You may have heard the phrase, “Power to the People!”
Beyond the name of a song by John Lennon in 1971 or the political rallying cry in the
1960’s, it has a meaning to all people—us—in our interpersonal relationships.
This video focuses how that power exists and is manifested in interpersonal relationships.
Simply defined, interpersonal power relates to our ability to influence another person
in the direction we desire.
But, let me add a second part to that definition: our ability to resist others’ attempts to
influence us.
Think of this as “empowerment,” defined by the Oxford Dictionary as, “the process
of becoming stronger and more confident, especially in controlling one's life and claiming one's
rights.”
While we’ll address this second definition in another video focusing on power resources—or,
what you can use to wield power—it’s important to acknowledge it here.
This video will focus on what interpersonal power is and the role it plays in interpersonal
relationships as well as the three different types of power relationships (sometimes called
power dynamics).
We’ve already covered the definition of interpersonal power but understanding the
role it plays in our interpersonal relationships is, well, interesting.
At the very least, knowing them may help you manage power in your relationships.
First, interpersonal power exists in all of your relationships and is implemented through
your interactions.
You, or someone else, are always using power in a relationship to influence another person
to say something, do something, stay in the relationship, etc.
Why?
Because we all have needs, for tangible “things” (like food, clothing, safety) and less tangible
needs like those discussed by American psychologist William Schutz in his Theory of Interpersonal
Needs (inclusion, affection, and control).
Interpersonal power, then, is rooted in an individual’s ability to meet another person’s
needs within a specific relationship – how can you satisfy someone else’s needs or
how can they satisfy yours?
Also, all partners in an on-going relationship have some degree of power —even if it is
what some would call “negative” power.
If one person is more dependent upon the other person’s power, we call that a dependent
relationship; there is an imbalance of power: one person has a greater need for the other
person to meet their needs.
Keep in mind that, the more people we have who are available to meet our needs, the less
power any one individual has over us.
For example, if you are a supervisor at work (yes, I know this may not be what you’re
thinking of when you think of interpersonal power, but it can be and you can likely see
the example); you are a supervisor and you need your employee to get work done.
You may have power because you are responsible for their continued employment, but your employees
have power, too: If they don’t do what you ask, your continued employment—or reputation—could
suffer.
But, if you have multiple employees who can do the same work, then the power of any one
employee is limited.
You’ll see that even children have power in their relationships with their parents
because we want them to love us, we don’t want them to disclose our secrets, etc.
In an interdependent relationship, each person has a similar amount of power over another.
And the power we have is circumstantial.
The power I have at work is different than the power I have with my husband, which is
different than the power I have with my friends.
And, as my needs adjust or my ability to meet my own needs improves, those power balances
can change.
For example, while I might need my husband’s vast amount of technical knowledge about computers,
if I reduced my need to use computers (I know, fat chance!) or if I learned more about computers
myself, then that power balance would change.
Finally, power is negotiated in our relationships.
We decide who will have power over us and what kind of power they will have.
We may think that we are helpless—and, indeed, we may have limited power—but we often grant
power to someone else.
Now, there are often severe consequences when we don’t grant power, but we usually can
do something—even if we don’t want to.
Earlier we addressed some power imbalances, which brings us to the different types of
power relationships, often called the power dynamics in relationships.
Think of it as how relationships can be defined based on how the people share power, like
which decisions—or types of decisions—are made by whom.
There are three different types of power relationships: Complementary, Symmetrical, and Parallel.
Don’t let the names fool you as they don’t necessarily give you a clue as to what each
type of relationship is.
For our discussion, we’ll use the yin and yang symbol, which relates to the concept
of dualism in Chinese philosophy.
One side—in our visuals, we’ll set that as the darker maroon side---relates to dominance,
while the other side—the white side—relates to submissiveness.
In the first power relationship, Complementary, power is divided unequally, with one partner
dominating and the other submitting.
One person usually dominates or makes most of the decisions with little or no resistance
from their partner.
This could be a good thing, like when one partner is detail-oriented while the other
is more of a “big picture” kind of person.
Or, both parties buy into the power imbalance, like an adult/child relationship.
In these cases, there will likely be relatively little conflict.
However, as people grow and relationships change, this could be a major source of conflict
with one person trying to change the power dynamic (usually the person being submissive)
and the other person trying to maintain the status quo (typically the one who holds the
dominant power).
Before we move to the next type of power relationship, let’s detour into a discussion of symmetry.
Symmetrical means that you can draw a line right down the middle of an image and you
see the same image on both sides of the line; the right is a mirror image of the left.
A heart icon, for example, is symmetrical: each side is a mirror image of the other.
A fiddler crab—the one with one claw significantly larger than the other—is asymmetrical; if
you drew a line down the middle, there are definitely differences in the two sides.
The first relationship we discussed is asymmetrical; if you drew a line down the middle of the
yin and yang symbol, both sides are not the same.
But, the next type of power relationship is symmetrical and is called that: Symmetrical.
This is when both partners attempt to have the same level of power: both want to take
control (or to dominate the other), or both want to cede control to the other (be submissive),
leading to two types of symmetrical relationships: competitive symmetrical and submissive symmetrical.
In a competitive symmetric relationship, both partners are fighting for dominance, often
resulting in overt (and often painful) conflict.
They each want to make the decisions, with neither backing down.
If you are in this type of power relationship, then you’ll need to have some good conflict
management skills, or the relationship will be rocky at best and likely to come to an
end at worst—and even that might not be the worst outcome.
The submissive symmetric relationship is the opposite.
Neither partner wants to make the decision or take responsibility.
I’m reminded of a situation where one person asks, “Where to you want to go for dinner?”
and the other responds, “I don’t know, where do you want to go?” with the first
person shooting back, “I don’t care; I asked you,” and so on.
Depending on the parties involved, this kind of relationship is likely to dissolve because
no one will take the lead.
The power dynamic that involves the shifting of power back and forth between the partners,
depending on the situation, is Parallel.
This is most likely the relationship you are in, as it is the most common power dynamic.
In a parallel relationship, the power dynamic changes based on the situation.
In my marriage, when it comes to any decisions regarding computers, I defer to my husband.
While I’m definitely an active participant in the discussion, we’ve agreed that he’s
the one who makes the decisions in this area.
Now, when it comes to teaching and education issues, he cedes the power to me—or at least
he should!
Some scholars consider this parallel approach to be the healthiest of all the power relationships
we’ve discussed.
Let me offer a caveat, though, about how the preferred power dynamic—the one deemed the
healthiest—may be culturally specific.
Some cultures subscribe to the Complementary power relationship—and that’s just fine,
as long as both parties sincerely accept that power imbalance.
Okay, that’s enough for now.
With a basic understanding of interpersonal power and the basic power relationships, or
dynamics, you’ll be able to move on to the next section of this topic: Power Resources.
In the meantime, consider examining the role power plays in your interpersonal relationships.
Because, truly, it is in people that power resides: Power to the People!