Blog

The Implications of Giving Away Power

by Beav on July 18, 2010

I came across this thought from Michael S. Malone in my reading of The Future Arrived Yesterday: The Rise of the Protean Corporation and What It Means for You. Malone is a coauthor of The Virtual Corporation from about 15 years ago.

“You simply cannot hand away power in an organization and expect your job to remain unchanged.” (150)

I loved this because while most have gotten on the bandwagon that a key to effectiveness in leadership today is about giving away power, a premise in some ways of servant leadership, that very few seem to have awareness of what such an approach requires of the leader.

I think it’s pretty common where leaders talk about giving away power and even delegate a lot, but assume that they don’t have to change anything about how they lead or their role. The result often is that others are “empowered” (really delegated) to do a bunch of stuff and shoulder great loads of responsibility, but are not resourced or coached or supported to the degree that would really translate to success.I think it’s great suggestion that all of us need to put some time in assessing what giving away power requires of us as leaders in the bigger picture to see the results we are after – a new generation of leaders and effectiveness in various initiatives and endeavors among others.

What do you think leaders need to know about how they need to change (or what will change) when they start giving away power?

http://www.ki-work.com Michael Wolff

There are two types of power: power over… and power with…With power over, the person that exerts power over another is empowered, the other is disempowered. One's a winner, the other's a lower.With power with, both partieis connect powerfully with each other, both parties are empowered, neither party is disempowered.In an organisational context, it is a shift from command and control, to collaboration and control.In organisations, both modes of power are in operation, although one will be the dominant mode, the the other, subdominant. In emerging organisations that are highly distrubuted and loosely coupled, the dominant mode of power is "power with".The weakness in Malone's argument is that the centre of his Protean Corporation is still predominantly command and control and power over. If the majority of stakeholders are operating in collaboration and control and power with modes, then it is unlikely that the centre will hold. The dominant mode will have become collaboration and control. This has a distinctively different set of values.

http://intensedebate.com/people/BVirtue Beav

Thanks for the comment Michael. I have similar thoughts so far in what I've read of Malone's model though I'm only about 2/3's through at this point. I've found there to be greater value in his work to forecast the impact on web 2.0 and eventually 3.0 upon the nature of relationships within organizations. I think he comes up with some helpful suggestions of how some checks and balances could work but ultimately I would agree with your critique of what would ultimately end up taking place. In general I've best most intrigued on what must change in leadership's self-understanding in light of the changing landscape of communication and technology. Fascinating stuff. Thanks Michael!