This 8 page paper looks at the use of power, the way decisions are made and the divergences within the different approaches to HRM; the scientific approach and the human relations school of thought. The paper applies this to human service organisations and demonstrates the complexities in the use of power in the workplace. The bibliography cites 9 sources.
Name of Research Paper File: TS14_TEhrpower.rtf
Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
organisation, operates. However, it is not only the presence of power, but also the way it is used which will impact on the value added by each employees that is
subjected to that power. In a service based environment the employees is key to success and as such different types of power may be more of less effective for example
power that is based purely on economic reward will be more suited to scientific management environments, where there is a production type environment, whereas other human relations motivation where power
is used to empower employees there may be a more intrinsic motivation. French and Raven describe a power taxonomy which provides a useful foundation for analysis of power within
an organization. This model uses five types of power; reward, coercive, legitimate, expert and referent, along with these there are three potential outcomes where power is used, compliance, commitment or
resistance (French and Raven, 1959). The most effective outcome is commitment, but compliance may also be acceptable for a manager. Legitimate power is seen where a legitimate request is
made. The perception of the legitimacy of the request is also viewed with reference to the perceived authority of the person making the request as well as the actual request
(French and Raven, 1959). This is seen in the different level of management and basic models of motivation, the human relations approach that uses a high trust, less authoritarian approach
than scientific management low trust models, all advocate a more consensual approach (Huczyniski and Buchanan, 1996). Willing compliance is more productive than forced compliance where there may be underlying
or hidden resistance, which indicates the model is one that can be used with different levels of effectiveness and as Lewin had noted, was also impacted on the different pressures