Although the use of power is one of the most pervasive facts of personal and organizational life, relatively few studies have been reported which focus directly on this topic. This study tested two hypotheses: organizational power is associated with office size and interpersonal power is associated with predominant facial features. Analyses of data from three organizations strongly supported the first hypothesis. In the second study, 99 subjects ranked, according to perceived power, nine composite pictures in which two facial features were varied. The results did not support the second hypothesis.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ClaryT.LukeR. A.Organizational and individual power. Training and Development Journal, 1975, 29, 41–51.
2.
FrenchJ. R.P., & Raven, B. H. The bases of social power. In CartwrightD. (Ed.), Studies in social power. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Univer. of Michigan Press, 1959. Pp. 150–167.
3.
HochbergJ.GalperR.Attribution of intention as a function of physiognomy. Memory and Cognition, 1974, 2, 39–42.
4.
KordaM.Power! how to get it, how to use it. New York: Random House, 1975.
5.
Leet-PellegriniH.RubinJ.The effects of six bases of power on compliance, identification, and internalization. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1974, 3, 68–70.
6.
McClellandD. C.The two faces of power. Journal of International Affairs, 1970, 24, 29–47.
7.
McClellandD.BurnhamD.Power is the great motivator. Harvard Business Review, 1976, 54, 100–110.
8.
MechanicD.Sources of power of lower level participants in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1962, 7, 349–364.
9.
ShapiroJ.Variability and usefulness of facial and body cues. Comparative Group Studies, 1972, 3, 437–442.
10.
ShoemakerD.SouthD.HoweF.Facial stereotypes of deviants and judgments of guilt or innocence. Social Forces, 1973, 51, 427–433.
11.
WinterD.The power motive. New York: Free Press, 1973.
