The need for power, need for influence, sense of power, and directiveness in female and male superiors and subordinates
More details
Hide details
Submission date: 2017-04-29
Final revision date: 2017-10-08
Acceptance date: 2017-11-07
Online publication date: 2017-12-22
Publication date: 2018-02-01
Current Issues in Personality Psychology 2018;6(1):47–56
The purpose of the study was to examine the phenomenon of power within an organisation from the vantage point of gender, the occupied position, earnings, and the number of subordinates.

Participants and procedure
The sample group comprised 107 female and 98 male participants. The mean age was 42.14 years (SD = 11.73). The study covered 100 superiors and 105 subordinates. The research tools were: the Need for Power and Influence Questionnaire (Bennett, 1988), the Personal Sense of Power Scale (Anderson, John, & Keltner, 2012), and the Directiveness Scale SD (Ray, 1976).

The superiors scored significantly higher on the need for power, need for influence, and directiveness. They also scored higher in terms of the need for power in relations with other people, with colleagues, and in superior-subordinate relations. The number of male leaders was conspicuously greater than the number of female leaders. Furthermore, women had fewer subordinates than men and earned less than men. Female participants scored lower on the sense of power and the need for power scales.

Occupying either an executive or subordinate position differentiates between women and men in terms of sense of power in interpersonal relationships. The findings on sense of power in the professional context may be applied in organisational psychology in order to increase employees’ competence and qualifications.
Abele, A. E., & Wojciszke, B. (2007). Agency and communion from the perspective of self versus others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 751–763.
Anderson, C., John, O. P., & Keltner, D. (2012). The personal sense of power. Journal of Personality, 80, 313–344.
Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory of personality. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (eds.), Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research (pp. 154–196). New York: Guilford Press.
Bell, D. V. (1975). Power, influence, and authority: An essay in political linguistics. Oxford: University Press.
Bennett, J. B. (1988). Power and influence as distinct personality traits: development and validation of a psychometric measure. Journal of Research in Personality, 22, 361–394.
Brannon, L. (1999). Gender: psychological perspectives. New York, London: Taylor & Francis.
Brzozowski, P. (1997). Skala Dyrektywności Johna J. Raya [Scale of Directiveness by John J. Ray]. Warszawa: Pracownia Testów Psychologicznych.
Bugental, D. B., & Lewis, J. C. (1999). The paradoxical misuse of power by those who see themselves as powerless: How does it happen? Journal of Social Issues, 55, 51–64.
Donhauser, P. W., Rösch, A. G., & Schultheiss, O. C. (2015). The implicit need for power predicts recognition speed for dynamic changes in facial expressions of emotion. Motivation and Emotion, 39, 714–721.
Fiske, S. T. (1993). Controlling other people. The impact of power on stereotyping. American Psychologist, 48, 621–628.
French, J. R. P. Jr., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (eds.). Studies in Social Power (pp. 150–169). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.
Galinsky, A. D., Magee, J. C., Gruenfeld, D. H., Whitson, J. A., & Liljenquist, K. A. (2008). Power reduces the press of the situation: implications for creativity, conformity, and dissonance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1450–1466.
Galinsky, A. D., Magee, J. C., Inesi, M. E., & Gruenfeld, D. H. (2006). Power and perspectives not taken. Psychological Science, 17, 1068–1074.
Galinsky, A. D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Magge, J. C. (2003). From power to action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 453–466.
Gąsiorowska, A. (2014). Psychologiczne znaczenie pieniędzy. Dlaczego pieniądze wywołują koncentrację na sobie? [Psychological meaning of money. Why money leads to self-focus?]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: a qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 765–780.
Judge, T. A., Colbert, A. E., & Ilies, R. (2004). A meta-analysis of the relationship between intelligence and leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 542-552.
Kipnis, D. (1972). Does power corrupt? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 33–41.
Kipnis, D. (1976). The Powerholders. Chicago: University Press.
Lips, H. M. (1985). Gender and the sense of power: Where are we and where are we going? International Journal of Women’s Studies, 8, 483–489.
Lord, R. G., De Vader, C., & Alliger, G. M. (1986). A meta-analysis of the relation between personality traits and leadership perceptions: an application of validity generalization procedures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 402–410.
Mandal, E. (1995). Seksizm a praca i bezrobocie kobiet [Sexism and female employment and unemployment]. Psychologia Wychowawcza, 38, 235–240.
Mandal, E. (2007). Kobiety i mężczyźni a władza w organizacji [Women and men and power within an organization]. Kolokwia Psychologiczne (Psychological Colloquia), 16, 153–174.
Mandal, E. (2008). Miłość, władza i manipulacja w bliskich związkach [Love, power and manipulation in close relationships]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Mandal, E., & Kocur, D. (2015). Poczucie władzy a poczucie satysfakcji seksualnej w intymnych relacjach [Sense of power and sexual satisfaction in intimate relationships]. Seksuologia Polska, 13, 1–7.
Minton, H. L. (1972). Power and personality. In J. T. Tedeschi (ed.), The Social Influence Process. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.
Mowday, R. T. (1978). The exercise of upward influence in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 137–156.
Sedlak, K. (2014). Ogólnopolskie badanie wynagrodzeń [Polish nationwide compensation survey]. Kraków: Sedlak & Sedlak.
Ray, J. J. (1976). Do authoritarians hold authoritarian attitudes? Human Relations, 29, 307–325.
Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. The Urban Review, 3, 16–20.
Saltzman, A. (1991). Trouble at the top. US News & World Report, 17, 40–48.
Schultheiss, O. C., Campbell, K. L., & McClelland, D. C. (1999). Implicit power motivation moderates men’s testosterone responses to imagined and real dominance successes. Hormones and Behavior, 36, 234–241.
Schultheiss, O. C., Dargel, A., & Rhode, W. (2003). Implicit motives and gonadal steroid hormones: eVects of menstrual cycle phase, oral contraceptive use, and relationship status. Hormones and Behavior, 43, 293–301.
Schultheiss, O. C., Wirth, M. M., Torges, C. M., Pang, J. S., Villacorta, M. A., & Welsh, K. M. (2005). Effects of implicit power motivation on men’s and women’s implicit learning and testosterone changes after social victory or defeat. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 174.
Sellers, J. G., Mehl, M. R., & Josephs, R. A. (2007). Hormones and personality: testosterone as a marker of individual differences. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 126–138.
Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797–811.
Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social psychology of groups. New York: Wiley.
Titkow, A. (2003). Szklany sufit: bariery i ograniczenia karier kobiet: monografia zjawiska [Glass ceiling: barriers and limitations in women’s careers: a phenomenon monography]. Warszawa: Fundacja Instytutu Spraw Publicznych.
Varga, K. (1975). Achievement, Power and Effectiveness of Research and Development. Human Relations, 28, 571–590.
Wojciszke, B. (2010). Sprawczość i wspólnotowość [Agency and communion]. Gdańsk: GWP.
Wojciszke, B., & Strużyńska-Kujałowicz, A. (2007). Power influences self-esteem. Social Cognition, 25, 472–494.
Wojciszke, B., & Szlendak, M. A. (2010). Skale do pomiaru orientacji sprawczej i wspólnotowej [Scales measuring agency and communion]. Psychologia Społeczna, 5, 57–70.