Joining Together: Group Theory and Group Skills USING POWER Joining Together: Group Theory and Group Skills 11th Edition David W. Johnson Frank P. Johnson

Nature Of Power Constructive Vs. Destructive Uses Of Power Two Views Of Power: Dynamic Interdependence View Of Power Trait-Factor View Of Power Bases Of Power Unequal Power High Power Members Low Power Members Indirect Power: Group Norms Group Mind

Power Power: Capacity To Affect Outcomes Of Oneself, Others, Environment Direct: In Interpersonal, Intergroup Interaction Indirect: Through Group Norms, Values, Traditions Constructive Vs. Destructive Use Of Power: Constructive: Increases Group Effectiveness, Benefits All Group Members, Encouraged By All Group Members Destructive: Increases Self-Benefit, Forces Others To Do Something They Do Not Wish To Do Two Major Theories: Dynamic-Interdependence: Who Influences Whom Changes Constantly As Individuals Strive To Achieve Mutual Goals Trait Factor: Disposition To Exert Power Over Other People

What is Power? A quality of a person? Of a position? Of a place? Of a situation? Of a relationship? Can be constructive or destructive (enhances or interferes with the effectiveness of group work) Dominant view: power is negative and destructive. “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely” (Lord Acton) Dynamic-Interdependence View of Power: positive and essential for mutual enhancement Imposed on Others Invited by Others Benefits Self Most destructive Mislead, swindled, altruism Benefits Others Paternalism Most constructive

The Dynamic-Interdependence View of Power Who Influences Whom To What Degree Changes Constantly As Members Strive To Achieve The Group’s Goals. Power Exists In Relationships. Power Is: Inevitable Essential Dynamic Distributed Context Is Decisive Competitive Cooperative

Power in Competitive Context Defined as: successful influence that overcomes the other’s unwillingness to perform the desired behavior. Currently dominating approach among social scientists and power holders Power is viewed as: A fixed-pie resource A zero-sum resource A commodity to be accumulated Acting in a unidirectional way Inherently coercive Limits other uses of power (based on trust and power sharing) Evokes reactance

Power in Cooperative Context Defined as: successful influence used to maximize joint benefits, and enhance the group’s effectiveness Power is viewed as Expandable To be shared Acting in bidirectional way Inherently noncoercive Largely ignored in the literature Research on people with cooperative cognitive orientation to power Inducibility

Mobilizing Power to Achieve Goals Determine your goals Determine your relevant resources Determine your needed coalitions Negotiate mutual support contracts Implement the contracts

The Trait-Factor Approach to Power Static Atomistic Historical Inductive Power and persuasion Aristotle Yale Attitude Change program, headed by Carl Hovland Social Dominance Theory

The Bases of Power Social exchange theory: power is based on the control of valuable resources. The type of resource  basis for power (French & Raven, 1959) Reward power Coercive power Legitimate power Referent power Expert power Informational power

Power and Problem Solving Groups are more effective at solving problems when Power is relatively balanced among its members Power is based upon competence, expertise, and information

High Power Members Happy with the situation Hard to move toward cooperation, conciliation, and compromise Two strategies to keep the status quo: Institute rules and norms to legitimize their power (“might-is-right”) Deter low-power group members from rocking the boat by applying carrot and stick method (“if-only-you-would-behave-neither-of-us-would-go-through-this-suffering”) The metamorphic effects of high power Status and power Power stereotyping theory Oppression

High Power Strategies To Justify Status Quo L = Legitimize Own Privileges And Intimidate Low-Power Individuals E = Self-Enhancement A = Attribute Low-Power People’s Success To Own Control D = Devalue Low-Power Individuals And Their Contributions

Low Power Members Build Coalitions Educate And Morally Persuade Bring High-Power Group Members To Negotiating Table: Use Existing Legal Procedures To Pressure For Change Use Obstruction Or Harassment To Increase High-Power Members’ Costs Terrorism Metamorphic Effects Of Low-Power Relationships Among Low-Power Groups Revenge

Low-Power Strategies To Change Status Quo C = Cooperative, Compliant, Yielding To High- Power Members O = Attribution Of Causes Of Group Successes To Own Efforts R = Resistance, Psychological Reactance, Obstruction Of High-Power Members’ Efforts E = Negative Evaluations Of High-Power Members

Group Norms Conforming To Group Norms: Conformity: Changes In Behavior Resulting From Group Influences Compliance: Behavioral Change Without Internal Acceptance Implementing Group Norms

The Group Mind Collective Behavior: Spontaneously Perform Atypical Actions Such As Riots Or Mass Hysteria Group Mind: In Mob Individuals Act Impulsively Unreasonably, Extreme Ways Anonymity: People Feel Less Responsible For Actions Contagion: Emotion States Spreads From Person To Person Convergence Theory: People With Compatible Motivations Release Previously Controlled Behaviors Emergent Norm Theory: Heterogeneous Individuals Adhere To Current Norms Deindividuation: State Of Relative Anonymity, Members Do Not Feel Identifiable

Summary Power Dynamic Interdependence Approach Trait Factor Approach Bases Of Power Unequal Power High-Power Members Low-Power Members Indirect Use Of Power Norms Group Mind