The Nature of Values and Authority-Beyond Metrics

Authority is accompanied  with power, and this can be an irresistible aphrodisiac. It is so intoxicating that people continually seek to gain higher levels of authority through wealth, social position, and power accumulation. Positions of power should come with responsibility, and those who do not have the right kind of values should not be entrusted to direct others. People in power positions set the standards for others and can have an enormous impact on acceptable behaviors among their charges.

A study focusing on disengagement theory found that managers who pushed others to engage in misreporting had a direct impact on the moral performance of their subordinates (Mayhew & Murphy, 2014). Supervisor requests were met with willing subordinates who misreported more, rationalized their unethical behavior and didn't feel that bad about it.

Immoral bosses changed the perspective of their subordinates to the point where they no longer could have any remorse. As unethical behavior becomes embedded into the organizational culture, it creates expectations. For those who “play by the rules,” it can seem like an unfair disadvantage.

Performance metrics becomes to define the individual. Companies that do not concern themselves with how these metrics were achieved will find themselves engage in more immoral activities. Whether the metric is associated with sales or production, the result should include an expectation of ethical behavior in its achievement.

All organizations, whether public or private, should seek to recruit and develop authority figures with moral sentiments. When tough decisions need to be made it is those with an internal moral compass who can make the right choices while those who are self-seeking and need external gratification will be more likely to support unethical behavior. The values of the authority figure will soon spread to their subordinates and create a new way competing.

Mayhew, B. & Murphy, P. (2014). The impact of authority on reporting behavior, rationalization and affect. Contemporary Accounting Research, 31 (2).

How Does Improper Use of Power Limit Group Performance?

Most people who have been in the working world for sometime have come across a situation where a single person uses power and authority with a dominating communication style to push their will on a corporate board, team, or workplace. Research by Tost, et. al (2013) discusses some of the pitfalls of doing so and the eventual decline of team performance. As performance declines so does the ability of organizations to generate income through collaborative effort and idea generation. 

Politicized workplaces are stressful and generally unproductive. According to Eisenhardt and Bourgeois (1988), when there is power inequality within the workplace political conflict rises and team performance declines. Teams should be well balanced to ensure that there is equity of power and the ability to discuss concepts openly for better idea generation. 

Power should be used to help push good ideas through to create greater productivity. However, when power is used to diminish the brainstorming process the best ideas do not come forward. There is a natural propensity for people to defer all major decisions to those that have the formal power. We all know that those that have the formal power do not always know the right answers or have failed to grasp alternative positions. Power, Leadership and Formal Authority can be summed up as follows:

Power: The ability of a person to control outcomes, how people perceive expenses, or push people in certain behaviors (Keltner, et. al, 2003). 

Leadership: The ability to influence others to work toward group objectives and goals (Bass, 2008). 

Formal Authority: Holding a position that that allows for a specific role within social hierarchy (Peabody, 1962).

Power, leadership, and formal authority maintain the ability to influence the outcomes of the group’s decisions. There are times when this can be beneficial once a final decision has been made and concise action is needed. However, preempting or cutting short the decision process may end up costing the organization later in terms of strategic outcomes as well as future willingness of employees to express themselves fully. 

Open communication within teams is essential in determining of the team’s performance (Dionne et. al, 2004).  Freethinking employees are more likely  to make novel solutions. Strategic decisions require the ability to perceive and understand various outcomes. As thoughts build on each other, open communication affords a better brain storming session. 

The authors conclude that the formalization of power into the hand of an individual limits the overall team performance. The leader’s subjective perspectives of power leads them to seek additional power derailing the performance process. The more power a leader feels the more their behavior changes and the more people defer to their power. Followers must willingly give up the power for the leader to gain additional influence. 

The research is important for avoiding the concepts of “group think” which limits a team’s performance. As leaders become more engrained in the perception of their power gain, the more their behavior prompts team members to give up the authority. The end result of such power deference is poor decisions, poor consequences, and potentially disastrous results. Even though it is possible for a single person to break the cycle by asking the right questions the social structure may try and force adherence leading to a lack of empowerment and performance for the whole group.

Bass, B. M. 2008. The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications. New York: Free Press.

Dionne, et. al (2004). Transformational leadership and team performance. Journal of Organizational Management, 17: 177–194.

Eisenhardt, K.  & Bourgeois, L. (1988). Strategic decision making in high-velocity environments: Toward a midrange theory. Academy of Management Journal, 31: 737–770.

Keltner, et. al. (2003). Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review, 110: 265–284.

Peabody, R. (1962). Perceptions of organizational authority: A comparative analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 6: 463–482.

Tost, et. al. (2013). When power makes others speechless: the negative impact of leader power on team performance. Academy of Management Journal, 56 (5).

The Types of Leadership Power

Leadership and power work together to influence organizational affairs and individuals who work within these organizations. According to Goncalves (2013) future leaders will need to understand how to define their leadership style, use that leadership style in alignment with existing organizational contexts, be able to tell stories that create a vision, and tap into their imaginations to find solutions. This leadership is defined by the necessity of developing a stronger management platform for a more complex world.

The use of power can be legitimate or illegitimate. In general, legitimate power supports a governing system in the betterment of a wider group of people. Illegitimate power focuses more on self-serving ends outside of a proper governing system. Generally these are established through culture and governing laws. In the case of the workplace such power should be used to influence people to fulfill organizational objectives in ways that are fair and appropriate. When such power is overly coercive it can detract from the organizational mission and from the governing system itself.

There are seven forms of power that are used to create influence:

Legitimate Power: The power of a formal position.

Expert Power: Knowledge based power.

Coercive Power: The power of fear.

Reward Power: The ability to give or take away awards.

Referent Power: The power of knowing and referring to powerful people.

Information Power: It is the power that comes from the use of information.

Each of these power sources has the ability to influence some situations but can lack effectiveness in other situations. For example, reward power can encourage higher levels of performance but coercive power might be more effective in chaotic situations. Referent power may get you a job but expert power is more effective in performance. When and where to use each of these powers is dependent on the situation and context of the environment.

Understanding the different types of power used within organization and the preferred power of the leader helps to understand better methods of not only gaining power within organizations but also how to manage the organization itself. Relying too heavily on one type can limit the ability of the organization to create different types of pressures and rewards to ensure the highest amount of performance. Power is not necessarily a bad or good thing but is a natural part of living in a social world. Some are more egalitarian than others but ultimately each can be used appropriately to maintain forward momentum.

Goncalves, M. (2013). Leadership styles: the power to influence others. Journal of Business & Social Science, 4 (4).