The 14 Sources of Power in Organizations

A brief look at the various media used to resolve conflict

At present, I’m working through Gareth Morgan’s Images of Organization with a group of MBA students. The book isn’t new (first published in the 1990’s; updated in 2006). Nevertheless, while its examples are somewhat dated, the book offers key insights that can be incredibly helpful for reading, decoding, and interpreting what is happening at an organization, whether that be your organization or another’s.

Morgan’s basic presupposition is that the way we speak or write about organizations changes how we think about them. With this presupposition in mind, Morgan offers a number of different metaphors, which end up being essentially different ways of thinking about organizations.  He talks about organizations as machines, as brains, as psychic prisons, etc. The keyword is “as.” What do you perceive an organization “as”? What is your dominant metaphor? Your answer to that question will frame what you think makes for a good organization.

For this post, I want to focus on something Morgan mentions in his chapter on “Organizations as Political Systems” where he talks about power. For the most part, the theme of power is one that postmodernists and Leftists have made it their business to study, articulate, and gather up for themselves. Think here of Foucault or any other postmodernist/critical theorist. If you go to grad school, it is practically obligatory that you read critical theory, selections from the Frankfurt school, etc. For whatever reason, conservatives don’t seem to spend much time thinking about power from a philosophical vantage.

Fair Warning

Before continuing, I want to warn you about two things.

First, the more you read about power, the more you may see it everywhere, and the more suspicious you may become. As Morgan himself acknowledges:

When we analyze organizations in terms of the political metaphor it is almost always possible to see signs of political activity. This can lead to an increased politicization of the organization, for when we understand organizations as political systems we are more likely to behave politically in relation to what we see. We begin to see politics everywhere and to look for hidden agendas even when there are none. For this reason, the [organizations as political systems] metaphor must be used with caution. There is a very real danger that its use may generate cynicism and mistrust in situations where there was none before.

Forewarned is forearmed. Don’t let what follows turn you into a cynic or into someone who immediately questions others’ motives. That’s not the point.

Second, the point of what follows is not to use what you learn here to gather up as much power as you can for yourself. Robert Greene’s heinous book The 48 Laws of Power, which I hesitate to even mention here because it is flat out evil, is incredibly popular. It has 78,000+ reviews on Amazon. It is evident that people use Greene’s book to manipulate those around them. One review reads:

“The 48 Laws of Power” by Robert Greene is a repugnant manifestation of human manipulation, deceit, and moral bankruptcy. From start to finish, this book offers a guidebook to manipulate and exploit others, promoting a toxic worldview that undermines genuine human connection and empathy. It is a distressing embodiment of the worst aspects of human nature.

I would agree with this review of Greene’s book, which is essentially about using power for your own advantage, even if it means abusing people and engaging in disgusting, unethical behavior.

No—the point with what follows from Morgan’s text is to just get a sense of where power resides in and even between organizations. We spend a good deal of our lives in organizations, and we should be realistic about the fact that we will at some point encounter conflict. It is impossible to work with others and not have conflict at least at some point.

Such a realistic understanding of how power works is beneficial for everyone working at a company, even if only to understand where differences stem from. My presupposition is that power is not necessarily a grave evil but can be used for good. Power can be an instrument of justice at the micro and macro level, and thus this article appeals only to those who want to use power for the sake of the good. It is much easier to destroy than it is to build, and so the question is: How can we use the sources listed below for the building up of organizations oriented towards the good?

Power and Where it Resides

Morgan doesn’t couch his discussion of power in complex technical jargon. Instead, he gives you a simple, easy to use formula for power:

Power is the medium through which conflicts of interest are ultimately resolved. Power influences who gets what, when, and how.

An interest is what someone wants. A conflict is what happens when different people want different things. Power is that which resolves conflict. It is an incredibly concise and helpful definition for power.

As per Morgan, if you can discern divergent interests, you can also perceive conflict.

Interestingly enough, as per Morgan’s definition, power is a medium. Like any other medium, power disappears from our awareness most of the time unless we make an active effort to perceive it. There is no such thing as power in the void. Rather, power always has a material and symbolic manifestation (the king’s crown, the CEO’s office, the president’s motorcade, the audible word that summons a subordinate, etc.)

Morgan writes, “power involves an ability to get another person to do something that he or she would not otherwise have done.” In other words, power retains a coercive force.

Thus, without further ado, here are the 14 sources of power that Morgan delineates.  

1. Formal authority –Typically, in bureaucracies, formal authority is a result of your job title and place within the organizational chart. You hold power because of who you are, and others recognize your authority based upon your explicitly articulated position in the organization. Although, Morgan cites Max Weber who situates authority in charisma, tradition, or law.

2. Control of scarce resources – Scarce skills, money, or raw materials can be converted into power. The keyword for this one is dependence. You can increase dependence of others on you, provided you have control over scarce resources, or you can decrease your dependence on others by acquiring those resources for yourself.

3. Use of organizational structure, rules, and regulations – As my teacher in grad school Richard Thames might say, sometimes we don’t argue by the rules but about the rules themselves. Who gets to make the rules? Who knows how to best take advantage of them? Someone attempting to change the rules may be shifting the balance of power in the organization. Working to rule is an example of using this resource.

4. Control of decision processes – By decision processes, Morgan means not simply the decisions themselves but the “decision premises”: “How should a decision be made? Who should be involved? When will the decision be made?” Whether or not an item appears on an agenda (and where it appears on the agenda) is a matter of considerable importance. The ability to select evaluative criteria also falls under this category (i.e., setting the metrics that determine success).

5. Control of knowledge and information – This resource relates to #2 above. Knowledge and information about key markets, organizational finances, proprietary information (intellectual property), and assets can all be translated into power. If you have the requisite skill to decode a contract or legalese, you have power. If your department (or employees within it) know how to do something that others don’t, you have power. The cult of expertise and the “they” relate to this resource.  

6. Control of boundaries – Those who patrol boundaries within an organization, letting personnel, information, or resources pass through to another side, can have considerable power. In many ways, it is the boundary that makes an organization (and even an organism) what it is. Public relations counsel, for example, has the ability to exercise extraordinary power not only by interpreting organizations to larger publics but also by interpreting the wants and needs of audiences back to the organization itself. Such a liaison acts as a filter, effectively defining what counts as important.

7. Ability to cope with uncertainty – Such an ability concerns the capacity to remediate problems that generate uncertainty, either in the environment or in the organization itself. Power accrues especially to those who can deal with continual uncertainty. Example: The ability to remediate a hacked website.

8. Control of technology – This item relates to #2 and #5 above. Not only do you possess the knowledge and ability to operate the technology, but you also possess the technology itself. The introduction of new technology can upset power balances.

9. Interpersonal alliances, networks, and control of “informal organization” – Informal coalitions can develop between organizational units, which exchange personnel, information, or any other resource. Such networks in essence exclude others as much as they include others.

10. Control of counterorganizations – Unions, consumer advocacy groups, government agencies, and related organizations can provide a powerful countervailing force in a conflict.

11. Symbolism and the management of meaning – Imagery, theater, and gamesmanship all factor into this resource. Which symbols get protected and promoted? How does the corporate culture get reinforced through particular rituals and symbols? Everything from laying out the structure of office buildings, enforcing a dress code or “brand style guide,” or planning key cultural events relates to this notion of symbolism. Appearance and impression management matter here. As Christopher Lasch might say (not without a hint of cynicism), nothing succeeds like the appearance of success.

12. Gender and the management of gender relations – Gender stereotypes can influence power (or perceived power). Morgan gives a number of strategies that women use to influence men or vice-versa.

13. Structural factors that define the stage of action – Certain things are outside of our control. The history of an organization or the relative volatility of an environment can produce structural factors that prevent your acting in one way or another. You may have access to many of the other resources listed here, but a corporate merger, takeover, or cataclysmic shift in technology may radically affect your ability to act in one way or another.

14. The power one already has – This somewhat self-evident resource simply means that power leads to power (much like success garners success). Morgan also uses this section to talk about how doing favors for others can later be cashed in to receive favors in return (quid pro quo).

The above list can be boiled down into a self-inventory useful for discerning the relative power you retain:

1. Title – What position do I/we occupy in the formal structure?

2. Resources – What resources do I/we control that others depend on?

3. Rules – How do organizational structures, rules, and regulations harmonize with my role? Can I/we exert any control over what forms these structures, rules, and regulations take?

4. Decisions – What sorts of decisions am I/are we asked to make? Do I/we have any say in influencing not simply the decisions themselves but the assumptions the decisions are based on?

5. Information – How do I/we control information that others need?

6. Boundaries – What boundaries am I/are we situated on? Do others rely upon me/us to facilitate communication between stakeholders?

7. Uncertainty – What sort of environmental or internal uncertainty does my organization face? How do I/we help resolve that uncertainty?

8. Technology – How do I/we control technology that others need?

9. Alliances – What sorts of informal alliances or networks exist at my organization? How do these form? Which key individuals are responsible for their existence? Would they continue to exist in the absence of these individuals?

10. Counterorganizations – Which countervailing forces already exist or could be formed within my particular industry?

11. Symbols – Which symbols, rituals, or other meaningful aspects of culture do I/we have an influence over?

12. Gender – How does gender affect (or not affect) power relations?

13. Structural Factors – What is outside my/our control that nevertheless will play a decisive role in how I/we can act?

14. Preexistent Power – What acts have I/we done that others have valued? How have these acts created an expectation for reciprocity?

Altogether, Morgan’s analysis of resources of power may be most helpful at heterogeneous organizations where stakeholders do not necessarily hold the same values. My questions are: How does each of these play out in your organization? Did Morgan fail to list any? How could these be used for good? How could they be used to interpret interorganizational phenomena as well as politics, broadly speaking?

Thanks for reading. If you want to read more about material and symbolic manifestations of power, Pierre Bourdieu talks about it. Although, I should caution you about reading Bourdieu. He can get overly technical and tiresome. He may also be a Marxist.