Legitimate Power Seen As Key Point For Positive Action Print E-mail
Living - Workplace
Written by TS-Si News Service   
Thursday, 19 June 2008 17:00
Women in a queue.
Chicago, IL, USA. History reminds us that the powerless can rise up and take action. However, research often states that power leads to action and lack of power leads to inhibition. How do we reconcile these different perspectives? New research suggests that the legitimacy of the power relationship is an important determinant of whether power leads to action.
 
A research team led in part by Adam Galinsky of the Kellogg School of Management (Northwestern University) sought to determine at what point the powerless rise up and take action. The findings in in Psychological Science are the first to clarify when, and lend insight into why, power leads to behavioral approach, or action.
 
Illegitimacy Moderates the Effects of Power on Approach. Joris Lammers, Adam D. Galinsky, Ernestine H. Gordijn, and Sabine Otten. Psychological Science 19(6), 558–564. doi: 10.1111 / j.1467-9280.2008.02123.x  [ Download PDF ]
 
Professor Galinsky collaborated with psychologist Joris Lammers of Tilburg University and Ernestine Gordijn and Sabine Otten of the University of Groningen on the study. According to the researchers:
  • When power is acquired or wielded legitimately (e.g., following a fair election or when actions are within authority), the likelihood for a successful cooperative environment is high, with the powerful leading and the powerless following.
     
  • However, if power is borne of illegitimate means (in fixed elections or self-interested actions that exceed authority) this can motivate force and resistance from the powerless.
Adam Galinsky, Morris and Alice Kaplan Professor of Ethics and Decision in Management, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University.“Power activates a person’s behavioral approach system and underlies our motivation to act, while powerlessness activates our behavioral inhibition system to restrict action and risk-taking,” said Galinsky.
 
“But, in illegitimate power scenarios, the powerless are more likely to act without direction in an attempt to change the situation, and the powerful may inhibit their actions for fear of losing their undeserved seat at the top.”
 
In a series of experiments, the research team investigated the effect that legitimate or illegitimate power has on approach behavior.
  • The research shows that when given legitimate power, participants were more likely to take action than those legitimately assigned to a position of powerlessness.
     
  • When power was conceived illegitimately, the powerful no longer took more action and risks than the powerless.
     
  • This increased action also manifested itself in various other ways, such as a higher propensity to haggle when making a purchase.
“These findings demonstrate that how power is conceptualized, acquired and wielded determines its psychological consequences,” conclude the authors. For instannce, in one study, women were assigned to either the position of boss or employee:
  • When women were assigned to either the position of boss or employee legitimately (based on their scores on a leadership test), the powerful took more risks than the powerless.
     
  • But when these women scored highly on the leadership test but were told that the researchers preferred to have a man in the position, the employees took more risks than the women assigned to illegitimate power (they had scored poorly but the researchers assigned them to the boss position because they wanted a women in charge).
     
  • Furthermore, these effects were so robust that even if participants simply thought back about similar events that happened in the past (such as a student becoming president of her fraternity after fixed elections) the same effects occurred.


Illegitimacy Moderates the Effects of Power on Approach. Joris Lammers, Adam D. Galinsky, Ernestine H. Gordijn, and Sabine Otten. Psychological Science 19(6), 558–564. doi: 10.1111 / j.1467-9280.2008.02123.x  [ Download PDF ]

Abstract

A wealth of research has found that power leads to behavioral approach and action. Four experiments demonstrate that this link between power and approach is broken when the power relationship is illegitimate. When power was primed to be legitimate or when power positions were assigned legitimately, the powerful demonstrated more approach than the powerless. However, when power was experienced as illegitimate, the powerless displayed as much approach as, or even more approach than, the powerful. This moderating effect of legitimacy occurred regardless of whether power and legitimacy were manipulated through experiential primes, semantic primes, or role manipulations. It held true for behavioral approach (Experiment 1) and two effects associated with it: the propensity to negotiate (Experiment 2) and risk preferences (Experiments 3 and 4). These findings demonstrate that how power is conceptualized, acquired, and wielded determines its psychological consequences and add insight into not only when but also why power leads to approach.

 
{sidebar id=39 align=left}
 
Comments (0)Add Comment
feedSubscribe to this comment's feed
min/maxShow/Hide comments

Write comment
feedShow/Hide comment form

security code
Write the displayed characters


busy
< Prev   Next >
Last Updated on Monday, 23 June 2008 04:09