Search results

The purpose of this paper is to describe the various ways in which a group of principals conceptualize the power basis of teachers within teacher–principal interactions.

The present study takes power as a potential to influence people as it was conceptualized in the taxonomy developed by French and Raven (1959/1968) and Raven (1993). This taxonomy was also used to discuss the conceptions emerged in the interview data. A total of 16 principals, 8 from public schools and 8 from private schools, were interviewed.

The phenomenographic analysis of the interviews with the 16 principals revealed five ways of understanding teachers’ power basis. These conceptions (in the form of categories of description) were: (a) the principal’s sense of reciprocity, (b) teachers’ field-specific knowledge, (c) teachers’ administrative experience, (d) teachers’ union affiliation and (e) teachers’ legal rights. Categories (a) and (b) were common to all the study’s participants. Category (c) was unique to participants from private schools, while categories (d) and (e) were unique to participants from public schools.

Three topics – the subtler forms of legitimate power, the issue of teacher tenure and the influence of unions on the educational system – appeared to have potential for interesting future studies in the field of educational management.

There is an apparent need to include social power as a course component in preparatory programs for educational administrators. The revised power taxonomy, which took its final form after the revisions made by Raven (1993), appeared to be an adequate explanatory theory to understand the teachers’ bases of power, and as such, it can be used to structure the content of the course about power interactions in school settings. In addition, the Turkish Ministry of National Education should handle the issue of unions’ improper influence over the educational system and take necessary measures in order to maintain the effective functioning of public schools.

To date, subordinates’ bases of power as a research subject has apparently been ignored. The present study is the first to reveal variations in the ways that school principals conceptualize teachers’ basis of power. Although the study data were collected in one city in Turkey, the research implications drawn from its findings can inspire interest in this neglected field of study all around the world.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how the exercise of power by leaders is impacted by cultural factors. The authors present a conceptual framework to examine the interaction of various cultural dimensions with harsh and soft power bases, thereby delineating the cross-cultural appropriateness of various power bases that may be tapped by organizational leaders.

Compatibility of each cultural dimension with harsh of soft power bases is conceptually examined, in the context of Raven’s power interaction model of interpersonal influence.

Soft power bases are more likely to be activated by managers in cultures that are collectivist, loose, long-term oriented, but low on power distance and uncertainty avoidance. Harsh power bases are expected to be chosen for influencing subordinates in cultures that are tight, short-term oriented, and high in power distance.

This is only an initial attempt to look at the exercise of social power in the context of societal culture. The framework can be extrapolated to a more fine-grained examination of the phenomenon.

The conceptualization has potential implications for developing training programs aimed at improving managers’ cross-cultural competencies.

Using a cross-cultural lens to examine how a leader exercises power contributes to a holistic view of power and culture. A cross-cultural extension of the power/interaction model, as suggested by the authors, adds value to the field of management development thinking and practice.

This study compared the dimensionality and possession of the bases of supervisory power and their relationships to compliance and satisfaction with supervision between the U.S. (n = 459) and S. Korean (n = 625) managers. Results indicate that the factor structure of the power bases in the S. Korean sample was remarkably similar to those found in the U.S. sample; but whereas the U.S. managers reported relatively more position than personal power base, S. Korean managers reported relatively more personal than position power base. Similarities in the relationships of coercive, legitimate, and referent power bases to compliance, satisfaction, and dissimilarities in the relationships of expert and reward power bases to the criterion variables in the two samples are noted.

This study tested a structural equations model of the five French and Raven bases of supervisory power (coercive, reward, legitimate, expert, and referent), styles of handling conflict with supervisor (problem solving and bargaining), and job performance. Employees (N = 1,116) completed questionnaires on power and conflict styles, and their job performance was evaluated by their respective supervisors (N = 398). The data were aggregated for the subordinates associated with a given manager (N = 398) to make sure that independent observation assumption is not violated. The LISREL 8 analysis of data indicates that legitimate power influenced referent power positively and coercive power negatively, and reward and legitimate powers positively influenced expert power, which in turn, positively influenced referent power. Referent power, in turn, positively influenced problem solving (i.e., using more integrating and less avoiding styles) and negatively influenced bargaining (i.e., using more dominating and less obliging styles) conflict‐management styles, and finally, problem solving style, but not bargaining style, positively influenced job performance.

This study presents the results of a field research designed to assess the seven bases of supervisory influence over respondents in industrial organisations working in Saudi Arabia. These seven bases of influence are: referent, experience, reward, coercive, legitimate, connection and information. The sample is composed of Saudi subjects as well as non‐Saudi subjects. The respondents ranked the seven methods of influence according to their importance. Results pertaining to factor analysis indicate that culture can decide the significance of an influence method over another. This points to the fact that Saudi participants and non‐Saudi participants have different sets of power bases.

To examine the influence of leadership power bases on subordinates’ job stress at boutique hotels.

A total of 400 subjects (20 managers and 380 non‐managerial employees) participated in this study from 20 boutique hotels. Participants were told that the study was designed to collect information on the leadership power bases used by first line managers and on the job stress levels of employees in the hospitality workforce. The Rahim Leader Power Inventory and Spielberger and Vagg's Job Stress Survey were used to assess leadership power bases and job stress, respectively.

There are significant relations between leader power bases and subordinates’ job stress. The findings support the suggestion in the literature that positional power bases stimulate job stress in the hospitality industry.

The study has several limitations that could be future research topics, such as hotels’ source of funding, demographic characteristics of the participants, etc. There is a question about the generalizability of these findings to other hospitality organizations such as four or five‐star hotels.

This paper explores an aspect of leadership in the hospitality industry that is often neglected. Organizations that actively consider leadership approaches and wish to nurture and develop their leaders and managers will need to be mindful of the leadership power bases.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the variations in the ways that principals conceptualize their basis of power in schools.

Phenomenography was used as the research method of this study. The interviewees consisted of 16 principals, eight from public schools and eight from private schools.

The analysis of the interviews revealed eight ways of understanding a principal’s power basis. These potential power bases were: teachers’ sense of reciprocity; teachers’ sense of responsibility; organizational rules and regulations; principals’ deep knowledge and experience; in-service training; principals’ reputation for being fair and impartial; teachers’ sense of identification with their principal; and principals’ control over teachers’ employment. Participants from public and private schools held generally similar conceptions. The conception of in-service training remained limited to private school principals. The power basis of principals’ control over teachers’ employment was not emphasized but could still be perceived as a conception in certain statements by participants.

Coercive power and legitimate power of reciprocity need to be investigated more thoroughly in the field of educational administration.

There is an urgent need for training for principals to raise their awareness of the adverse effect that coercive power has on teachers.

This study is the first known to explore variations in the ways that principals conceptualize their power basis.

Leadership educators are constantly looking for new and inventive ways to teach leadership theory. Because leadership educators realize principles of androgyny and experiential education work well with leadership theories, instructors find movies are a great way to infuse leadership theory with novel teaching methodology. “Movies, like Shakespeare, are becoming a staple of college curricula” (Hoffman, 2000, p.1).

The Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003) is a movie illustrating five power bases defined by Raven and French (1958). The rogue characters in this film use expert power, referent power, legitimate power, reward power, and coercive power to get the treasure, get the girl, get the curse lifted, and/or get freedom. Utilizing a three-hour block of time, an instructor can complete a mini lecture on power, watch the movie, and discuss the power bases shown. Results show students develop a deeper understanding of power after the class.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the key leadership characteristics (in the form of social power) needed in a knowledge‐based firm that can influence knowledge workers (KWs) to participate actively in creating, sharing, and using knowledge.

Data measuring top leaders social power and knowledge management (KM) practices is gathered from 402 KWs representing 180 Multimedia Super Corridor status firms in Malaysia.

The analysis indicates that expert power has a positive influence on the extent of knowledge acquisition and dissemination practices. Legitimate power is found to impede knowledge acquisition practices. Furthermore, reliance on referent power no longer works in a knowledge‐based context. Finally, the paper found the impact of coercive, legitimate, and reward power to be contingent on the organizational size.

Besides leaders potential to influence, there may be other factors that could influence the extent of KM practices in organization. Further, this paper explores the power of top management, which could not be generalized to leaders from middle or lower level management. Future research should address these limitations.

The paper implies that knowledge leaders need to enhance certain bases of power that have the potential to improve the extent of KM practices in organizations.

This paper provides useful insights about the significance of leaders' power bases with emphasis on new approaches needed in knowledge‐based organizations.

As part of an exploratory study on the nature of global leaders' power, we interviewed 23 global leaders to address the question: “How do the task, culture, and relationship complexities of global leadership shape the way global leaders exercise power and influence their followers?” We identify five complicating factors that shape the use of power by global leaders: Language, culture, time zones, physical distance, and matrix organizational structures. When compared with domestic leaders, these five factors make the use of power more complex for global leaders and require global leaders to invest substantially more time and energy into building relationships, sharing leadership, and prioritizing communication to ensure common understanding of vision and goals. We highlight a sixth factor, high-quality relationships, as an enabling resource for global leaders to succeed despite contexts of global leadership complexity. We provide a conceptual model summarizing how global leader influence attempts are complicated and enhanced and offer implications for future research and practice.