Principles of Management: Power & Resistance PDF

Principles of Management: Power & Resistance Anselm Schneider Introduction Crozier (1965): - Study of a French monopolistic company - Surprising observation: Many central strategic decisions were not taken by the top managers, but by service technicians Puzzle: Why did hierarchical power fail...

Principles of Management: Power & Resistance Anselm Schneider Introduction Crozier (1965): - Study of a French monopolistic company - Surprising observation: Many central strategic decisions were not taken by the top managers, but by service technicians Puzzle: Why did hierarchical power fail? Explanation: - Monopolistic company à low levels of external uncertainty - Machinery sometimes malfunctioned à internal uncertainty - Technicians had the capacity to deal with this uncertainty à Technicians held an informal power position that allowed them to influence central organizational processes Introduction Power as an inherent feature of business & organizations Power in organizations is exercised in different ways Power in organizations is exercised by different actors à What forms of power do exist? à What are the reactions to the exercise of power? Objectives of the lecture: Understand power as a constituent element of organizations Explore different forms of power Analyze the interplay between different forms of power and respective forms of resistance Coercion (1) Definition: “Getting a person to do something that he or she otherwise would not have done” 3 features of coercive power: causal: A causes B to do something episodic: exercise of power involves observable behaviour situational: an actor may have power in some situations and spheres, but not in others Coercion (2) Bases of coercive power: Position Skills Ability to cope with uncertainty Access to critical resources Shortcomings of a narrow focus on coercion Does power only work through observable acts? What about less visible forms of power? Resisting coercion: Refusal (1) Definition: Refusal as a blocking of the effects of power by undermining the flow of domination Passive refusal: non-compliance Active refusal: escalation of opposition Refusal as an obvious form of resistance Forms of refusal Work to rule Strikes Theft Sabotage Manipulation (1) Definition: “power through non-decisions”: limiting the scope of actual decision making to “safe” issues by manipulating the community values, myths, and political institutions and procedures Manipulation (2) 3 forms of manipulation in organizations: Anticipation of results: actors foresee future expressions of power and comply with assumed expectations Mobilization of bias: dismissing undesired options from deliberation processes Institutionalized rule- and norm making: design of rules in favour of the powerful group à Focus is not on observable exercise of power, and therefore difficult to support empirically Anticipation of results Compliance with the anticipated wishes of the powerful Existing power structures / previous exercise of power Actors foresee future expressions of power à Potential feeling of powerlessness Mobilization of bias Design of decision processes so that certain issues get out of focus Informal pre-decision processes potentially rule-out alternatives that deviate from the wishes of powerful elites Only a small subset of alternatives is then subject to closer evaluation Mobilization of bias: The case the selection of a new Airport in London (Alexander, 1979) 4-stage decision process: 1) 78 “coarse” alternatives de-selection of 49 options 2) 29 remaining based on the “judgment of the alternatives commission members” elimination of 14 alternatives 3) 15 remaining alternatives elimination of 10 alternatives, primarily on the basis of the 3) 5 final alternatives criterion “accessibility”, which was most easily quantified and most heavily weighted Institutionalized rule- and norm- making Issues do not arise because they contradict entrenched rules and specifications Example: Systematic exclusion of women from managerial roles Design of rules such as Working hours (e.g. meeting at late hours) Lack of childcare … systematically prevents women from participation in decision processes Shortcomings of a narrow focus on manipulation Difficult to falsify Difficult to research empirically Focus on individual behaviour Negligence of higher level structures and processes Resisting manipulation: Voice (1) Definition: Voice as a means to get access to flows of domination in order to participate in the decisions that affect them à Changing the background rules of the game Preconditions for speaking to power and participating in organizational decisions: Utilization or creation of a space for voice Legitimacy and dignity of actors Relevance of the arguments Resisting manipulation: Voice (2): Forms of voice Trade unions (and the ILO on the international level) as the traditional form of voice Independent organizations that support whistleblowers Social movements as contemporary forms of voice à Alternative organizational structures as spaces for voice à Protests in the public sphere as a legitimate form of voice Wrap up (1) Coercion and manipulation as individual level forms of power Refusal and voice as the respective forms of resistance against coercion and manipulation Weak spot of these 2 forms of power: Neglect of structural and systemic forms of power Domination (1) Definition: “shaping of preferences and attitudes” Sources of domination: Unquestioned rules that shape social reality: shaping ways of life through broader social structures Ideology: production of preferences and wants that are antithetical to individuals’ interests (example: Technical rationality) Cognitive schemas: legitimation of certain views while disregarding others (à selection of the option that is “most appropriate”) Domination: The case of technological rationality as ideology (Organizational) decisions potentially subject to multiple considerations, such as justice, sustainability, … Actual decisions are made primarily with respect to efficiency (which is an expression of technical rationality) Powerful elites are usually the main beneficiaries of efficiency-focused decisions Example: Layoffs Even if there might be many social arguments against mass-layoffs, eventually the justification of efficiency prevails Domination: The case of culture management Since the 1980s: Increased framing of organizational culture (values, attitudes, beliefs, norms, myths) as a potential resource (see lecture 7) “Engineering” organizational culture as a way to increase productivity Assumption: Organizational cultures can control workers completely Resisting domination: Escape Irony and cynicism as resentment Resentful dis-identification as a way to escape different forms of cultural and ideological control Typical context of escape: organizational cultures that superficially aim at the “liberation of employees” through self-management and loyalty campaigns More generally: Tends to occur as a response to power relations that cannot be left or changed  Cynicism Cynicism as a form of escapism Cynicism as “passive resistance” à Creation of a gap in which “the subject feels relieved from the burden of committing to the role as an active and participating employee” Different approaches to cynicism Managerial view Cynicism as an psychological / organizational problem that needs to be fixed Humanist view Cynicism as a mechanism to protect the self from colonization Cynicism as a double edged sword On the one hand, cynicism operates as a form of resistance On the other hand, cynicism might reproduce extant relations of power: Cynicism helps individuals create a distance between their feelings and their actions and therefore does not challenge domination à Cynical employees have the impression of autonomy à Cynicism and related forms of resistance are not necessarily problematic for holders of power, since they can serve as “safety valves” à Cynicism might even be welcomed by the holders of power Subjectification (1) Definition: “constitution of the person that makes decisions”; shaping of individuals’ subjectivity (“the way in which individuals interpret and understand their circumstances and [which] is bound up with the sense they have of themselves (identity)” (Knights & McCabe, 2000: 423) Subjectification (2) Sources of subjectification: Discipline through control systems and organizational practices: à “the disciplined member of the organization wants on his or her own what the organization wants” Discourses: (example: discourse of consumer care that infiltrates employee identity; “total quality management”) Governmentality: exercise of power is not required since individuals control themselves through auto-monitoring Resisting subjectification: Creation (1) Generation of alternative identities and discursive systems of representation, since individuals “participate in the constitution of their own subjectivity as they reflect on, and reproduce the social world (Knights & McCabe, 2000: 242) Using power to create something that was not intended by those in authority Creation (2) Example: Rescripting of the official rules in an organization Terms such as “autonomy”, “self-management” and “trust” are popular in contemporary organizations Examining organizational life might lead to the insight that “we are not allowed to manage ourselves”, “we are not really trusted” These insights can then lead to alternative self- narratives and identities (and eventually to new practices) Wrap up (2) Domination and subjectification as structural and systemic forms of power Escape and creation as the respective forms of resistance against domination and subjectification References Fleming, P., & Spicer, A. 2007. Contesting the corporation. Cambridge: University Press. Jermier, J.D., Knights, D., & Nord, W. 1994. Resistance and power in organizations. London: Sage