Not all inequality is created equal: Effects of status versus power hierarchies on competition for upward mobility.

Abstract

Although hierarchies are thought to be beneficial for groups, empirical evidence is mixed. We argue and find in 7 studies spanning methodologies and samples that different bases of hierarchical differentiation have distinct effects on lower ranking group members' disruptive competitive behavior because status hierarchies are seen as more mutable than are power hierarchies. Greater mutability means that more opportunity exists for upward mobility, which motivates individuals to compete in hopes of advancing their placement in the hierarchy. This research provides further evidence that different bases of hierarchy can have different effects on individuals and the groups of which they are a part and explicates a mechanism for those effects.

When Interteam Conflict Spirals into Intrateam Power Struggles: The Pivotal Role of Team Power Structures

“…Considering team-level moderators, such as intrateam power structure stability and legitimacy would also be interesting. When the power structure is less stable (more mutable), power struggles have been found to be more likely (Hays & Bendersky, 2015;Mead & Maner, 2012a). We expect that interteam conflict may further intensify power dynamics in teams with an unstable power structure (both hierarchical and egalitarian), as it further pressurizes the situation.…”

“…Rather than leading to more intrateam power struggles, we predict that resource-threatening interteam conflicts will reduce power struggles in egalitarian teams. Although the equal distribution of resource control and lack of power rank differences between members in these teams can promote a harmonious climate (e.g., Deutsch, 1975;Kabanoff, 1991;Kerr & Slocum, 2005;Lawler & Yoon, 1998), which benefits team functioning (e.g., Glew, 2009;Lawler & Yoon, 1998;Leventhal, Karuza, & Fry, 1980;Smith & Cook, 1973), there may, at times, also be temptations for members within egalitarian teams to engage in selfinterested power-seeking behaviors, i.e., to increase one's individual control over resources within the team (Hays & Bendersky, 2015). For instance, members of egalitarian teams may also, in certain situations, try to improve their individual power position by withholding information, exerting dominance, or forming coalitions.…”

“…We extend theory on power hierarchies by identifying when a power hierarchy may be functional (i.e., when resources are abundant) versus harmful (i.e., when resources are threatened and scarce-with one instantiation of this being interteam conflict) for team functioning; we show that a power hierarchy Team Performance may backfire in settings where resources are under threat. Finally, by looking at how resource-threatening interteam conflict may result in intrateam power struggles, we extend the burgeoning literature on power dynamics in teams (e.g., Aime, Humphrey, DeRue, & Paul, 2014;Bendersky & Hays, 2012;Hays & Bendersky, 2015; by providing a first illustration of how intrateam power dynamics are jointly impacted by the interteam setting and the internal team power structure.…”

The interpersonal nature of power and status

“…This increased focus on others comes in part because high-status individuals are concerned with maintaining their position in the status hierarchy [1] and such hierarchies may be seen as particularly mutable [19]. For example, because high-status individuals desire to be seen as worthy of others' respect and esteem, higher status is associated with greater fairness and justice towards others [17**].…”

Characteristics of the Power Status of Employed Population in Modern Russia

“…Субъективное измерение властного статуса наиболее активно исследуется психо логической наукой и основывается либо на особых качествах непосредственного носителя власти (вождя, лидера, руководителя), либо на особенностях психологи ческой природы самого человека. При таком подходе для измерения властного статуса наиболее эффективным оказывается метод эксперимента, посредством которого можно зафиксировать ощущение и восприятие власти через поведение индивида [Hays, Bendersky, 2015]. Социологи же под субъективным властным статусом (в соответствии с интерпретацией любого субъективного статуса в со циологической науке в целом) понимают оценки (или самооценки) этого статуса, даваемые людьми, и для измерения его обычно используют традиционные для социологических опросов балльные или вербальные оценки.…”