Types of Teams

Today we find all kinds of teams in society, and they generally fall into one of two primary groups: permanent teams and temporary teams. Here are some of the common types: 1. Task Force - a temporary team assembled to investigate a specific issue or problem. 2. Problem Solving Team - a temporary team assembled to solve a specific problem. 3. Product Design Team - a temporary team assembled to design a new product or service. 4. Committee - a temporary or permanent group of people assembled to act upon some matter. 5. Work Group - a permanent group of workers who receive direction from a designated leader. 6. Work Team (also called Self-Directed Work Team or Self-Managed Work Team) - an ongoing group of workers who share a common mission who collectively manage their own affairs within

Stages of team Development 1. Orientation (Forming) - This is simply the bringing together of a group of individuals. At this stage, members are:

moderately eager have generally positive expectations have some anxiety about why they are there and what it all means have some anxiety about other members such as who they are and what they are like

During orientation, thework output is generally low as members are focused on defining the goals and task, how to approach it, and what skills are needed. Thelength of this stagewill depend on how clearly the task is defined. Groups with simple tasks will move through orientation quickly, but groups with complex goals and tasks may spend much longer in this stage.

This is an important stage because it serves to clarify the team's mission and bond team members. Teams that pay attention to building the relationships as well as focusing on the task tend to do better than those that skip over relationship building. Teams, after all, are made up of people who must work cooperatively for a successful outcome. 2. Dissatisfaction (Storming) This stage is characterized by:

argument conflict a dip in morale

It results from differences between initial expectations and the reality of the situation as perceived by the members. Members may have varying opinions of what the group was to do and how to accomplish it. Members are also beginning to confront the differences in their personalities and values, a condition that is present anytime strangers meet. Members may feel anger or frustration with the task or with other members or may even resent the presence of formal leadership. Generally, the dissatisfaction stage is relatively short. Some groups, however, may become stuck in this stage and continue to be both demoralized and relatively unproductive. In the worst cases, some groups never emerge from this stage and, if possible, disband in frustration. 3. Resolution (Norming) - This stage in the group's development involves the:

resolving of issues setting up group processes setting of group policies, procedures, and values increasing production

Members are now resolving differences and clarifying the mission and roles. Members areless dissatisfied as in the previous stage because they are now learning more about each other and how they will work together. They are making progress toward their goals. They are developing tools to help them work better together such as a problem solving process, a code of conduct, a set of team values, and measurement indicators.

Member attitudes are characterized by decreasing animosities toward other members; feelings of cohesion, mutual respect, harmony, and trust; and a feeling of pleasure in accomplishing tasks. The work is characterized by slowly increasing production as skills develop. The group is developing into a team. 4. Production (Performing) - The team is accomplishing work effectively. Production is high and the climate is positive. Member attitudes are characterized by positive feelings and eagerness to be part of the team. Members are confident about the outcome, enjoy open communication, exhibit high energy, and disagreement is welcome and handled without emotional conflict. Although work is being accomplished through all the stages, this stage reflects the work being accomplished most effectively. 5. Termination (Adjourning) -In the case of temporary teams such as task forces, design teams, and problem solving teams, a fifth stage reflects the ending of the process. Depending on the team's success in accomplishing its task and how strongly the members have bonded, this stage may reflecteither a sense of loss or relief. When a team ends, time should be spent addressing how it should be done to properly recognize the team's accomplishments. Conclusion As you ponder the problems your team may be experiencing, consider what stage of development the team may be in. It may help you in working toward a solution.

Tasks and Team Building

Almost all team activity falls under two main topics: task accomplishment and team building.Task accomplishment is any activity that accomplishes work and moves the team toward its mission. Team building is any activity that builds and strengthens the team as a team. The experts agree that teams that focus on both sets of activities tend to be stronger and more successful over time. Accomplishment A. B. Team Mission & Vision Team Operating Processes Team Building A. Team Values B. Team Operating Principles

C.

Team Task Roles

C.

Team Building Roles

Task Accomplishment - Team Mission and Vision The driving force behind every team is a clear mission and vision. A mission is the task at handwhat the team doesits purpose for existing. A vision is a mental image of a possible and desirable future state for the team that is better than what now exists. The best teams have members who share a common understanding of the mission and vision, and have great clarity of how their mission and vision support those of the larger organization. Teams that perform poorly are frequently found to lack this common understanding. Task Accomplishment - Team Operating Processes To accomplish tasks effectively and efficiently, good teams develop operating processes. These are agreed-upon ways, such as sequential steps, to perform work, communicate, meet, arrive at decisions, problem-solve, resolve differences, apportion work, schedule activities, and more. For clarity, and to aid understanding, a team operating process is usually written or displayed. Team Task Roles Team task roles are those roles that members assume, either consciously or unconsciously, that move the team forward in accomplishing its tasks and mission. These roles are of vital importance in good team functioning.

1. Initiator - suggests new ideas to the group 2. Information Seeker - seeks clarification of issues in terms of their factual adequacy 3. Opinion Seeker - seeks clarification of the values pertinent to the issue, rather than facts 4. Information Giver - offers facts or other "authoritative" information 5. Opinion Giver - offers beliefs or other value-based ideas 6. Elaborator - spells out suggestions in terms of examples or developed meanings 7. Summarizer - pulls together ideas, concepts, and group decisions to help the group identify where it is in its thinking 8. Coordinator-Integrator - clarifies and integrates relationships between various ideas, suggestions, and people

9. Orienter - defines the position of the group with respect to its goals 10. Disagreer - takes a different point of view, argues against, and implies error in fact or reasoning 11. Evaluator-Critic - subjects the accomplishment of the group to some set of standards. Questions the "practicality," the "logic," the "facts," or the "procedure" 12. Energizer - prods the group to action 13. Procedural Technician - performs routine tasks related to group functioning 14. Recorder - keeps a written record of the groups work

Team Building Team building is any activity that builds and strengthens the team as a team. For teams to function optimally over the long term, building team spirit, enthusiasm, cohesiveness, and camaraderie are vitally important. Unfortunately, these activities have been deemed less significant to their sister activities of task accomplishment, so little emphasis has been placed on team building. The following pages discuss important team building activities necessary for high-performance teams. Click "next" button to continue. Team Values Our values are those beliefs that we possess that help us to make decisions such as right from wrong, good from bad, or normal from not normal. These values come into play each time we interact with others, and are the source of rich discussions or significant conflict.

Our values reflect our teachings from our family, friends, schools, mentors, and media. When we form teams, we must understand that each team member brings a unique value system to the table. These learned insights on life add important information to team discussions, but their differences are frequently the source of conflict. So understanding how values affect team member relationships is a critical piece of the team building puzzle. The Six Team Building Roles Team building roles are those carried out by members, either consciously or unconsciously, that tend to build the team's interpersonal relationships, cohesiveness, and spirit. They are vitally needed roles that play a large part in maintaining team performance over the long term. These roles include:

1. Encourager - praises other members' contributions to the team 2. Harmonizer - mediates differences between other members 3. Compromiser - offers a compromise during disagreement or conflict by yielding position or admitting error 4. Gatekeeper -regulates the flow of communication, particularly in meetings, by encouraging the participation of those less inclined to participate and quieting those who are overly talkative 5. Standard Setter - expresses standards for the team regarding its operation 6. Group Observer - observes and reports back to the team on its group dynamics

WHAT IS SOCIOMETRY?

The word sociometry comes from the Latin socius, meaning social and the Latin metrum, meaning measure. As these roots imply, sociometry is a way of measuring the degree of relatedness among people. Measurement of relatedness can be useful not only in the assessment of behavior within groups, but also for interventions to bring about positive change and for determining the extent of change. For a work group, sociometry can be a powerful tool for reducing conflict and improving communication because it allows the group to see itself objectively and to analyze its own dynamics. It is also a powerful tool for assessing dynamics and development in groups devoted to therapy or training. Jacob Levy Moreno coined the term sociometry and conducted the first long-range sociometric study from 1932-38 at the New York State Training School for Girls in Hudson, New York. As part of this study, Moreno used sociometric techniques to assign residents to various residential cottages. He found that assignments on the basis of sociometry substantially reduced the number of runaways from the facility. (Moreno, 1953, p. 527). Many more sociometric studies have been conducted since, by Moreno and others, in settings including other schools, the military, therapy groups, and business corporations. A useful working definition of sociometry is that it is a methodology for tracking the energy vectors of interpersonal relationships in a group. It shows

the patterns of how individuals associate with each other when acting as a group toward a specified end or goal (Criswell in Moreno, 1960, p. 140). Moreno himself defined sociometry as the mathematical study of psychological properties of populations, the experimental technique of and the results obtained by application of quantitative methods (Moreno, 1953, pp. 15-16). Sociometry is based on the fact that people make choices in interpersonal relationships. Whenever people gather, they make choices-where to sit or stand; choices about who is perceived as friendly and who not, who is central to the group, who is rejected, who is isolated. As Moreno says, Choices are fundamental facts in all ongoing human relations, choices of people and choices of things. It is immaterial whether the motivations are known to the chooser or not; it is immaterial whether [the choices] are inarticulate or highly expressive, whether rational or irrational. They do not require any special justification as long as they are spontaneous and true to the self of the chooser. They are facts of the first existential order. (Moreno, 1953, p. 720).

SOCIOMETRIC CRITERIA Choices are always made on some basis or criterion. The criterion may be subjective, such as an intuitive feeling of liking or disliking a person on first impression. The criterion may be more objective and conscious, such as knowing that a person does or does not have certain skills needed for the group task. When members of a group are asked to choose others in the group based on a specific criteria, everyone in the group can make choices and describe why the choices were made. From these choices a description emerges of the networks inside the group. A drawing, like a map, of those networks is called a sociogram. The data for the sociogram may also be displayed as a table or matrix of each persons choices. Such a table is called a sociomatrix.

What makes a good team leader? The way a team is led will have a major impact upon the success or otherwise of the team. When asked what they want from a team leader, team members will often identify several values they would want a leader to hold : commitment to people as well as task is the first key element. desire to support and serve the team as well as lead from the front. enthusiasm, energy, inspiration and sufficient expertise. willingness to shoulder responsibility rather than pass the buck ability to make the team come together to achieve more than a group of individuals.

Commitment to people Most team members are primarily concerned about relationship and about being valued as a team member, before they are concerned about the task that the team is to undertake. Feeling secure in a group environment is an important pre-requisite before individual contribution. The good team leader is able to spend time building the team, not only when the team starts off, but when a newcomer joins an existing team. Desire to Support and Serve Whilst team members want to see the ability to lead from the front, they are also strongly motivated by the ability to lead from the back! Servant leadership from the team leader is vital if team members are in turn, to want to serve each other. This is a particularly key topic for Christian leaders. There is a balance to be struck between a willingness to take on any chores that need to be done by the team, and taking an inappropriate balance of roles so that the leadership is diminished. Enthusiasm, Energy, Inspiration and Expertise Unsurprisingly team members want to be inspired and motivated by team leadership which has the energy and enthusiasm to fire them up. However, they also want to feel secure that the team leader has themselves, or has access to, the necessary expertise to lead the team in the right direction. The leader doesn't have to be the most knowledgeable of the subject at hand, but if they are not, they must encourage the input of others. Willingness to shoulder responsibility. Team leaders are tested under pressure. When challenges arise, as they inevitably will, the leader will need to take responsibility to ensure that they are fixed as far as possible and that the team is strengthened as a result. This does not mean that the leader should admit that issues beyond their control are in any way their fault, (although they should be honest in admitting their mistakes), but rather adopt a proactive stance to ensure the team is not deflected from its course. Ability to achieve more as a team. Teams only become a team once there is some synergy within the group ie the team process adds value to that which a disparate group of individuals would achieve undirected. This is likely to require the team leader to explore leadership models

that share the leadership role within the team, to have an understanding of different individuals team roles, strengths and gifts, establish a mutual accountability within the team, and to create a team environment which is open, fun and allows healthy and productive discussion.

Leadership Styles
Leadership style is the manner and approach of providing direction, implementing plans, and motivating people. Kurt Lewin (1939) led a group of researchers to identify different styles of leadership. This early study has been very influential and established three major leadership styles. The three major styles of leadership are (U.S. Army Handbook, 1973):
o o o
Authoritarian or autocratic Participative or democratic Delegative or Free Reign

Although good leaders use all three styles, with one of them normally dominant, bad leaders tend to stick with one style.

Authoritarian (autocratic)

I want both of you to. . .

This style is used when leaders tell their employees what they want done and how they want it accomplished, without getting the advice of their followers. Some of the appropriate conditions to use it is when you have all the information to solve the problem, you are short on time, and your employees are well motivated. Some people tend to think of this style as a vehicle for yelling, using demeaning language, and leading by threats and abusing their power. This is not the authoritarian style, rather it is

an abusive, unprofessional style called bossing people around. It has no place in a leader's repertoire. The authoritarian style should normally only be used on rare occasions. If you have the time and want to gain more commitment and motivation from your employees, then you should use the participative style.

Participative (democratic)

Let's work together to solve this. . .

This style involves the leader including one or more employees in the decision making process (determining what to do and how to do it). However, the leader maintains the final decision making authority. Using this style is not a sign of weakness, rather it is a sign of strength that your employees will respect. This is normally used when you have part of the information, and your employees have other parts. Note that a leader is not expected to know everything this is why you employ knowledgeable and skillful employees. Using this style is of mutual benefit it allows them to become part of the team and allows you to make better decisions.

Delegative (free reign)

You two take care of the problem while I go. . .

In this style, the leader allows the employees to make the decisions. However, the leader is still responsible for the decisions that are made. This is used when employees are able to analyze the situation and determine what needs to be done and how to do it. You cannot do everything! You must set priorities and delegate certain tasks. This is not a style to use so that you can blame others when things go wrong, rather this is a style to be used when you fully trust and confidence in the people below you. Do not be afraid to use it, however, use it wisely! NOTE: This is also known as laissez faire (or laisser faire), which is the noninterference in the affairs of others. [French : laissez, second person pl. imperative of laisser, to let, allow + faire, to do.]

Forces

A good leader uses all three styles, depending on what forces are involved between the followers, the leader, and the situation. Some examples include:
o Using an authoritarian style on a new employee who is just learning the job. The leader is competent and a good coach. The employee is motivated to learn a new skill. The situation is a new environment for the employee. o Using a participative style with a team of workers who know their job. The leader knows the problem, but does not have all the information. The employees know their jobs and want to become part of the team. o Using a delegative style with a worker who knows more about the job than you. You cannot do everything and the employee needs to take ownership of her job! In addition, this allows you to be at other places, doing other things. o Using all three: Telling your employees that a procedure is not working correctly and a new one must be established (authoritarian). Asking for their ideas and

input on creating a new procedure (participative). Delegating tasks in order to implement the new procedure (delegative). Forces that influence the style to be used included: o o o o o o o o How much time is available. Are relationships based on respect and trust or on disrespect? Who has the information you, your employees, or both? How well your employees are trained and how well you know the task. Internal conflicts. Stress levels. Type of task. Is it structured, unstructured, complicated, or simple? Laws or established procedures such as OSHA or training plans.

Positive and Negative Approaches

There is a difference in ways leaders approach their employee. Positive leaders use rewards, such as education, independence, etc. to motivate employees. While negative employers emphasize penalties. While the negative approach has a place in a leader's repertoire of tools, it must be used carefully due to its high cost on the human spirit. Negative leaders act domineering and superior with people. They believe the only way to get things done is through penalties, such as loss of job, days off without pay, reprimanding employees in front of others, etc. They believe their authority is increased by frightening everyone into higher levels of productivity. Yet what always happens when this approach is used wrongly is that morale falls; which of course leads to lower productivity. Also note that most leaders do not strictly use one or another, but are somewhere on a continuum ranging from extremely positive to extremely negative. People who continuously work out of the negative are bosses while those who primarily work out of the positive are considered real leaders.

Use of Consideration and Structure

Two other approaches that leaders use are: Consideration (employee orientation) leaders are concerned about the human needs of their employees. They build teamwork, help employees with their problems, and provide psychological support. Structure (task orientation) leaders believe that they get results by consistently keeping people busy and urging them to produce. There is evidence that leaders who are considerate in their leadership style are higher performers and are more satisfied with their job (Schriesheim, 1982).

Also notice that consideration and structure are independent of each other, thus they should not be viewed on opposite ends of a continuum. For example, a leader who becomes more considerate, does not necessarily mean that she has become less structured.

Conflict Management Techniques

Conflict situations are an important aspect of the workplace. A conflict is a situation when the interests, needs, goals or values of involved parties interfere with one another. A conflict is a common phenomenon in the workplace. Different stakeholders may have different priorities; conflicts may involve team members, departments, projects, organization and client, boss and subordinate, organization needs vs. personal needs. Often, a conflict is a result of perception. Is conflict a bad thing? Not necessarily. Often, a conflict presents opportunities for improvement. Therefore, it is important to understand (and apply) various conflict resolution techniques.

Forcing
Also known as competing. An individual firmly pursues his or her own concerns despite the resistance of the other person. This may involve pushing one viewpoint at the expense of another or maintaining firm resistance to another persons actions. Examples of when forcing may be appropriate
In certain situations when all other, less forceful methods, dont work or are ineffective When you need to stand up for your own rights, resist aggression and pressure When a quick resolution is required and using force is justified (e.g. in a lifethreatening situation, to stop an aggression) As a last resort to resolve a long-lasting conflict

Possible advantages of forcing:

May provide a quick resolution to a conflict Increases self-esteem and draws respect when firm resistance or actions were a response to an aggression or hostility

Some caveats of forcing:

May negatively affect your relationship with the opponent in the long run May cause the opponent to react in the same way, even if the opponent did not intend to be forceful originally Cannot take advantage of the strong sides of the other sides position Taking this approach may require a lot of energy and be exhausting to some individuals

Win-Win (Collaborating)
Also known as problem confronting or problem solving. Collaboration involves an attempt to work with the other person to find a win-win solution to the problem in hand - the one that most satisfies the concerns of both parties. The win-win approach sees conflict resolution as an opportunity to come to a mutually beneficial result. It includes identifying the underlying

concerns of the opponents and finding an alternative which meets each party's concerns. Examples of when collaborating may be appropriate:
When consensus and commitment of other parties is important In a collaborative environment When it is required to address the interests of multiple stakeholders When a high level of trust is present When a long-term relationship is important When you need to work through hard feelings, animosity, etc When you don't want to have full responsibility

Possible advantages of collaborating:

Leads to solving the actual problem Leads to a win-win outcome Reinforces mutual trust and respect Builds a foundation for effective collaboration in the future Shared responsibility of the outcome You earn the reputation of a good negotiator For parties involved, the outcome of the conflict resolution is less stressful (however, the process of finding and establishing a win-win solution may be very involed see the caveats below)

Some caveats of collaborating:

Requires a commitment from all parties to look for a mutually acceptable solution May require more effort and more time than some other methods. A win-win solution may not be evident For the same reason, collaborating may not be practical when timing is crucial and a quick solution or fast response is required Once one or more parties lose their trust in an opponent, the relationship falls back to other methods of conflict resolution. Therefore, all involved parties must continue collaborative efforts to maintain a collaborative relationship

Compromising
Compromising looks for an expedient and mutually acceptable solution which partially satisfies both parties. Examples of when compromise may be appropriate:
When the goals are moderately important and not worth the use of more assertive or more involving approaches, such as forcing or collaborating To reach temporary settlement on complex issues To reach expedient solutions on important issues As a first step when the involved parties do not know each other well or havent yet developed a high level of mutual trust When collaboration or forcing do not work

Possible advantages of compromise:

Faster issue resolution. Compromising may be more practical when time is a

factor Can provide a temporary solution while still looking for a win-win solution Lowers the levels of tension and stress resulting from the conflict

Some caveats of using compromise:

May result in a situation when both parties are not satisfied with the outcome (a lose-lose situation) Does not contribute to building trust in the long run May require close monitoring and control to ensure the agreements are met

Withdrawing
Also known as avoiding. This is when a person does not pursue her/his own concerns or those of the opponent. He/she does not address the conflict, sidesteps, postpones or simply withdraws. Examples of when withdrawing may be appropriate:
When the issue is trivial and not worth the effort When more important issues are pressing, and you don't have time to deal with it In situations where postponing the response is beneficial to you, for example When it is not the right time or place to confront the issue When you need time to think and collect information before you act (e.g. if you are unprepared or taken by surprise) When you see no chance of getting your concerns met or you would have to put forth unreasonable efforts When you would have to deal with ostility When you are unable to handle the conflict (e.g. if you are too emotionally involved or others can handle it better)

Possible advantages of withdrawing:

When the opponent is forcing / attempts aggression, you may choose to withdraw and postpone your response until you are in a more favourable circumstance for you to push back Withdrawing is a low stress approach when the conflict is short Gives the ability/time to focus on more important or more urgent issues instead Gives you time to better prepare and collect information before you act

Some caveats of withdrawing:

May lead to weakening or losing your position; not acting may be interpreted as an agreement. Using withdrawing strategies without negatively affecting your own position requires certain skill and experience When multiple parties are involved, withdrawing may negatively affect your relationship with a party that expects your action

Smoothing
Also known as accommodating. Smoothing is accommodating the concerns of other people

first of all, rather than one's own concerns. Examples of when smoothing may be appropriate:
When it is important to provide a temporary relief from the conflict or buy time until you are in a better position to respond/push back When the issue is not as important to you as it is to the other person When you accept that you are wrong When you have no choice or when continued competition would be detrimental

Possible advantages of smoothing:

In some cases smoothing will help to protect more important interests while giving up on some less important ones Gives an opportunity to reassess the situation from a different angle

Some caveats of smoothing:

There is a risk to be abused, i.e. the opponent may constantly try to take advantage of your tendency toward smoothing/accommodating. Therefore it is important to keep the right balance and this requires some skill. May negatively affect your confidence in your ability to respond to an aggressive opponent It makes it more difficult to transition to a win-win solution in the future Some of your supporters may not like your smoothing response and be turned off

Power
Kenneth E. Boulding, Three Faces of Power, (Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications, 1989).

Boulding describes the nature of power as a social structure. He describes the objects and pathologies of power. Boulding begins with the simple definition of power as the ability to get what one wants. From there he breaks the notion of power down into three general categories, based on the consequences of the exercise of power. Destructive power is the power to destroy. Threats are a typical exercise of destructive power, and the military is an example of an institution organized around destructive power. Productive power is the power to make and create. Exchange and trade are typical productive behaviors, and economics is an organized form of productive power. Integrative power is the power to create relationships and bring people together. Relationships of love and respect rest on integrative power, and social groups use integrative power to gain members and maintain their loyalty. Boulding cautions that each type of power has positive and negative uses. For instance, destructive power is used positively when a doctor destroys a tumor. He also observes that while one type of power may predominate in some behaviors or organizations, generally there are elements of each type present.

Boulding addresses the distribution of power by examining the social structures of power. He argues that power in groups tends to be hierarchical. Due to human limitations on the ability to communicate, decision-making roles develop. Instructions flow down the hierarchy, while information flows up. Within a hierarchical structure, power is limited by available knowledge. Boulding also argues that "hierarchical power cannot survive unless it can be legitimated. Authority in some sense is always granted from below."[p. 44] Examples of structures of power include the institution of property, and the nation-state. Power structures generally rest on a complex mix of the three types of power. Boulding says that the role of integrative power in maintaining structures is both the most important, and the least recognized or understood. Boulding considers three classes of objects of power: material objects, non-human animals and other living creatures, and persons. The exercise of power over humans is greatly complicated by persons' independent wills. Generally the choice of which type of power to use will depend in part on the nature of the object. You cannot bribe a tree to fall; only destructive power will do. Occasionally power will be exercised for its own sake, without any object. Sometimes the object of an exercise of one type of power is to increase other one's ability to exercise other types of power. The old saying that "power corrupts" recognizes the potential for some exercises of power to become pathological. Boulding notes however that it is not merely power which may be corrupting, but also influence, and even powerlessness. Boulding argues that the primary source of pathology is an unrealistic image of one's power, and suggests possible causes of such unrealistic images. Each type of power has its own pathological forms. An example of pathology is the use of national power simply to maintain a state's position in the international "pecking order." Civil wars have a high potential to become pathological. Pathological concentrations of power can develop when power attracts more power, or when "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer." Conflicts, which are always at root about distributions of power, can become pathological when third-parties who do not bear the costs of the conflict benefit from it. Personal Power The next four chapters examine the destructive, economic and integrative types of personal power. Personal power refers to the power wielded by an individual. Generally destructive power is the easiest form of power for an individual to use. Because it is the easiest to use, people often exercise destructive power to counter their feelings of powerless. Defensive power can be used in self-defense, or it can be used to threaten others. Defensive power plays a role in maintaining an integrated society. The threat of social exclusion helps keep people obedient to social norms. Personal destructive power plays a large role in certain political systems, such as dictatorships. Just as tyrants rule by physical threat, some religious leaders may control their adherents by the use of spiritual threats. The greatest exercise of personal destructive power is when one person has the power to declare war. One of the

dangers of destructive power is that when individuals (or organizations) have specialized in destructive power, they often feels compelled to use that power, lest it erode from disuse. People will create opportunities, or "pick a fight," in order to use their destructive abilities. Personal economic power is most easily measured by the amount of money an individual controls, although there are factors which complicate this measurement. One is the difficulty in distinguishing clearly between the economic power of an individual and a household. Another is the distinction between income, wealth, and consumption. One element of economic power which cannot be easily measured by money is the value of a person's physical and mental abilities. Personal economic power will depend in part upon the inheritance practices in the larger society, and partly upon an individual's skill and luck in increasing their original stake. There seems to be a limit to the ability of economic power to improve an individual's quality of life, that is, there seems to be a point at which further riches will not substantially improve an individual's life. Boulding says that integrative power is both the most difficult to define and yet potentially the most significant form of power. For example, both destructive and economic power must be legitimate to be fully effective, and legitimacy is an aspect of integrative power. Jesus, Muhammad and the Buddha are exemplars of integrative power; none of the three had great destructive or economic power. The most basic form of integrative power is love, in the widest sense. And love is most powerful when it is reciprocated. Boulding sees respect as another example of integrative power at work. Respect is then closely related to legitimacy. The creation and maintenance of individuals' identities depends on the integrative system in a society. Individuals gain their particular identities by gaining the respect and acknowledgment of others. Personal integrative power relies on the complex social network of integrative power, which in turn depends on a network of communication and learning. The degree of integrative power possible is higher in societies in which learning is open-ended. Boulding discusses the paradoxical integrative power of the weak. An individuals' weakness and neediness creates a demand on the stronger to help and support the weak. Having a network of friends tends to both increase personal integrative power, and to lead to further friendships, and so further gains in integrative power. Boulding concludes this section with a discussion of the dynamics of the three types of personal power over the course of an individual's life. Organizational Power The next set of chapters examines destructive, economic and integrative power in organizations. Destructive power plays two main roles in society. Destruction may be the first stage in a productive process, such as clearing land for farming. Or destructive power may by used to make and carry out threats. The military is a prime example of an organization of destructive power for this second role. Boulding notes that while destructive power is needed to make threats, threats are most effective when they are made in an

integrative context which legitimates the demand for submission. Integrative power also plays a crucial role in maintaining the sense of community and commitment needed to mobilize armies and motivate soldiers. Boulding questions the view that destructive power can be used defensively, as deterrence, to maintain peace. He argues that such strategies have resulted in an escalating spiral of threats and counter-threats. As with personal destructive power, the existence of organized destructive power encourages it use. Creating and maintaining organizations of destruction has a high cultural and economic cost. Drawing on historical cases, Boulding argues many nations have had periods of cultural and economic development after being defeated in war, thus questioning the benefit of maintaining a strong military for defense. While military organizations point out their beneficial economic side-effects, such as employment or technical developments, Boulding points out that economic benefits would almost certainly be greater had the resources devoted to the military been directed directly toward economic development. Boulding also suggests that, very often, "an increase in military power diminishes the personal power of private citizens."[p. 154] Economic power is a factor in all organizations, because all organizations need resources to exist. Governments, for example, consume labor and generate revenues by taxation. However economic power is central to business and corporate organizations, which use this power to generate profits. Boulding reviews, in general terms, several economic theories of the origins of profit, and the relation between profits, interest, and unemployment. He concludes that "economic power in organizations is strangely fragile, unpredictable, and to a surprising extent in the control of quite unconscious processes in society, over which no single person or group has any real control or power."[p. 163] There are a few general guidelines for increasing an organization's economic power. Companies can sell more stock. They can save. They can grow and innovate. Business monopolies increase economic power, but can be difficult to maintain. Boulding also considers the economic power of the household organization, and of the family. Since all organizations have some economic component, Boulding describes integrative organizations as those whose primary purpose is not the pursuit of profit. "A major source of the integrative power of a community or organization is the degree to which the personal identity of the members involved is bound up with their perception of the identity of the community or organization as a whole."[p. 173] Integrative power generally plays a large role in maintaining religious organizations, for example. When coupled with the diversity of human organizations, strong identification with groups can lead to conflicts. Sometimes threat power is used to enforce identification with the group. These threats can range from police action, to divine retribution, and it is this combination of integrative and threat power which accounts for the enduring influence of nations and religions. In participatory political systems, however, promises tend to be more effective than threats alone. Boulding also

argues that integrative power, in the form of an expanded sense of community, is the key to creating and expanding peace. The dynamics of power over the life of an organization are complex and variable. Boulding offers some general observations on the shifts in power in nation states, business organizations, integrative organizations, political parties and social groups. Power in Evolution The final chapters discuss the role of power in biological evolution and in social evolution. Boulding concludes this work with a discussion of how a better understanding of power can help shape a better future. Boulding identifies three types of evolution: physical and chemical, biological, and social. He notes that power in broadest sense is simply the potential for change. In this sense, power is clearly involved in all three types of evolution. The development of life was also a great increase in power, since living organisms are able to change in response to their environment, and even to change their environment. Boulding argues that much of biological evolution is cooperative, in the sense that species are mutually dependent. Even predator and prey species are mutually dependent for their survival. And while biological evolution involves destruction, the use of threats in biological evolution is virtually nonexistent. Boulding identifies cooperation as an unconscious form of integrative power. In social cooperation the use of integrative power becomes conscious. Boulding goes on to consider the role of power in past human social evolution. He argues that "the increase in the productive and integrative powers of the human race have been much more significant than the increase in its destructive powers, at least up to the present century."[p. 226] Threats played very little role in humanity's early development. Threats played a larger role after the development of agriculture. Organized warfare came into existence relatively recently, with the rise of civilization. And Boulding argues that, despite historians' fascination with war and strife, "at least 90 percent of human activity even in the age of civilization was peaceful--plowing, sowing, and reaping, cooking, weaving, and building, making pottery and tools, eating, feasting, singing, worshiping, dancing, having and raising children, and so on."[p. 223] Given this analysis of past human development, Boulding asks what present uses of power would allow humanity to avoid nuclear annihilation or environmental disaster, and lead to a better future. Although the problem is a complex one, Boulding identifies some of the factors which must be considered in forming an answer. Key to finding a better future, he concludes, is a better understanding of the types, uses and dynamics of power.

There are some five properties of social groups: status, norms, role, socialization and power. Such powers include the following: reward power, coercive power, expert power, legitimate power, and referent power. In addition to social group situations, these powers are used by advertisers to influence consumers. Five Group Powers Reward Power : The perception that you will be rewarded by a group or other environmental influence for certain behavior. The more valuable the reward the greater the power. Rewards can include intangible things such as praise or honors as well as money, goods and services.

Advertisers frequently use reward power to influence consumers by implying love , happiness, popularity, and success will be yours for using their product. Rewards are used in direct selling of products by companies such as Amway, Magic Chef and Tupperware. Their sales people hold sales rallies and receive large rewards, swimming pools and motor homes, for promoting their products.

Coercive Power : This power influences behavior with fear or the withholding of rewards. This is seldom physical punishment, but subtle psychological detriment or loss of reward.

Coercion is intended to frighten or scare the consumer by showing the unfortunate results that can occur if the item is not purchased, such as being shunned for bad breath or dandruff. However, if it is demonstrated that buying the product will make the problem go away, it is reward power. Coercion is unpleasant. People don't like viewing disagreeable things and will turn-off. Coercive ads that do not alienate the consumer are difficult to design, but good ones are very successful. Remember the egg frying in a pan and the caption, "Your Brain On Drugs" .

Legitimate Power : Group members' perception that the group has the legitimate right to influence them. Expressions such as "should", "ought to", "must", give legitimacy to expected behavior from a group such as family/parents, teachers, or religious organizations.

Advertisers appeal to the consumers moral values such as ads by charities, non-profit organizations, alumni associations, Salvation Army and Save the Children. Advertisers also use the organizations that represent authority and knowledge to validate products such as AMA for medicines, AAA for car service, or ADA for diets.

Expert Power : People accept the influence of individuals who are known experts recognized for their expertise. Teachers are subject experts and their students accept their instruction.

Salespeople frequently demonstrate their knowledge of the products they sell to customers. The power is strongest if the expert is not paid to promote the product, but is unbiased. Fictious experts are effective in spite of being supported by the producer, such as Mr. Clean, Betty Crocker, etc. This is related to Ads that provide evidence of tests and lists of ingredients, and performance data which use "information" as expert power.

Referent Power : An individual's identification with a group grows as s/he associates more with that group. The stronger the relationship the greater the influence of the group and certain members of the group on the individual. If the individual maintains the identification with the group, the greater its referent power.

Advertisements show ordinary people, like you and me, using the same product brand as popular role models or heroes. Movie and sports stars are frequently used for their referent power. Status symbols are often recommended by celebrities.

The power to empower

Power is a significant component of organizational life. Its acquisition, use, and abuse occupy a great deal of time among people working together. The ongoing legal battle between healthcare management and labor unions over proposed National Labor Relations Board rules, for instance, is essentially a struggle over the power to control working conditions, wages, benefits, and more. Many managers do not view themselves in terms of their power. For them, power carries a negative connotation. All managers, however, posses some degree of power by virtue of the positions they hold in their organizations. What they do with this hierarchical form of power will make the difference between successful and unsuccessful managers in the 1990s.

Healthcare managers who use their power to dominate and control people will fail. Those who use their power to empower others will achieve success personally and help their institutions to survive and thrive. Successful managers empower their employees in a number of ways. At a minimum, empowering managers do the following: Trust people. Empowering employees requires a fundamental belief that people want to do the right thing on the job. Strong managers believe that people are not lazy and constantly looking for ways to take advantage of management. In short, managers must trust people to empower them. Let go. Most managers were promoted because of their abilities and effort as line employees. Letting go of the tasks and activities that made them successful requires additional effort. But that is precisely what must be done to empower others. A manager must give others the opportunity to be successful. This requires more than simply following the rules of delegation. Letting go requires a commitment to another's success. Accept mistakes. It has become a cliche to say that employees must be allowed to make mistakes and that they learn from those errors. Managers who empower others take the fear out of the workplace by not punishing employees who take risks and make mistakes. The healthcare industry needs innovations and solutions from its workers. Mistakes are a natural by-product of innovative, changing organizations. Avoid dependency. Management's job is to assist or serve those doing the work, facilitating their success. Empowering managers take care not to cross the line with their assistance and unwittingly make employees dependent on them. Responding to requests for help rather than imposing help is a good rule to follow. Talk straight. Empowering others demands honest communication. Frequent and frank discussions about employee performance are critical to the employee's development. To gloss over performance problems or fail to praise effective performance ultimately demotivates and debilitates employees. Empowering managers seize opportunities to engage in performance related conversations with employees. Become vulnerable. Managers who use their power to empower others accept that their success largely depends on those who report to them. They learn to live with the uncertainty and anxiety coming with vulnerable situations. In becoming vulnerable, managers transfer or share power with their employees. This is the ultimate expression of true participative management and empowerment.

Power is a dirty word to many. Nevertheless, it is integral to management and the sociology of organizations. Power can be used in negative and positive ways. Using it to empower others is most effective for the organization, management, and employees. Interestingly, managers who use their power to empower others usually become more powerful in the process and end up emerging as leaders in their organizations. And organizations led by empowering managers are more apt to meet with success in the 1990s.