Sources of power and influence

Power is a force of influence and authority. Most leaders wield power, but how power is manifested and used often differs between leaders. Where does a leader get power from? Or do a leader’s followers give it to them? Well it’s both. In this article, we’ll be looking at the five different sources of power a leader can use, with some advice on when these powers should be used, and perhaps when not.

The five sources of a leader’s power come from distinctly different sources. Here’s an overview:

Expert Power: When a leader has significant domain knowledge/skills. E.g. an expert accountant influences how junior accountants go about their tasks

Positional Power: Comes when a leader has a legitimately held position of authority. E.g. typically, the CEO of an organization has the highest positional power

Reward Power: Is evident when a leader can give, or take away, a reward. E.g. a leader can influence a follower’s behavior by awarding a bonus, or taking away perks

Coercive Power: This is felt when a leader creates the perception of a threat. E.g. a leader has coercive power if her followers believe that she will initiate disciplinary action

Personal Power: Influence gained by persuasion. E.g. a manager may have to rely on nothing more than a friendly please and thankyou for an employee to perform a task

So now we will look at each of these sources of power and consider when they could be used, and when it’s not appropriate to use them…

Approaches to contingency model

Fred E. Fiedler’s contingency theory of leadership effectiveness was based on studies of a wide range of group effectiveness, and concentrated on the relationship between leadership and organizational performance. This is one of the earliest situation-contingent leadership theories given by Fiedler. According to him, if an organization attempts to achieve group effectiveness through leadership, then there is a need to assess the leader according to an underlying trait, assess the situation faced by the leader, and construct a proper match between the two. Leader’s trait In order to assess the attitudes of the leader, Fiedler developed the ‘least preferred co-worker’ (LPC) scale in which the leaders are asked about the person with whom they least like to work. The scale is a questionnaire consisting of 16 items used to reflect a leader’s underlying disposition toward others. The items in the LPC scale are pleasant / unpleasant, friendly / unfriendly, rejecting / accepting, unenthusiastic / enthusiastic, tense / relaxed, cold / warm,

helpful / frustrating, cooperative / uncooperative, supportive / hostile, quarrelsome / harmonious, efficient / inefficient, gloomy / cheerful, distant / close, boring / interesting, self-assured / hesitant, open / guarded. Each item in the scale is given a single ranking of between one and eight points, with eight points indicating the most favorable rating.

Friendly									Unfriendly
	8	7	6	5	4	3	2	1

Fiedler states that leaders with high LPC scores are relationship-oriented and the ones with low scores are task-oriented. The high LPC score leaders derived most satisfaction from interpersonal relationships and therefore evaluate their least preferred co-workers in fairly favorable terms. These leaders think about the task accomplishment only after the relationship need is well satisfied. On the other hand, the low LPC score leaders derived satisfaction from performance of the task and attainment of objectives and only after tasks have been accomplished, these leaders work on establishing good social and interpersonal relationships.

Situational factor

According to Fiedler, a leader’s behavior is dependent upon the favorability of the leadership situation. Three factors work together to determine how favorable a situation is to a leader. These are:

• Leader-member relations - The degree to which the leaders is trusted and liked by the group members, and the willingness of the group members to follow the leader’s guidance
• Task structure - The degree to which the group’s task has been described as structured or unstructured, has been clearly defined and the extent to which it can be carried out by detailed instructions
• Position power - The power of the leader by virtue of the organizational position and the degree to which the leader can exercise authority on group members in order to comply with and accept his direction and leadership

With the help of these three variables, eight combinations of group-task situations were constructed by Fiedler. These combinations were used to identify the style of the leader.

Figure 1: Correlation between leader’s LPC scores and group effectiveness

Leadership Effectiveness

The leader’s effectiveness is determined by the interaction of the leader’s style of behavior and the favorableness of the situational characteristics. The most favorable situation is when leader-member relations are good, the task is highly structured, and the leader has a strong position power.

Research on the contingency model has shown that task-oriented leaders are more effective in highly favorable (1, 2, 3) and highly unfavorable situation (7, 8), whereas relationship-oriented leaders are more effective in situations of intermediate favorableness (4, 5, 6).

Fiedler also suggested that leaders may act differently in different situations. Relationship-oriented leaders generally display task-oriented behaviors under highly favorable situations and display relationship-oriented behaviors under unfavorable intermediate favorable situations. Similarly, task-oriented leaders frequently display task-oriented in unfavorable or intermediate favorable situations but display relationship-oriented behaviors in favorable situations.

Cognitive resource Theory model

The Cognitive Resource Theory main claim is that various sources of stress are blocking the use of rationality in leadership. The more cognitively acute and experienced a leader is, the more she or he is able to overcome the effects of stress. Command, though, is the factor that overcomes the effects of stress. As for experience is the main factor enabling leadership under stress. Intelligence is more effective in less stressful situations. However, the leader's ability to think is more effective when her or his style is more orderly, premeditated and authoritarian. If the leader is similar to the average of a group, effective leadership will come from consensus-oriented approaches. In terms of objectives, the less complicated the tasks a group needs to do, the less of a need there is for an intelligent and experienced leader
.
Pro's

• Cognitive Resource Theory is a constant reminder of the hubris of intelligence. Stress is common in leadership situations, and this theory emphasizes how it limits even an intelligent person's ability to lead.
• The theory helps predict whether a certain type of person will be able to lead in a stressful situation.
• A specific model exists with the theory that allows testing in multiple environments and with making predictions.
• The theory helps the placement of persons in leadership positions by suggesting that people be tested for intelligence and the ability to manage stress in addition to assessing leadership qualities.

Con's

• Intelligence is not defined. There are many types and degrees of intelligence and the Cognitive Resource Theory doesn't account for them.
• The nature of tasking itself is not addressed. There are many types of objectives a group may need to achieve and each may involve a different level of stress and hence, require a different leadership method.
• Many types of stress exist; one cannot simply say "stress". For example, there is psychological and physical stress and each has its inhibiting effects that the theory does not account for.
• Stress often is measured subjectively, this in the face of the many measurable effects in the cognitive, psychological and physical domains. Without a quantitative evaluation instrument, it is difficult to create research instruments to evaluate the theory.

Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Model

The situational leadership model, developed by Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard, suggests that the leader’s behaviour should be adjusted according to the maturity level of the followers. The level of maturity or the readiness of the followers were assessed to the extent the followers have the ability and willingness to accomplish a specific task. Four possible categories of followers’ maturity were identified:

R1 : Unable and Unwilling

R2 : Unable but Willing

R3 : Able but Unwilling

R4 : Able and Willing

The leader behaviour was determined by the same dimensions as used in the Ohio studies, viz. production orientation and people orientation. According to the situational mode, a leader should use a telling style (high concern for task and low concern for people) with the least matured group of followers who are neither able nor willing to perform (R1). A selling style of leadership (high concern for both task and relationship) is required for dealing with the followers with the next higher level of maturity, that is those who are willing but unable to perform the task at the required level (R2). The able but unwilling followers are the next matured group and require a participating style from the leader, characterized by high concern for consideration and low emphasis on task orientation. Finally the most matured followers who are both able and willing requires a delegating style of leadership. The leader working with this kind of followers must learn to restrain himself from showing too much concern for either task or relationship as the followers themselves do accept the responsibility for their performance.

Though this theory is difficult to be tested empirically, it has its intuitive appeal and is widely used for training and development in organizations. In addition, the theory focuses attention on followers as a significant determinant of any leadership process.

The Path Goal Theory

In the recent time, one of the most appreciated theories of leadership is the path-goal theory as offered by Robert House, which is based on the expectancy theory of motivation. According to this theory, the effectiveness of a leader depends on the following propositions:

♦ leader behaviour is acceptable and satisfying to followers to the extent that they see it as an immediate source of satisfaction or as instrumental to future satisfaction

♦ leader behaviour is motivational to the extent that (1) it makes the followers’ needs satisfaction contingent or dependent on effective performance, and (2) it complements the followers’ environment by providing the coaching, guidance, support, and rewards necessary for realizing the linkage between the level of their performance and the attainment of the rewards available.

The leader selects from any of the four styles of behaviour which is most suitable for the followers at a given point of time. These are directive, supportive, participative, and the achievement-oriented according to the need and expectations of the followers. In other words, the path-goal theory assumes that leaders adapt their behaviour and style to fit the characteristics of the followers and the environment in which they work. Actual tests of the path-goal theory provides conflicting evidence and therefore it is premature to either fully accept or reject the theory at this point. Nevertheless the path-goal theory does have intuitive appeal and offers a number of constructive ideas for leaders who lead in a variety of followers in a variety of work environments.

Industrial Dispute 1947

1. Industrial Dispute Act 1947 Disputes manifest in the form of strikes, lockouts & commonly known as bandhs.
2. Industrial Dispute Act 1947 any dispute or difference between employers & employers, employers & workmen, or workmen & workmen, which is connected with the employment or non-employment or terms of employment or with the condition of labor of any person.
3. Causes for dispute
   • Wage demand:
   • The demand for has never been fully met because of high rate of inflation & equally high cost of living.
   • Wage agreement reached in one company will inspire unions in other plants .
4. Union-rivalry: Most organizations have multiple unions which leads to rivalry among different unions. Here, the problem of authenticity of membership occurs for the manager.( unions put members in such a way that overall the number exceeds the total number of employees in the organization). Secondly, the problem of collective bargain agent.
5. Political interference
   • Labor movement around the world would show that labor union by their nature political.
   • Drawbacks of unions being politicized:
   • Distant ideological issues divide & fragment issues on party lines.
   • Because of wrong political influence the unions sometimes do not sign on the agreement even though it is in favour of workers.
   • Political parties somehow engineers strikes, lockouts to show their political strength, which leads to long lasting disputes.
6. Unfair labour practices
   • Managements unwillingness to talk over ant dispute or matter, enrages the workers.
   • Managements unwillingness to recognize any particular trade union.
   • No enough authority to the officials to negotiate with the workers.
   • When during negotiations for settlement the representatives take the side of management.
7. When management uses such words like they have taken the decision of recruitment, selections & training & that it need not consult employees in any of these matters. Large number of managements have not even taken any step to provide benefits to the workers .
8. Too many laws:
   • Labor legislation is regarded as most dynamic institution. There are about 108 acts both central as well as state ,earning our country the dubious distinction of being highly labor legislated countries in the world.
   • But the employees & industries who are benefited by these laws are very few.
   • Judiciary also do not play a positive role .
9. ???? How to solve disputes ????
   • Collective bargaining.
   • Code of discipline.
   • Grievance procedure .
   • Arbitration.
   • Conciliation.
   • Adjudication.
10. Collective bargaining: it occurs when representatives of union meet with management. They meet to discuss over employee’s wages & benefits, to create or revise work rules & to resolve disputes of labor contract. The bargain is said to be collective in the sense that chosen representatives act as bargaining agent for all employees in dealing with management .
11. Code of discipline: Defines duties & responsibilities of employees & workers. It ensures that employees recognize the obligations and rights of one another. Promotes cooperation.
12. Grievance Procedure: 1. Section head shall try to resolve & if this fails. 2. Departmental heads shall intervene to resolve ,if they fail 3.Division heads intervene, if they fail. 4.Complaint is referred to the union.
13. Arbitration: It is procedure in which the third party studies the bargaining situation, listens to both the parties & gathers information ,& then makes recommendations that are binding on both the parties.
14. Conciliation: In this representatives of workers & employees are brought together before a third party with a view to persuade them to arrive at an agreement by mutual discussion between them.
15. It may be said that conciliator has no power to force a settlement but can work with parties separately to determine their respective positions, explain the positions more fully to the opposition & facilitates reaching of an agreement .
16. Adjudication
    • Refers to mandatory settlement of an industrial dispute by a labor court or a tribunal. Generally Government refers a dispute for adjudication on the failure of conciliation proceedings.

high performing organization (HPO)

Quality Circles

What is Quality Circle (QC)?
Quality Circles are (informal) groups of employees who voluntarily meet together on a regular basis to identify, define, analyze and solve work related problems.
Usually the members of a particular team (quality circle) should be from the same work area or who do similar work so that the problems they select will be familiar to all of them. In addition, interdepartmental or cross functional quality circles may also be formed.
An ideal size of quality circle is seven to eight members. But the number of members in a quality circle can vary.
Other Names of Quality Circles

• Small Groups
• Action Circles
• Excellence Circles
• Human Resources Circles
• Productivity Circles

Objectives of Quality Circles

• Promote job involvement
• Create problem solving capability
• Improve communication
• Promote leadership qualities
• Promote personal development
• Develop a greater awareness for cleanliness
• Develop greater awareness for safety
• Improve morale through closer identity of employee objectives with organization's objectives
• Reduce errors.
• Enhance quality
• Inspire more effective team work
• Build an attitude of problem prevention
• Promote cost reduction
• Develop harmonious manager, supervisor and worker relationship
• Improve productivity
• Reduce downtime of machines and equipment
• Increase employee motivation

Quality Circle Meetings

• Meetings are important part of quality circle's working.
• Meetings are attended by all the members of the quality circle.
• In general, meetings take place once a week or once in afortnight.
• Each meeting lasts for approximately one hour, though variations are possible.
• Apart from the frequency of the meetings, what is important is the regularity of the meetings.

What Takes Place During Quality Circle Meetings?
Any of the several activities may occur during a meeting such as:

• Identifying a theme or a problem to work on.
• Getting training as required to enable members to analyze problems.
• Analyzing problem(s).
• Preparing recommendations for implementing solution(s).
• Follow up of implementation of suggestions.
• Prepare for a presentation to the management.

What Quality Circles are Not? (Misconcepts)

• Quality Circles do not tackle just quality problems.
• Quality Circle is not a substitute or replacement for task forces, product committees, joint plant councils or works committees, quality assurance department, suggestion schemes.
• Quality Circles do not change the existing organizational structure or the chain of command.
• Quality Circles are not a forum for grievances or a spring board for demands.
• Quality Circles are not a means for the management to unload all their problems.
• Quality Circles are not just another technique.
• Quality Circles are not a panacea for all ills.

Pitfalls and Problems

• Lack of faith in and support to Quality Circle activities among management personnel
• Lack of interest or incompetence of leaders/facilitator
• Apathy, fear and misunderstanding among middle level executives
• Delay or non-implementation of Circle recommendations
• Irregularity of Quality Circle activities
• Non-application of simple techniques for problem solving
• Lack of or non-participation by some members in the Circle activities
• Circles running out of problems
• Antagonism of non-members towards Quality Circle operations
• Inadequate visibility of management support
• Complexity of problems taken up
• Non-maintenance of Quality Circle records
• Too much facilitation or too little
• Language difficulty in communication
• Communication gap between Circles and departmental head
• Change of management
• Confusing Quality Circle for another technique
• Resistance from trade unions

Structure of Quality Circles Program
Six Basic Elements

• Circle participants or members.
• Circle leaders/deputy leaders.
• Program facilitator.
• Steering/advisory committee.
• Top management.
• Non-participating management/members.

How Do Quality Circles Operate?

• Appointment of a steering committee, facilitator and QC team leaders.
• Formation of QCs by nomination/voluntary enrolment of QC members.
• Training of all QC members (by an expert consultant).
• Training of non-participating employees (by an expert consultant).
• Problem data bank and identification of problems for QC work.
• QC problem resolution by QCs through standardized techniques.
• Presentation of QC solutions to management.
• Evaluation of award/recognition.

Code of Conduct for QCs

• Attend all meetings and be on time.
• Listen to and show respect for the views of other members.
• Make others feel a part of the group.
• Criticize ideas, not persons.
• Help other members to participate more fully.
• Be open to and encourage the ideas of others.
• Every member is responsible for the team’s progress.
• Maintain a friendly attitude.
• Strive for enthusiasm.
• The only stupid question is the one that is not asked.
• Look for merit in the ideas of others.
• Pay attention- avoid disruptive behavior.
• Avoid actions that delay progress.
• Carry out assignments on schedule.
• Give credit to those whom it is due.
• Thank those who give assistance.
• Do not suppress ideas- do express.
• Objectives and causes first, solutions next.
• Give praise and honest appreciation when due.
• Ideas generated by the group should not be used as individual suggestions to suggestion scheme.

Problem Solving Tools and Techniques Used by Quality Circles
Given below are the most commonly used tools and techniques. These are called the old QC tools:

• Brainstorming.
• Pareto analysis.
• Cause and effect diagram (or fish bone diagram or Ishikawadiagram).
• Histogram.
• Scatter diagram
• Stratification
• Check sheet
• Control charts and graphs

New QC Tools
Quality circles started using additional seven tools as they started maturing. These are:

1. Relations diagram.
2. Affinity diagram.
3. Systematic diagram or Tree diagram.
4. Matrix diagram.
5. Matrix data analysis diagram.
6. PDPC (Process Decision Program Chart).
7. Arrow diagram.

Benefits of QC

• Self development.
• Promotes leadership qualities among participants.
• Recognition.
• Achievement satisfaction.
• Promotes group/team working.
• Serves as cementing force between management/non-management groups.
• Promotes continuous improvement in products and services.
• Brings about a change in environment of more productivity, better quality, reduced costs, safety and corresponding rewards.