The difference between Personal power and positional power is that personal power is innate; it is derived from a person’s capacity to influence. It is also dependent on a person’s referent and expert ability. On the other hand, positional power is vested in appointed authority. It is coercive in nature due to the formal authority aspect. One of the similarities between the two is the leadership aspect, even though one or the other could have less or more desirable outcomes. Personal power is more effective since it inspires people to go above and beyond in order to achieve a goal.
Empowerment is the practice of providing employees with opportunities, resources, motivation, and authority to foster growth. One of the problems that an organization could experience while empowering teams is ineffective empowerment programs due to managerial beliefs in power. This is remedied by additional training of the managers and involving them in the empowerment process. Besides, decentralization and breakdown of organizational structure may occur as a result of ineffective empowerment. To avoid this, clear guidelines on the level of empowerment should be developed.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The first power style is passive power. This style is characterized by a gentle and differential approach to situations, hence avoids problems. This may create resentment and confusion among the employees due to the lack of proper guidelines. The second style is aggressive power. This style is forceful and critical. It is mainly results-oriented. Aggressive power may produce a positive effect on satisfaction, but it may also cause employee withdrawal. Assertive power is the type of power that results in a win-win situation in negotiations. This style of power is ideal in most situations. It creates clear guidelines, increases the confidence of employees, and improves problem-solving. It produces satisfaction among employees and trust in the organization.
The similarity between consultative, democratic and consensus is that while consultative and consensus are more time consuming democratic does not necessarily consume more time. They are also similar in that when decisions are well handled, all could result in quality decision making. Most importantly, while all could be acceptable to different people, acceptance of decisions made is difficult in democratic leadership.
The causes of group decision making problems are disagreements, impact of emotions and negative pressure. These result in lengthy and poor decision making.
Shared leadership is a one in which different stakeholders have a say and participate in leadership. It encompasses empowerment, social relations and support development as well as participative decision making. It is advantageous as it improves tasks and results in better decision making when tasks are difficult.
