This document discusses several theories of power and politics within organizations: - Michels' "Iron Law of Oligarchy" argues that all large organizations are inevitably run by an oligarchy, even democratic socialist parties. However, organizations vary in how open they are to new leadership. - French and Raven identified five bases of power: reward, coercion, legitimacy, expertise, and referent. Kanter expanded on this, arguing that power comes from access to resources, information, and support. - Mintzberg viewed organizational behavior as a "power game" between different influencers, including owners, directors, employees, and other stakeholders.

1. Bill Adams, FEA, University of Malaya
Power & Politics
Organization Theory

2. [Michels’ “Iron Law of Oligarchy”] –archy and –ocracy
Anarchy = rule by no one
Monarchy = rule by the one (mon…)
Oligarchy = rule of the few
Plutocracy (plutarchy) = rule by the rich
Theocracy = rule by religious leaders
Autocracy = rule by autocrat/dictator
(Aristocracy = [rule by] the upper class)
Bill Adams, FEA, University of Malaya
Democracy = rule by the many
Meritocracy = rule by the talented/merit
Technocracy = rule by technicians
“Mobocracy, Netocracy, Gerentocracy,” etc.

3. [Michels’ “Iron Law of Oligarchy”] –archy and –ocracy
Oligarchy = rule of the few
Democracy = rule by the many
But no –archy or –ocracy word for:
rule in a democratic republic
where the many elect the few to
Bill Adams, FEA, University of Malaya
represent them and made decisions.
(“Republican” form of government.)

4. Robert Michels‟ “Iron Law of Oligarchy”
"Who says organization
says oligarchy.”
Michels’ argument:
All large organizations are inevitably run
Bill Adams, FEA, University of Malaya
by an oligarchy (a handful of people) –
even the socialist parties of Europe!
Oligarchs work to preserve their power.

5. Robert Michels‟ “Iron Law of Oligarchy”
Criticisms:
OK, but… organizations
vary enormously in how
porous is entry into the leadership
group & how much “circulation of elites.”
Bill Adams, FEA, University of Malaya
Ignores concept of democratic republics!
Democratically the many elect the few
as representatives to make decisions.

6. French & Raven: Bases of Power
Coercion
Expertise Rewards
POWER
Bill Adams, FEA, University of Malaya
Referent Legitimacy

7. French & Raven: Bases of Power
● Attempt at power outside regular
realm will tend to reduce power!
● Coercion decreases attraction and
increases resistance; rewards do
the opposite.
Bill Adams, FEA, University of Malaya
● Coercion more powerful if
accepted as legitimate.

8. Rosabeth Moss Kanter:
Power & Powerlessness
http://blogs.hbr.org/kanter
Bill Adams, FEA, University of Malaya
Power = “ability to mobilize
resources to get things done.”

9. Rosabeth Moss Kanter:
Power & Powerlessness
Lines of
Infor-
mation
Lines of Lines of
Supply Support
Bill Adams, FEA, University of Malaya
Gets resources Gets freedom
for org tasks POWER for risk taking,
(and rewards) using discretion

10. Rosabeth Moss Kanter:
Power & Powerlessness
Bill Adams, FEA, University of Malaya
She seems to assume
 basic legitimacy
and coercive powers;
turns to the stronger
bases for org power.

11. Rosabeth Moss Kanter:
Power & Powerlessness
Feel powerless when:
● Little freedom
(bound by rules and routine,
little flexibility, little discretion) Especially
● Little attention
vulnerable:
(Peripheral activity, limited ☆ Front-line
supervisors
Bill Adams, FEA, University of Malaya
contact with sr. officials and
others; no publicity) ☆ Staff
professionals
● Little opportunity
(Few advancement opportuni- ☆ Sometimes
top executives
ties for self or subordinates)

12. Rosabeth Moss Kanter:
Power & Powerlessness
To increase power, share it!
Bill Adams, FEA, University of Malaya

13. Models of Power in
Pfeffer:
Organization Decision Making
POLITICAL
RATIONAL BUREAUCRATIC
POWER
Efficiency & Stability & Struggle
Emphasis
effectiveness consistency & conflict
Process Rational & logical Standard process Argumentative
Bill Adams, FEA, University of Malaya
Goals Clear & consistent Fairly consistent Divergent
Norm Optimize outcome Follow precedent Coalition victory
Infor- Extensive & Scope set Used/withheld
mation systematic by the rules strategically

14. March: The Power of Power
“Power” seems obvious but
is very difficult to measure
and study in a rigorous way!
Bill Adams, FEA, University of Malaya

15. Mintzberg: Power Game & the Players
March said power is a poor concept for analysis,
but Mintzberg argues it is extremely valuable!
“Organizational behavior is a power game.”
Passive Influencers Quit
“Loyalty” “Voice” “Exit” 
Bill Adams, FEA, University of Malaya
Players in the power game
are the “influencers.”

16. Mintzberg French & Raven („59) Kanter
Resource Lines of
Supply
Tech skill
Expertise
Lines of
Knowledge Infor-
mation
Reciprocity
Access
Bill Adams, FEA, University of Malaya
Legitimacy
Legal rights Rewards
Coercion
+ Will to use
Referent
(charisma) Lines of
+ Skill to use Support

17. Mintzberg: Power Game & the Players
PUBLICS
Owners
Directors
General Public
Government
Bill Adams, FEA, University of Malaya
Employee Associations (Unions)
(Partners, Suppliers) ASSOCIATES (Competitors, Clients)
Special Interest Groups

18. Buzzword: Stakeholder
“Stakeholder”:
those with a
stake in the
organization
Organi-
zation
Bill Adams, FEA, University of Malaya
Primary vs.
secondary
stakeholders