The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
POTENTIAL POWER AND POWER USE: AN INVESTIGATION OF STRUCTURE AND BEHAVIOR.
Abstract
behavioral tactics. Results indicate that structural position, measured as an individual's network centrality and level in the organizational hierarchy, and behavior-use of assertiveness, ingratiation, exchange, upward appeal, rationality, and coalition formation-relate independently and significantly to others' perceptions of the individual's power. In addition, structure partially mediated the relationship between behavior and power, and the behavioral strategies partially mediated the structure-power relationship. Significant interaction effects were also found. The study of power in organizations has been both plagued and blessed by the multitude of theories and approaches that have been offered. Although the variety of approaches makes convergence difficult, consideration of its subtle complexities leads to a more comprehensive overview of the phenomenon of power. However, the proliferation of conceptual subtleties has also resulted in a fragmentation of empirical research (Astley & Sachdeva, 1984). Nowhere is this more evident than in the research agendas of organizational psychologists, who take a micro-level view, and organizational sociologists, who take a macro-level view. Micro research has focused on the behavior of individuals, macro research on the larger organizational context. In investigating power in organizations, the micro-macro split is exemplified in the distinction between potential power and power use.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification
Freeman, L. C. (1978) · Social Networks · doi:10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7 · Cited by 17,062
Barley, S. R. (1986) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392767 · Cited by 2,315
Being in the Right Place: A Structural Analysis of Individual Influence in an Organization
Brass, D. J. (1984) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392937 · Cited by 1,549
Self-citationBurkhardt, M. E., & Brass, D. J. (1990) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393552 · Cited by 947
Self-citationNetwork Position and Cognition in a Computer Software Firm
Walker, G. (1985) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392814 · Cited by 129
Cited by
Moving beyond Dyadic Ties: A Network Theory of Stakeholder Influences
Rowley, T. J. (1997) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1997.9711022107 · Cited by 2,522
Orchestrating Innovation Networks
Dhanaraj, C., & Parkhe, A. (2006) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2006.21318923 · Cited by 1,803
Stam, W., & Elfring, T. (2008) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2008.30744031 · Cited by 1,218
Kilduff, M., & Krackhardt, D. (1994) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256771 · Cited by 689
Cattani, G., & Ferriani, S. (2008) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1070.0350 · Cited by 659
Metadata
- Authors
- Brass, D. J., & Burkhardt, M. E.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Journal
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 1993-06-01
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 441-470
- ISSN
- 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
- 1948-0989
- OpenAlex
- W2032572697
- Cited by
- 963
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 36.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: POTENTIAL POWER AND POWER USE: AN INVESTIGATION OF STRUCTURE AND BEHAVIOR. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/256588
- The paper
- Brass, D. J., & Burkhardt, M. E. (1993). POTENTIAL POWER AND POWER USE: AN INVESTIGATION OF STRUCTURE AND BEHAVIOR. Academy of Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.2307/256588
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.