Sources of Power of Lower Participants in Complex Organizations

Mechanic, David

doi:10.2307/2390947

Cited by 547 publications

(273 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

258

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The opposite may be equally true: Power creates responsibility, but responsibility can confer power. When responsibility and duty to others is transferred through delegation, Mechanic (1962) suggested that informal social power is often transferred alongside it.…”

Section: Power and Responsibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Witnessing wrongdoing: The effects of observer power on incivility intervention in the workplace

Hershcovis

Neville

Reich

et al. 2017

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Power and Responsibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Witnessing wrongdoing: The effects of observer power on incivility intervention in the workplace

Hershcovis

Neville

Reich

et al. 2017

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…credibility, stature, control over money and rewards (Mechanic, 1962;Crozier, 1964, Hickson et al, 1971Pettigrew, 1973;French and Raven, 1968;Pfeffer and Salancik, 1974). Hardy and Clegg (1996) explain that the list of all possible sources is almost infinite, and without a total theory of contexts, which is impossible, one can never…”

Section: A Brief Overview Of Powermentioning

confidence: 99%

Power dynamics in the long‐term development of employee‐friendly flexible working

Nadeem

Hendry²

2003

Women in Management Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper focuses on the possibilities of the long‐term development of flexible working as a work‐life policy, through understanding the power dynamics between the individual and the organisation. The study presents a framework which summarises the factors influencing the employee‐employer power dynamics, and leads us to the research questions. The methodology involves triangulation in case studies in two organisations based on surveys of representative samples in each organisation (n = 243 and n = 128) and interviews with the management. Findings support the long‐term development of employee‐friendly flexible working. There is a strong desire, and a lack of polarisation of attitudes, among employees for greater flexibility. Certain employee groups with stronger negotiating power have initiated the work‐life debate, but in doing so, they have increased the power of all employees through lowering ideological barriers, and creating knowledge of new possibilities and aspirations. Favourable external pressures and changing business needs also improve the position of employees.

show abstract

“…Negotiation implies that all actors, even in the lower echelons, have power, but, what are the sources of this power? Other studies of health care workers have highlighted how occupational groups are able to control the conditions of their work by ignoring or modifying orders (Roth and Eddy 1969) and/or by controlling knowledge and information (Rosenthal et al 1980, Roth 1963, Mechanic 1962. Usually, lower status participants use these structures when they consider the orders of higher authority to be illegitimate (Dingwall and McIntosh 1978).…”

Section: The Supervisory Nursesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Complexity of role-set is associated with differing degrees of alienation, different approaches to conflict management, different work orientations and differential access to social resources. Mechanic (1962) argues that the sources of power of lower status participants are access to information, persons and instrumentalities. By excluding lower status participants from access to knowledge and to persons different from themselves the structure of the teams limits the power of the direct caregiving nurses and maintains the control of the higher status professionals, particularly the supervisory nurses.…”

Section: The Supervisory Nursesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structure and Meaning in Multidisciplinary Teamwork

Cott

1998

Sociology Health & Illness

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between structure and meaning in multidisciplinary long-term care teams. In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with 26 staff working on five multidisciplinary teams in the same long-term care facility in Metropolitan Toronto. Staff in different structural locations have differing meanings of work and teamwork. Direct caregiving nursing staff have simple role-sets, minimal involvement in team decision-making and ritualistic orientations towards their work and teamwork. Multidisciplinary professionals have complex role-sets, greater involvement in team decision-making and organic orientations towards their work and teamwork. Supervisory nurses are in a contradictory structural location and shared aspects of both orientations to teamwork. The lack of shared meanings results in alienation from work and teamwork for staff in lower structural positions which, in turn, has considerable implications for team functioning.

show abstract

Sources of Power of Lower Participants in Complex Organizations

Cited by 547 publications

References 0 publications

Witnessing wrongdoing: The effects of observer power on incivility intervention in the workplace

Witnessing wrongdoing: The effects of observer power on incivility intervention in the workplace

Power dynamics in the long‐term development of employee‐friendly flexible working

Structure and Meaning in Multidisciplinary Teamwork

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About