intervention.

On a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 represents serious conflict and 10 represents
total co-operation, assess your organisation on each of the scales below. Mark
each scale with an X for the current situation, and a O for your desired state.
If there is a 25 per cent difference in the totals, then your organisation has a
problem to address.

2.  Choose expert facilitators

These should work with the group to resolve the conflict. They should be
people from outside the teams involved with no bias or vested interests other
than to achieve a positive outcome.

Whoever you choose will have their impartiality questioned. So if their
position, reputation or behaviour indicates any allegiance, their effectiveness
will be severely handicapped and they are likely to become part of the problem
rather than the solution.

3.  Involve the people at the top

The facilitators will be unable to influence fundamental issues that only top
managers have the power to change.

People will also question the validity of the programme unless it has visible
backing form senior managers. In addition, symptoms of conflict at operational
level are often related to a negative interpretation of messages coming down
from the top of the organisation.

4.  Set the scene for impartiality

Meet the team members and set the context for the work to come. This involves
making it clear that the facilitator's role exists first to address the
breakdowns in relationship that are preventing progress, and second to help
create working methods that promote co-operation.

Facilitators should expect to encounter mistrust initially. They must show
that they are not there to apportion blame, and should avoid billing themselves
as experts whose job it is to tell everyone what they've been doing wrong up
until now.

5.  Explore the individual issues

Arrange for facilitators to meet each individual in a private setting, to
discuss how the situation affects them personally. This will build trust between
team members and facilitators, which is vital when dealing with emotional
issues.

The challenge here is to create empathy without bias one way or the other. It
can be tempting to sympathise with someone's dilemma or to become critical of
his or her behaviour - either of which will compromise neutrality.

Conflict resolution is a truly multidisciplinary field. It is an amalgam of
psychology, philosophy, political science, sociology, anthropology, law etc.
Which elements are or should be the dominant ones, depends on the situation at
the time and those involved in the conflict.

However, the psychological aspects appear to be a little more important than
other aspects. Therefore, it is important to pay more attention to the
psychodynamics of conflict and its resolution.

6.  Clear the air

Bring the whole group together to clear the air and explore the conflict from
different perspectives. This is the most difficult of the process and should be
led by someone highly skilled and experienced at this type of work. Each
situation is unique and people's reactions are unpredictable. He identified the
use of 6 hats, using one hat at a time:

Other ways to clear the air include:

• allow individuals to share their issues with the group and, most
  importantly, to say how they feel about working within the team. The point
  at this stage is for people to hear and understand each other, and not to
  prove who is right or wrong or to solve anything yet.  This part of the
  process is the most uncomfortable, and requires very sensitive handling. If
  debate occurs at this point, arguments will break out and old frustrations
  will fester, only to reappear later and block progress.
• get each subgroup to look at the situation from other people's point of
  view. Help them to step into the shoes of the other parties and communicate
  what they imagine the situation is like for them. This is where
  bridge-building can begin.  Again, what is important is to generate
  shared understanding, not to focus on who is right or wrong.
• get the group to consider everything they've heard so far from a neutral
  
  observer's point of view. The following observations are typical at this
  point:
• 'people's frustrations are very similar';
• 'they seem to be in vicious circle';
•  'no one is benefiting from it';
•  'they need to sort this out as a whole group, not as separate
  cliques'.

It is naive to think that everything will suddenly change when the barriers
start to come down; but it is the prerequisite for moving forward to the next
stage.

7.  Declare an amnesty

This involves gaining an emotional commitment to ditching 'old baggage' and
to working together to move forward. It also involves a practical commitment to
creating:

• a common vision and goal
• team and individual goals that are aligned to the overall vision
• agreement on how differences will be dealt with in future
• new working practices

Old baggage can quickly reappear if people feel that one particular person or
group is setting the future direction. So facilitators must pay close attention
to people's body language and tones of voice. This is vital to achieving
commitment to the process.

8.  Approach the problem

Deal with the outstanding practical problems that started or worsened during
the period when relationships were deteriorating. During this stage, the
facilitator should gradually let go. Some people will want more support than
others, but it is important not to create dependency. But don't leave too many
loose ends for the team to tie up.

This approach addresses the underling causes of conflict, and can reverse the
problems that follow when they are left unresolved: employee dissatisfaction,
low productivity, absenteeism and high staff turnover. But organisations usually
start by using other strategies. These include:

• putting tighter controls on spending;
• enforcing service agreements;
• setting up new system and procedures;
• changing key people.

The approach described does not preclude these strategies, but they have far
more chance of success if the underlying relationships within the group are
healthy and productive.

The process may look logical and straightforward and, on paper, it is. In
reality, addressing the underlying problems that block progress can be messy.
Things often look worse before they get better, but the result - a highly
productive team - is well worth it.'

Tips

Remember to bring in Motivation factors - e.g. if status is the
reason, and someone perceives that the responsibility for change should be
theirs, it is possible to move the responsibility and heavily involve that
person as a motivator.  Similarly if management lines are being changed and
someone is unhappy with their new management structure this could be negotiated.

Also consider Maslow's hierarchy of needs - if certain physiological
needs are not being met this will increase conflict and meeting these needs
would act as a motivator.

 

References

Brooks M. How to resolve conflict in teams. People Management.
8 Aug 2001
, 34-35.

Cole, G.A. (1998) Organisational Behaviour w:st='on'>

London

: Letts

French, W.L. and

Bell

, C.H. (1999) Organisation Development
w:st='on'>

New Jersey

: Prentice Hall

Greiner L.E. Schein V.E. (1988)  Power and organization development:
mobilizing power to implement change. w:st='on'>

Reading

, Mass: Addison-Wesley ISBN 0-201-12185-9 184pp

Huczynski, A. and Buchanan, D. (1985) Organizational Behaviour

London

: Prentice Hall

Weber, Max, Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology, w:st='on'>

New York

, Bedminster Press, 1968.

de Bono, Edward (1985). Six Thinking Hats: An Essential Approach to
Business Management. Little, Brown, & Company. ISBN
0316177911 (hardback) and 0316178314 (paperback).

© K Enock and
S Markwell 2010