Submitted From:

Talha Naveed f2017021001

Junaid Iqbal f2017021002
Department Anam Rauf f2016021004
School of Business & Economic Zaka Akbar f2017021016
Subject Nauman Ahmad f2017021019
Organizational Behavior
Class Submitted To:
MBA (Ex)
Dr. Naveeda Kitchlew
Power Corrupts People

Introduction:
Power refers to ability of someone to do something. And corruption is a form
of dishonesty undertaken by a person entrusted with a position of authority, often to acquire
personal benefit. That might not be personal too. Now here comes the question. Does power really
makes people corrupt?
In general perception it is believed that power actually corrupts people. But some people think
otherwise. We have two sects of people here: one in the favor of subject and one who are against
this point of view. There are numerous reasons of beliefs and example that support these two type
of thoughts. Here, in this presentation we’d discuss lessons from these two different school of
thoughts.
Power:
The concept of power needs to be distinguished from authority and influence.
Corruption:
Having or showing a willingness to act dishonestly in return for money or personal gain.

How leadership Power Relate with Corruption?

Most people have heard the line "Power corrupts." (Or the longer version, "Absolute power
corrupts absolutely.". The question I'm often asked is "why and how does power corrupt
leaders?"

The answer is complex, but fairly clear. Leadership, at its core, is all about power and influence.
Leaders use their power to get things done. A simple distinction is between two forms of power.
Socialized power is power used to benefit others. We hope that our elected officials have this
sort of power in mind and are primarily concerned with the best interests of their constituents.

The other form of power is called personalized power, and it is using power for personal gain.
Importantly, these two forms of power are not mutually exclusive. A leader can use his or her
power to benefit others, but can also gain personally (there are no poor former U.S. Presidents!).
The obvious problem is when personalized power dominates and the leader gains, often at the
followers' expense.

Yet, leaders can delude themselves that they are working for the greater good (using socialized
power), but engage in behavior that is morally wrong. A sense of power can cause a leader to
engage in what leadership ethicist, Terry Price, calls "exception making"(link is external) -
believing that the rules that govern what is right and what is wrong does not apply to the
powerful leader "for other people, this would be wrong, but because I have the best interests of
my followers at heart, it's ok for me to...." During Watergate, the argument was made that
President Nixon could not have acted illegally because "the President is above the law."

Leaders can also become "intoxicated" by power - engaging in wrong behavior simply because
they can and they can get away with it (and followers are willing to collude and make such
exceptions "It's ok because he/she is the leader"). Some have suggested that President Clinton's
engaged in a sexual dalliance with intern Monica Lewinsky simply because "he could."

Power has advantages and disadvantages for leaders.

On the positive side, power makes leaders more assertive and confident and certain of their
decisions. This enables them to move forward on chosen courses of action. Leaders must use
power to "get the job done."

On the negative side, the more people possess power, the more they focus on their own
egocentric desires and the less able they are to see others' perspectives.

And then there are individual differences. Some people are simply power hungry and prone to
use their power to subjugate others - they are "leaders from hell". [1]

Bases of Power:
Formal Power
Is established by an individual’s position in an organization; conveys the ability to coerce or
reward, from formal authority, or from control of information.
Coercive Power
A power base dependent on fear.
Reward Power
Compliance achieved based on the ability to distribute rewards that others view as valuable
Legitimate Power
The power a person receives as a result of his or her position in the formal hierarchy of an
organization.
Information Power
Power that comes from access to and control over information.
Expert Power
Influence based on special skills or knowledge.
Referent Power
Influence based on possession by an individual of desirable resources or personal traits.
Charismatic Power
An extension of referent power stemming from an individual’s personality and interpersonal
style.[4]
Types Of Corruption: (Macro Level)
Pay offs and Bribes
The act or occasion of receiving money or material gain especially as compensation or as a bribe.
Graft and Embezzlement
Graft is the acquisition of gain in dishonest or questionable way such as corruption or inside
information; embezzlement is the acquisition of gain through organized fraud
Blackmail and Extortion
Blackmail, in contrast to extortion, is when the offender threatens to reveal information about a
victim or his family members that is potentially embarrassing, socially damaging, or
incriminating unless a demand for money, property, or services is met.
Preferential Treatment
Preferential Treatment literally refers to "job or employment preference given to someone who is
of the right race, ethnicity, or gender" as defined in the government's approved list of historically
disadvantaged.[5]

Types Of Corruption: (Micro Level)

Administrative Corruption
The term of " administration corruption" is a technical expression means the spreading of
infringing on public funds and profiteering from public posts in the society. Types of "
administration corruption" : Corruption of high ranking officials or second tier at the stats'
bodies
Political Corruption
Political corruption is the use of powers by government officials for illegitimate private gain.
An illegal act by an officeholder constitutes political corruption only if the act is directly
related to their official duties, is done under color of law or involves trading in influence.
Grand Corruption
Political corruption is generally refer as Grand corruption. Political corruption is the use of powers
by government officials for illegitimate private gain. An illegal act by an officeholder constitutes
political corruption only if the act is directly related to their official duties, is done under color of
law or involves trading in influence
Petty Corruption
Petty corruption refers to everyday abuse of entrusted power by low- and mid-level public officials
in their interactions with ordinary citizens, who often are trying to access basic goods or services
in places like hospitals, schools, police departments and other agencies
Public Corruption
Public corruption in any form is the misuse of a public or government office for private gain. Its
existence is an indication that something has gone wrong in the management of the government
office, whether it be federal, state, or local

The most common type of corruptions that we face in organizations is Systematic and Petty
corruption. People tend to use their power to obtain an advantage by dishonest means. That also
involves getting benefits using their subordinates. Similarly people in authority tend to behave
work with their ease. That type of ignorant behavior is also counted in terms of corruption.[5]

Causes of Corruption:

Corruption is caused as well as increased because of the change in the value system and ethical
qualities of men who administer. The old ideals of morality, service and honesty are regarded as
an achromatic.
In a highly inflationary economy, low salaries of government officials compel them to resort to
the road of corruption. Graduates from IIMs with no experience draw a far handsome salary than
what government secretaries draw.
Election time is a time when corruption is at its peak level. Big industrialist fund politicians to
meet high cost of election and ultimately to seek personal favor. Bribery to politicians buys
influence, and bribery by politicians buys votes. In order to elected, politicians bribe poor illiterate
people, who are slogging for two times meal.
Cycle of Power Corruption:

Cases Examples In Our Country:

 Axact Company Case on Shoaib Ahmad
 Panma Papers Case on Nawaz Sharif & his family.
 Health Department Corruption Case on Dr. Asim
 LDA Corruption Case on Ahad Cheema
 Corruption Case on Provincial Minister of Sindh Sharjeel Memon

Effects Of Corruption:
 Corruption makes the whole system handicap.
 Corruption in Pakistan has wings not wheels.
 In the private sector, it increases the cost of business.
 Creates unhealthy climate for investment.
 Its effects on development are disastrous.
 It makes the condition of poor people, poorer.
 Undermines economic development of the nation.
Treatment of corruption:

 Stop going for immediate solutions

 Awareness in public
 Killing corruption at the cutting edge
 Shaping of minds through education
 Media and religious scholars
 For individual think about final day
 Anti-corruption efforts
 Right to information act
 Computerization
 Strengthening the governing body
 Strict punishment

Supporting Material:
Point:
Now if we take example of people who got corrupt after coming into power, then Napoleon is a
prominent name. He started out as a man who wanted power- but put forward the amazing idea that
countries could choose their own leaders, as he was chosen. He championed a civil service not choked by
corruption, and a set of laws that ensured some measure of justice. The Code Napoleon is still used in
France, there are versions of it all throughout Europe, and surprisingly, a form of it exists in Louisiana.
He called people under his realm citizens, and tried to empower them as best he could. Then he got the
power bug. He put his relatives in charge of other countries, even if they were clearly incompetent,
because they were family. This caused him to lose Spain. He started to make decisions not based on
people’s needs, but his wants- and in the end- defined the words "Napoleon Complex".
President Chavez of Venezuela was elected on a popular vote to stop the abuses of the system against the
poor, and promptly made his own family and friends wealthy. He corrupted the election process and
became a dictator in all ways harmful to the country.
President Ortega started out as a Sandinista - a fighter against the upper classes to give part of the country
back to the people. He's become an absolute dictator who has rigged the election process and has
suppressed all his opponents harshly, while, again, he gives the nation’s wealth to his friends and
relatives. This was JUST what Somoza was deposed for. There are countless such examples.

Or- Nixon, who ran as a moderate republican president, and ended up thinking he had the right to break
into Democratic offices, bug people, and suppress the press.
Lenin, who I think had good intentions, but the Bolshevik system had absolute power and corrupted the
power bearers absolutely, bringing Stalin, a power mad thug from the start, into power.

How about King David- who was a fair king, a good king, but corrupted by power so much he sent his
friend to war in order to possess his friend’s wife- yes- biblical, but apt.
Or the string of crazy power mad Roman Emperors who had themselves declared Gods?
The list goes on. And On. [2]

Counter-Point:
C.S. Lewis said, “Provocation doesn’t make me ill-tempered: it only shows me how ill-tempered I am.”
Power is like that – it brings our true character to the surface. [3]
It’s not the power that corrupts, it’s their inner urge to use their power for corruption. There are several
examples of those too who got power but did nothing wrong. They didn’t use their power to get a
dishonest advantage. In-fact they used it for the betterment of mankind.
Some of very good examples of these cases are Abraham Lincoln, Nelson Mandela, Steve Jobs and Bill
Gates. All of them got power, but despite that they didn’t use it for their personal benefits. They made the
world a better place with their power and services.

Conclusion:
Power breeds competence, not corruption, according to a new study if people feel powerful in their
roles, they may be less likely to make on-the-job errors like administering the wrong medication
to a patient. Contrary to conventional wisdom, the study suggests that people at the bottom of the
workplace totem pole don't end up there for lack of ability, but rather that being low and powerless
in a hierarchy leads to more mistakes. The biggest and most significant implication is for
organizations. If you could increase an employee's sense of power, it should improve their
executive function, which would decrease incidence of catastrophic errors. If that reasoning holds
up in the real-world workplace, simple acts of empowerment, such as encouraging employees to
make suggestions to company management, could reduce unnecessary mistakes. And that could
translate to fewer medication errors in hospitals, fewer airline accidents or even a lower risk of a
disaster at a nuclear power plant. They seem like powerful reasons to embrace a theory.

References:
[1] Ronald E Riggio Ph.D. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/us/experts/ronald-e-riggio-phd

[2] https://www.quora.com/What-are-3-historical-examples-of-Lord-Actons-claim-that-
absolute-power-corrupts-absolutely
[3] https://bensternke.com/power-doesnt-corrupt/
[4] Text Book Organizational Behavior by Stephen P. Robbins & Timothy A. Judge
[5] Google Scholar