Power

MAGEE AND GALINSKY (2008)

 POWER is the asymmetric control over valued
resources in social relations (Magee & Galinsky,
2008)
Definition • Relative state of dependence in social relations
• Value is subjectively determined
French and Raven (1959)
• Reward
• Coercive
• Information
• Expert
Are classified as “resources being controlled”
Connections
• Legitimate power
to previous
Is classified as the legitimacy of one’s power as a
separate variable
theory
• Referent power
(p. 362)
Overlaps with Magee and Galinsky’s definition of
STATUS “Status is the extent to which an individual or
group is respected or admired by others”
Resource dependence theory (Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978)
“Power resides among a set of interdependent
subunits or organizations that exchange resources
with each other.”

BUT Power should not be equated to the “capacity to

Connections
influence” (p. 363) to previous
• Defining power as influence conflates the
independent with the dependent variable and
amount to tautology
theory
• However, power, influence, and resistance are
related as social forces
(p. 362)
• E.g. High-power party can lead to influence attempts
which can be meet resistance by low-power party
How the Psychology
of Power Reinforces
Hierarchies
“…once a hierarchy gets established,
a number of organizational and
psychological processes conspire to
create different degrees of
opportunity to maintain and even
acquire more power …” (p. 365)

“…power has metamorphic

consequences, leading those with
high power to roam in a very
different psychological space than
those with low power.” (p. 366)
Keltner et al. (2003) and Kipnis (1976)
conclude, “possessing or lacking power
fundamentally transforms individuals’
psychological state” (p. 366)

Power-Approach Theory (Keltner et al., 2003)

claims that possessing power increases the
tendency to focus on and approach attractive
aspects of situations
• Increase access to rewards
• Less interference from others to pursue
rewards
Conversely, “low-power individuals are subject
to more social and material threats especially
the threats of losing favor among higher-
ranking individuals, and they are acutely aware
of the constraints…” (p. 366)
… individuals in power
relations lead high-power
individuals to possess a
primary “approach” response
and low-power individuals to
have a primary “inhibit”
response in their cognition and
behavior (p. 367)
This power-induced transformation of psychological
processes partially occurs because rank in a power
hierarchy determines the type and strength of
pressure that some individuals impose and others
face (p. 367)
The world of those who have
little power is filled with real and
psychological shackles, whereas
possessing power is often
equated with freedom (p. 367)

Finally, couple with Ludwig and

Longenecker’s argument that
leaders are not prepared to face
success …