Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1977 Power Base Effectiveness Perceptions: an Empirical Study. Arthur Daniel Sharplin Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Sharplin, Arthur Daniel, "Power Base Effectiveness Perceptions: an Empirical Study. LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses.edu/gradschool_disstheses/3167 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons.
For more information, please contact gradetd@lsu. INFO RM ATIO N TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)".
If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame.
When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation.
Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received. University Microfilms International 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, M ichigan 48106 USA St.
Tyler's Green High Wycombe, Bucks, England HP10 8HR 78-7558 SHARPLIN, Arthur Daniel, 1939- POWER BASE EFFECTIVENESS PERCEPTIONS: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY. The Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, Ph., 1977 Business Administration University Microfilms International, Ann A rbor, M ich iga n 48106 POWER BASE EFFECTIVENESS PERCEPTIONS: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of Management by Arthur Daniel Sharplin B., Memphis State University, 1970 M., Louisiana State University, 1973 December, 1977 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS There are several persons to whom X owe special debts of gratitude in connection with this dissertation. I shall not attempt to be comprehensive and undoubtedly I will fail to mention someone who has made a very real contribution. First of all, I thank God for the small measure of strength and wisdom with which I have been blessed and for the great privilege which is mine to pursue the doctoral degree at this fine university.
Certainly God deserves all honor and gJory now and forever. Yet there are people without whose support I would have faltered and others who have made my study and research so much easier than it might have been. Foremost among these is my precious wife Kathy who has always overestimated me and underestimated her own contributions to my efforts. During more than half of our eighteen years together she has endured what must have seemed an endless stream of educational efforts which sapped my energies and occupied my time.
During these years she has faithfully practiced the most honored profession to which a woman can aspire, that of homemaker, mother, and wife. My children, Dee Dee and Danny, now 16 and 15, should also receive their father's thanks. They have been honest and honorable and have not required the attention children often need. They have been moderate in their demands and have strengthened me by sharing my joys and disappointments.
Lately they have begun to understand and participate intellectually in my work. A special note of thanks goes to my five brothers, one of whom, Leon, died last winter. Tom, especially, has my everlasting gratitude because he gave up his own education in the tenth grade and went to work so that I and the others could continue in school. Larry, two years my junior, has not failed to express his pleasure when I have met success.
He has thus inspired me to a degree that he probably did not recognize. James and Jerry, the two youngest brothers, have stood in for me many times and have kept our businesses profitable while I was unable, because of educational efforts, to be there. James' wife Wanda graciously corrected my terrible grammar and made suggestions on a preliminary draft of this paper. The members of my doctoral committee also have my appreciation.
Edmund Gray, particularly, has guided me through this difficult project with great kindness and wisdom. Dave Smith was willing to devote time and energy to the statistical aspects of the paper even before he was appointed to the committee. Terence Oliva has never failed to make incisive comments on each draft of the dissertation. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.
ii LIST OF T A B L E S. vi LIST OF FIG U RE S. 1 Purpose of this S t u d y. 7 Significance of the P r o b l e m.
8 Organization of the S t u d y. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE. 12 Background and Conceptual Literature. 12 Relevant Empirical Studies.
23 Related Studies from the Periodical Literature. THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK. 39 Power and Management. 42 The Bases of P o w e r.
54 The Research Instrument. 54 iv CHAPTER Page The P r e te s t. 55 Distribution and Collection. 57 H^: Rank Order of Effectiveness.
57 H : Rank Order of Emphasis by S u p e r v i s o r s. 2 61 H^: Power Level and Emphasis on Legitimate and Coercive Power. 62 H^: Situational and Personal Variables Vs. Power Base Effectiveness.
REPORT AND ANALYSIS OF D A T A. 65 The Perceived Rank Order of Effectiveness. 65 The Perceived Rank Order of Emphasis by Supervisors. 69 Supervisor Power Level and Emphasis Upon Coercive and Legitimate Power.
70 Personal and Situational Variables Versus Rank Order of Effectivenessof Power Bases. SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS. 77 Conclusions with Regard to theHypotheses. 80 Some Practical I m p li ca t io n s.
82 Suggestions for Future Research. 114 v LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Su m mary of Power Base Stud i es. Average Rank Order of Effectiveness and Rank S u m s.
Identity of the Firm and Rank Order of Emphasis on Coercive P o w e r. Average Rank Order of Emphasis and Rank S u m s. Supervisor Power Level and Rank Order of Emphasis on Coercive P o w e r. Supervisor Power Level and Rank Order of Emphasis on Legitimate Power.
Significance of Relationships Between Situationaland Personal Variables and Perceptions of Power Base Effectiveness. Background of the Subject and Rank Order of Effectiveness of Referent P o w e r. Tenure with Current Supervisor and Rank Order of Effectiveness of Referent Power. Educational Level of the Subject and Rank Order of Effectiveness of Legitimate Power.
76 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Management of Resources. Management as an InteractiveP r o c e s s. The Power Process in Management.
47 vii ABSTRACT Power defined as "the ability to influence" is receiving increasing attention from management scholars. There is still little research, however, on power in business organizations. This study is concerned with power relationships at the lowest and most populous organizational level in ordinary business organizations. The organizations studied are two industrial concerns, an administrative and clerical group in a major chain store, and a general contracting and steel fabricating firm.
The primary purpose of the study is to obtain an indication of the relative effectiveness of various forms of influence in producing subordinate compliance with supervisor preferences. The forms of influence are distinguished in terms of the five power bases developed by French and Raven in 1959. These power bases are as follows: reward power, coercive power, legitimate power, referent power, and expert power. By means of a self-administered questionnaire subordinates were asked to provide certain personal and situational information and to rank statements designed to correlate with the French and Raven power bases.
Ranking was in terms of the subordinate-perceived effectiveness of each of the bases of supervisor power. Data from 171 respondents resulted in the following statis tically significant rank order of perceived effectiveness: expert power, legitimate power, referent power, reward power, coercive power. viii This result was tested for generality and was found to be fairly consistent across various demographic compositions and regardless of the identity of the firm involved. This result is consonant with those of several other studies reported herein.
There were two secondary conclusions. First, supervisors in the population from which the sample was taken appeared to place most emphasis on expert power and least emphasis on coercive power in influencing their subordinates. Second, of twenty-five possible relationships between personal variables and the perceived effective ness of individual power bases, only three turned out to be significant. CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The term "power" evokes negative thoughts in the minds of many.
To desire power is to be "power mad" or "power hungry," Machiavellian or autocratic. To hold power is to risk corruption. Interest in the concept of power as a critical element in management has been increasing in recent years, though. Undoubtedly, this trend has been enhanced by definitions of power which do not emphasize the negative connotations.
In recent literature, power is generally defined as, "the ability to influence."-*- In a managerial context, this means the ability of one person (e., the manager) or social unit (e., Department A) to influence another (e., a worker or Department B). Thus defined, power is value free and sub ject to open and even favorable discussion. David McClelland, well-known for his work on the achievement motive, said "Since managers are primarily concerned with influencing ^Definitions of power can be found in the following sources: Dow Votaw, "What Do We Believe About Power?" California Management Review 8 (Summer 1966): 74; Peter Bachrach and Morton S. Baratz, "Decisions and Non-decisions: An Analytical Framework," The American Political Science Review 57 (September 1963): 620; David Mechanic, "Sources of Power of Lower Participants in Complex Organizations," Administrative Science Quarterly 7 (December 1962): 351; William H.
Riker, "Some Ambiguities in the Notion of Power," American Political Science Review 58 (June 1964): 347. 1 2 others, it seems obvious that they should be characterized by a high need for power ."^ In a similar vein, Clayton Reeser, writing in a recent management text, stated, "The will for power— a potent drive in many people— is essential for those who aspire to success as 3 managers." Furthermore, two recent presidents of the American Academy of Management, Lyman W. Porter and Herbert G. Hicks, called for increased study of power in their presidential addresses to the Academy.