메뉴 건너뛰기
Organizational Dynamics
Volumn 5, Issue 3, 1977, Pages 3-21
Who gets power - and how they hold on to it: A strategic-contingency model of power
Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]
Indexed keywords

EID: 49449128392     PISSN: 00902616     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/0090-2616(77)90028-6     Document Type: Article
Times cited : (445)
References (2)
  • 1
    • 84910237187 scopus 로고    scopus 로고
    • The literature on power is at once both voluminous and frequently empty of content. Some is philosophical musing about the concept of power, while other writing contains popularized palliatives for acquiring and exercising influence. Machiavelli's The Prince, if read carefully, remains the single best prescriptive treatment of power and its use. Most social scientists have approached power descriptively, attempting to understand how it is acquired, how it is used, and what its effects are. Mayer Zald's edited collection Power in Organizations (Vanderbilt University Press, 1970) is one of the more useful sets of thoughts about power from a sociological perspective, while James Tedeschi's edited book, The Social Influence Processes (Aldine-Atherton, 1972) represents the social psychological approach to understanding power and influence. The strategic contingencies's approach, with its emphasis on the importance of uncertainty for understanding power in [[Truncated]]
  • 2
    • 84910205672 scopus 로고    scopus 로고
    • Unfortunately, while many have written about power theoretically, there have been few empirical examinations of power and its use. Most of the work has taken the form of case studies. Michel Crozier's The Bureaucratic Phenomenon (University of Chicago Press, 1964) is important because it describes a group's source of power as control over critical activities and illustrates how power is not strictly derived from hierarchical position. J. Victor Baldridge's Power and Conflict in the University (John Wiley & Sons, 1971) and Andrew Pettigrew's study of computer purchase decisions in one English firm (Politics of Organizational Decision-Making, Tavistock, 1973) both present insights into the acquisition and use of power in specific instances. Our work has been more empirical and comparative, testing more explicitly the ideas presented in this article. The study of university decision making is reported in articles in the June 1974, pp. 135–151, and [[Truncated]]

* 이 정보는 Elsevier사의 SCOPUS DB에서 KISTI가 분석하여 추출한 것입니다.