MGMT20001 · Organisational Behaviour
Power and Politics
Power is the capacity to influence others, and its engine is dependence — A has power over B to the extent B depends on A for something valued, scarce and non-substitutable. The unit teaches the bases of power (Benfari et al. 1986, extending French & Raven: reward, coercive, legitimate, expert, referent, plus information, affiliation, group; position vs personal) and, as its centrepiece, the three dimensions of power (Lukes, via Hardy): 1st = visible decision-making, 2nd = agenda-setting / non-decisions, 3rd = unobtrusive / ideological power that shapes preferences so no conflict appears. The critical punchline: an absence of conflict can be evidence of power, not its absence. Power becomes politics when influence turns self-serving; throughout runs the ethical imperative to use power responsibly. The case is Elon Musk at Tesla and SpaceX.
What this chapter covers
- 01Power defined; dependence as its engine
- 02Bases of power (Benfari et al. 1986, extending French & Raven); position vs personal
- 03The three dimensions of power (Lukes / Hardy)
- 04Why the third (unobtrusive / ideological) dimension is the deepest
- 05Power vs organisational politics
- 06Dependency, influence tactics (hard vs soft) & the ethics of power
- 07Case: Elon Musk across all three dimensions
Worked example: classify the influence, then judge it
- +1Controls information: information base of power; used to decide what others know — a lever of influence.
- +1Decides which proposals reach the agenda: the 2nd dimension (agenda-setting / non-decisions) — controlling what is even discussable.
- +1Staff 'want' the long hours: the 3rd dimension (unobtrusive / ideological) — preferences shaped so consent is given and no conflict appears.
- +1Power or politics? If the influence serves the organisation legitimately it's power; if it's self-serving and steps outside sanctioned channels it tips into organisational politics.
- +1Ethical verdict: concentrated, partly invisible power needs accountability — protect upward voice and independent oversight, because invisible power is hardest to hold to account.
Key terms
- Power and dependence
- Power is the capacity to influence others; its basis is dependence — you have power over me to the extent I depend on you for something I value that is scarce and non-substitutable. A base only converts to influence when the target actually depends on it.
- Bases of power (Benfari et al. 1986)
- French & Raven's reward, coercive, legitimate, expert and referent, extended with information, affiliation and group. Position power (reward, coercive, legitimate, information) transfers with the job; personal power (expert, referent) belongs to the individual.
- Three dimensions of power (Lukes / Hardy)
- 1st = visible decision-making (who wins open disputes); 2nd = agenda-setting / non-decisions (keeping issues off the table); 3rd = unobtrusive / ideological (shaping preferences so no conflict appears). Power gets progressively harder to see.
- Unobtrusive power (Hardy 1985)
- The third dimension: power exercised through meaning, language and ideology rather than open force. Whoever controls the dominant story controls what counts as 'common sense', and therefore what is even up for debate.
- Power vs organisational politics
- Power is the capacity to influence (can serve the organisation or the self); politics is the self-serving use of influence outside sanctioned means, advancing the individual sometimes at the organisation's expense and breeding distrust.
Power and Politics FAQ
What are the three dimensions of power?
Lukes' framework (taught via Hardy): the 1st dimension is the visible win in a decision; the 2nd is agenda-setting power to keep issues off the table; the 3rd is unobtrusive / ideological power that shapes people's very preferences, so no conflict appears. Power gets progressively harder to see — the most effective kind you don't notice.
Why can an absence of conflict be evidence of power?
On the third-dimension view, smooth agreement can be the strongest evidence of power: preferences were shaped so well that resistance never formed. So 'everyone agreed' is not proof there was no power — reading consensus as the absence of power is a favourite exam trap.
What's the difference between power and organisational politics?
Power is the capacity to influence and can serve the organisation or the self; it's judged on whether it's used legitimately and ethically. Politics is the self-serving use of influence outside sanctioned channels — perceived as illegitimate, it breeds distrust, stress and withdrawal.
How do I structure a power case answer?
Classify, diagnose, judge. First name the base (reward / expert / information…) and the dimension (1st/2nd/3rd); then ask power or politics (organisation-serving vs self-serving); then deliver the ethical verdict. Apply all three dimensions to the named leader — define → apply-with-evidence → recommend.
Exam move
The chapter's centre of gravity is the three dimensions of power — be able to apply all three to a named leader, and especially to read the third (unobtrusive) dimension and the 'absence of conflict = power' trap, because that's where the marks are. Memorise the bases of power (Benfari, extending French & Raven) and the position vs personal split. For any influence scenario, run the three quick moves: classify (base + dimension), diagnose (power or politics?), judge (the ethical verdict) — then apply to Musk via define → apply → recommend.
