How do power relations affect organisational development use case Essay

How do force relations affect organisational development use deterrent example study - Essay ExamplePower, when handled judiciously, is a positive aspect of a social dynamic that creates the core motivating center from which true innovation and execution can be reached. Power organizes and keeps a group within limits so that it does not branch out into tangents that are counterproductive to focused goals. Foucault rejected the inclination that authority was an object, but determined that it is an aspect of the negotiation that people make with each other in trying to find their identity. Organisations are a put in which individuals leave alone develop concepts of who they are within that social organisation, lending that identity to the greater overall identity of the self. Searle, on the other hand, argues that social reality exists by and large because of the agreement of the people who create it (McNiff and Whitehead 2000, p. 104). Therefore, the power relations that are c reated within an organisation exist in order to create the social structure in which the individual finds a sense of their purpose within that organisation. Whichever side of the power that a person finds themselves within, the structure sets the stage from which the actions of the social groups find a platform. In examining the concept of power relations in organisations, it is first important to define power and the way in which power influences. Once power is understood, it is inseparable to understand power relations in order to understand how they fit into organisational development. Looking at the ways in which power is used through focus approaches will help to further define the ways in which power relations are relevant to the organisation of a business. The ways in which power is developed and through the methods of management it is used will define the ability for teams and team members to successfully accomplish tasks towards company goals. Defining Power The concept o f power, small-arm seemingly simple, is actually a complex notion as observed through social science. Max Weber defined power as the jeopardize of a man or number of men to realize their knowledge will in a communal action even against the resistance of others who are participating in the act (Fletcher 2006, p. 37). The representation defines power as the ability to overcome opposition to what is desired by ones self or by ones social group. Furthermore, it suggests that people will have clearly defined goals and those goals can come into conflict with one another (Fletcher 2006, p. 37). Sociologist Stephen Lukes suggests that power manifests in three different forms. Each of those manifestations operates at a different level of contestation. The first level is one-dimensional power which occurs when one group gains the dictatorial power to impose their will over another group. An example of this can be seen when a coalition gets higher wages and benefits when bargaining with a corporation. The union has exerted one-dimensional power over the corporation. Two dimensional power can be seen when one group controls the level of advancement that can be make by another group. In this scenario, not only has the group found a way to impose their desires onto another group, it will prevent it from pursuing their own goals (Fletcher 2006, p. 37). The third type of power is three-dimensional power. This type of power is the most effective power in that it controls conflict before it happens. Third-dimensional power will align goals, values, and desires. In this case