Organizational Behavior: Perils of Power within Teams
Ever wondered why power in an organization is split hierarchically and not within members of a team? It is believed that within a team, competition for the required resources is essentially what corrupts the social interactions amidst the team members. This explains the reason why power in an organizational hierarchy might work significantly well due to the increased efficiency but power in a team structure causes disparity and issues in mutual respect. The power within teams has a negative impact due to one high power individual enjoying certain benefits while the entire team tends to suffer due to power competition, increased sensitivity, and lowered satisfaction caused due to negative self-comparisons which in turn results in lowered productivity or output.
Teams with high power dispersion essentially have lower outcomes and take into account the detrimental effects of power sensitivity when there is a member with a higher power concentration which results in stronger reactivity to resources. The perception of individuals about their teammates’ power is essentially what causes vicious power struggles because the only option a person has is to either fight or accept. This results in a competition for power which essentially destroys the key attributes of a team which are teamwork and camaraderie, resulting in corruption of social interactions. The belief takes into account both internal factors such as personal threats and external factors such as resource threats to the team.
The conflict perspective of power within teams describes how power accumulated or stagnated around a member of a team increases the inherent pressure on the other members which increases sensitivity and response towards resource allocation. So, this explains how having a high-power person in a team may ensure power struggles but it also suggests that the sensitivity which causes these power struggles essentially requires a trigger. The trigger can be either personal (essentially an inequitable or illegitimate approach towards resource sharing) or external, such as inter-team conflict or shortage which could spark a power competition.
Power can also be used as a sort of shielding mechanism wherein the power existent within the team could be heavily accessed and exploited by the person who has the power concentrated in them. This also explains that even if the power is not exploited by the person to illegitimately access the resources, the speculation about it among the other team members may spark conflicts that arise due to scarcity. This is due to the fact that at any point, non-confrontational behavior in teams may lead to dissatisfaction and pent-up hatred while any confrontation would lead to unnecessary engagement in conversation which may result in a disparity in teams.
Comparisons could also arise due to the presence of a high-power member which sparks personal insecurity and doubt in the power position within the team. Since a low power member faces the issue of not having any necessary decision-making authority present with the high-power member, this could result in positional insecurities and getting put in a vulnerable position due to the possibilities of mistreatment which could prove to be counterproductive. This also encompasses the idea where there could be situations or instances of nepotism instead of the necessary and significant meritocracy leading to teams with lower substantive capabilities. This is because of the factors that high power individuals often end up choosing their teams, and it’s often noted that people always choose people they are comfortable working with which leads to a lack of opportunities for other well-deserving individuals just because they are not favored.
Power may also dilute interpersonal communication within teams as a high power member may often not wish to interact or value the inputs of a low power individual. This is due to the factor that the person can often not be held accountable due to the power he holds. Oftentimes, the narcissism associated with high power positions can also prove to be a trigger in this scenario for this kind of behavior wherein there may be a certain disregard for opinions of the low power individuals.
Also in situations of external threats, the team may not be able to compete or defend themselves in an inter-team scenario due to the existing disparities and lack of understanding between the team members. This can result in lowered productivity which may lead to crippling consequences such as a loss of a significant share of resources to other teams. But it is accounted that a power-oriented approach to organization sparks individual ambitions which essentially improves organizational functioning whereas a lack of this approach results in lower work satisfaction and inspiration.
Perhaps the only way to negate this effect of power within teams could be through a behavioral approach, such as through the introduction of an informal organization. This could reduce the impact of such sensitivity through better interpersonal understanding where there is reduced scope for a protracted conflict or struggle for resources due to a more fair distribution of power created through enhanced team bonding.
To read more on this topic, visit
