SBenegaL

Blog

  • Power 4

    In the last byte, we looked at the various interpersonal forms of power in greater detail. In today’s byte, we look at a few guidelines for the ethical use of power.

    We use the following table to summarize these:

     

    This table has been adapted from the reference book.

  • Power 3

    In the last byte, we defined the various Interpersonal Forms of power. In today’s byte, we look at these in a greater detail.
    Reward power was defined in the earlier byte, and it would be interesting to note that this could lead to better performance only as long as the employee sees a clear and strong link between performance and rewards. The manager would need to be explicit about the behavior being rewarded and should make the connection clear in case this is to function well.
    Coercive power would leverage on the threats of punishments – managers using this power could be found to verbally abuse employees or withhold support from them.
    Legitimate power would be effective only if the employee also believes that the manager has the right to tell them what to do! The manager thinking that he has the right to influence the target would have little to no influence in this case!
    Referent power emerges since the target identifies with or wants to be like the agent. Charismatic leaders are often thought to possess referent power – there is no mandate that the agent has to be superior to the target in any way!
    Expert power needs three conditions to be in place:
    1. The target must trust the expertise given is accurate
    2. The knowledge involved must be relevant and useful to the target
    3. The target perception of the agent as an expert is crucial

  • Power 2

    In the last byte, we began our discussion on Power, in today’s byte we look at some of the interpersonal forms of power.

    Interpersonal powers are used in interactions with others, one of the earliest studies by French and Raven identified five forms of this power, viz – reward, coercive, legitimate, referent and expert. These could be defined as below:

    1. Reward Power: This power refers to an agent’s ability to control rewards that a target wants.
    2. Coercive Power: Refers to the power that is based on an agent’s ability to cause an unpleasant experience for a target.
    3. Legitimate Power: Refers to the power that is based on position and mutual agreement, agent and target agree that the agent has the right to influence the target.
    4. Referent Power: Is an elusive power that is based on interpersonal attraction.
    5. Expert Power: This power refers to the power existing when an agent has specialized knowledge or skills that the target needs.

  • Power

    In the last byte, we looked at the managerial implications of the decision making dimensions that we had discussed. In today’s byte, we begin our discussion on the concept of power.

    Power could be understood as – “the ability to influence another person.”

    Note the term used here is not authority but influence. It is important to understand the distinction to be able to grasp the concept:
    Influence is – the process of affecting him thoughts, behavior, and feelings of another person.

    Authority is – the right to influence another person.

    To understand it better, a manager may have the authority but no power! The position could give the individual the right, as a supervisor/boss; however the person may not have the skill or ability to influence others. 

    An important aspect here is the understanding of the “zone of indifference” – It is a range in which any attempt to influence a person will be perceived as legitimate and will be acted on without a great deal of thought. Ex: An employee wouldn’t see working for forty hours per week, greeting customers, solving problems and collecting bills, when requested by the manager as completely legitimate and within the zone of indifference. However, if the manager requests the employee to organize a birthday gift for the manager’s spouse, or to over charge a customer etc; it goes beyond the zone of indifference.

    The constant challenge for the manager is to work on enlarging the employee’s zone of indifference and this could be accomplished by power rather than authority!

  • Decision Making – Managerial Implication

    In the last byte, we looked at the ethical dimension of decision making. In today’s byte, we look at the managerial implication of decision making as a critical activity.

    As a manager, it is rare to have the luxury of optimizing, satisfying is a more realistic approach that one would need to take. Many a times the decision could be unpredictable and random!

    Given that individuals differ in their preference for risk as well as styles of gathering information and making judgment; the manager would benefit from understanding these individual differences and can help managers maximize strengths in employee decision styles and build teams that capitalize on strengths like – creativity. By creating an enabling environment that is supportive, the employee’s creativity could be nourished.

    There is also no strict rule that defined whether decisions need to be taken up by individuals or teams/groups; it depends on the kind of requirement – the need to diagnose the situation, implement the appropriate level of participation etc and keep an eye on the potential for group think and other relevant biases that could creep in.

    Ethicality in decision making is the bedrock on all good decision making.

  • Decision Making – Ethical Issues

    In the last byte, we looked at the three components of Decision Making in Virtual workplace in detail. In today’s byte, we look at some ethical issues that arise in decision making and what steps one could take in decision making.

    With the increasing visibility of corporate decisions, it is all the more crucial in today’s settings to be careful of the ethical implications of the decision one takes. The ethical angle of decision making in organizations could be influenced by many factors like – individual differences, organizational rewards, and punishments.

    Through a study conducted by Kenneth Blanchard and Norman Vincent Peale – there are some “ethics check” that decision makers could take. Refer for greater detail their book – “The Power of Ethical Management”. Three major questions they encourage the decision maker to ponder over are:

    1. Is it Legal?
    2. Is it balanced? (Would it be fair to all concerned in the short and long term? Does it promote win-win partnership?)
    3. How will it make me feel about myself? (Will it make me proud of my actions? How will I feel when others become aware of the decisions?)

  • Decision Making – Virtual Workplaces 2

    In the last byte, we began our discussion making in virtual workplaces. We discuss about the three components that we mentioned to be important component

    DVCS relates to the face to face interactions of teams that generally rely on computer mounted cameras and provides video feeds and voice transmissions; combined with high-speed data connections the local teams can connect with their counter-parts across geographies. These systems could also take advantage of outside experts who could be added to the group.

    Through the use of GDSS, users could turn off their individual identities and interact with anonymity and can poll participants and assemble statistical information relevant to the decision being made – thus enabling collaboration in virtual teams.

    Internet and intranets could be rick communication and decision-making resource that would allow virtual teams to archive text, visuals, audio, and data files for use in decision making. The progress of the virtual teams could be easily updated and shared with other team members.

    These 3 components provide virtual teams a rich communications environment for decision making, however it is difficult to duplicate the face-to-face environment and its effectiveness is driven by the virtual team member’s ability to use the tools that are available.

  • Decision Making – Virtual Workplaces

    In the last byte, we looked at the role Group Decision Support Systems play. In today’s byte, we begin our discussion on the shift decision making process has to take in case of Virtual Workplaces.

    Virtual workplace refers to the modern day work environment where managers face scenarios of flexibility in workplace independent or unconstrained by geography, time and organizational boundaries. Virtual teams today could be seen as a work arrangement where the co-workers are disbursed geographically and would require a combination of telecommunication and information technology to accomplish the task at hand. These teams rarely have face-to-face meetings and the membership involved changes according to the project requirements at hand.

    The decisions made in these virtual teams would need the following three components for communication and decision making:

    1. Desktop Videoconferencing Systems (DVCS)
    2. Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS)
    3. Internet/intranet systems
    While we have already discussed the GDSS in the earlier section, we shall discuss about this in the context of these virtual teams. Over the next byte, we shall attempt understanding these three components.

  • Decision Support System

    In the last byte, we looked at Expert Systems and began our discussion on DSS. We shall continue from the discussion on DSS to begin today’s byte. 

    DSS could be designed to ease decision making in situations of information overload and stress. Many a times, though the situations that arise at different points in time could even be emergency situations, the managers wouldn’t really need to make a radically different plan – they could have a skeletal plan that could be accessed using the DSS instead of beginning from scratch each time!

    Group Decision Support System (GDSS) is a decision making tool that helps in group decision making scenario – GDSS uses computer support and communication facilitate to support group decision making process in either face to face meetings or dispersed meetings. One advantage is that GDSS could help conflict management within a group by depersonalizing the issue and by forcing the group to discuss its conflict management process. Members are also found to share information more fully when they use GDSS!

    We shall continue this discussion on GDSS further in the next byte as well.

  • Decision Making: Expert Systems

    In the last byte, we looked at the cultural issues that affect decision making. In today’s byte, we look at some of technical aids that help decision making – Expert Systems.

    Expert Systems are developed using artificial intelligence for programmed decisions. Definitely the system is set up using decision rules and therefore the effectiveness of the expert system is dependent on its design. As the system is a source of knowledge and experience and not just passive software, the organization would need to decide who is responsible for the decisions made by the system.

    What is important is that managers do not blindly go by the decisions that emerge from the expert systems; they must carefully scrutinize the suggestions and take a call.
    Decision Support Systems (DSS) is a tool that enhances the manager’s ability to make complex decisions. These are essentially computer and communication systems that process incoming data and synthesize the pertinent information for managers to use.
     
    We shall continue the discussion on DSS in the next byte too.