The effectiveness of coercive power and reward power will depend on the specific scenario involving or requiring their application. According to Fairholm (2009), coercive power can be defined as possessing the ability to control and direct others by use of fear of losing a valued and important income or fear of punishment while on the other hand, reward power strives to establish incentives that are meant towards the emulation of institutional or organizational norms. In some cases, some employees may consider reward power to ineffective reward while others may consider striving in order to achieve it (Pfeffer, 2013). Nevertheless, in both paradigms, an individual views important aspects in gaining compliance in an organization. In most cases, motivation of individuals to replicate the beliefs and ideas of their institution is beneficial for the organization. In regard to this, reward power has advantages in gaining compliance since it incentivizes employees replicating organizational structure and message. Regardless of the reward, compliance is certain when associating attitude and performance with the norms or message of the institution.
Similarly, it is impractical for institutions to presume that every employee will always give in to every directions that are given. Understanding that non-compliance issues might arise in any organization is part of the fact. No specific amount of rewards or incentives can address it, hence, power has to be coercive. According to Pfeffer (2013), an important factor for organizations to consider when growing is not to exceedingly depend on only a single type of power. He further argues that it is not beneficial for the organization to only use power from only one position. A variety of organizations that are successful embrace the ability of generating various amount of compliance based on specific situations (Weller, 2002). The ability to apply both paradigms skillfully provides an organization with the opportunity to discover greater success due to being adaptable to a specific situation.
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Power And Politics".
From a standpoint of an employee, little establishes more hatred than the view of unfairness in institutions. When employees discern that there exists intrinsic unfairness in the power structure in regard to distribution of power, resentment increases, loss of credibility begins, and employees and the organization can suffer from a sense of alienation between them. In regard to this reason, I would to make a suggestion that expert power is the simplest and easiest to live or stay with as an employee (Fairholm, 2009). According to my argument, expert power is the just the closest or next element to a merit based development in an organization. Rewarding the expert in a specific aspect of the structure of the organization, it gives employees the ability to get along with it since advancement or development is directly related to content knowledge (Pfeffer, 2013). Development and advancement from the basis of an expert’s power provides an individual the ability to feel that their effort is rewarded as well as their performance in important roles in the organization are validated. Therefore, expert power is considered realistic because it enables the organization to move near to a meritocratic model, a feature that enhances the effort of employees.
Based on this argument, I believe that the most effective source of power in an organization is the expert power. Expert power assures that every person should actively participate in the goals and ideals of the organization. Weller (2002) argues that having expert power is a common stepping stone to various sources of power in an organization such as referent or legitimate power. The idea is logical since most employees prefer positions of power be filled by individuals who are knowledgeable and understand the purpose of the organization.
There are circumstances in which this type of power might be rendered ineffective. This occurs when there is change in the priorities of an organization. For instance, when an organization realizes that marketability and profitability ought to be the guiding calculus when formulating and making decisions, it results in hiring individuals who are capable of demonstrating a desire of being successful in this realm. Fairholm (2009) experts are considered to be second to those individuals who possess the ability to generate more revenues for the organization. The specific type of power that requires authentication and validation by the organization depends on the specific organizational message pursues to be validated and reinforced. Based on this vantage point, the source of power may be considered rendered ineffective.
Finally, it is realistic that trust does influence the use of power. The aspect of trust underlines the application of power. Every type of power can be transmitted effectively and be utilized if people have a feeling of a specific level or degree of trust with the ones who make such decisions. The decisions of individuals wielding power in the organizations will resonate highly if they establish a high level of trust with the members of the organization (Pfeffer, 2013). Credibility that allows more power to be respected and be wielded depends on the level of trust that is established within the individuals and organizations and also between the two entities. The individuals who are in power should focus their effort in establishing a high level of trust with the members of the organization so as to gain credibility from all the organization stakeholders (Weller, 2002). Establishing a positive trust and good will with the individuals and organization stakeholders directly affected by the actions and decisions of the people in power is important for the purpose of positive sustenance of every member of the organization and all the people associated with the organization.
