The social alignment theory of power: Predicting associative and dissociative behavior in hierarchies

Abstract

Evolutionary social psychologists have demonstrated that powerholders generally attain and maintain rank in social hierarchies through two distinct types of behaviors: associative (prestige-based) strategies or dissociative (dominance-based) strategies. However, the dual-strategies literature lacks a theoretical account of when and why people adopt one approach over the other. We provide a theoretical model of power to address this question and also expand the focus to include low-power versions of associative (persuasion-based) and dissociative (passivity-based) strategies. To develop our framework, we build on the distinction between power (i.e., asymmetric control over valued resources) and volitional influence (i.e., the ability to produce willful changes in others). We posit that individuals who perceive high volitional influence with regard to another party are in a state of social alignment, because their interests and those of the other party are, or can easily become, aligned. As a result, they pursue associative strategies (prestige for high-power actors, or persuasion for low-power actors). In contrast, individuals with low perceived volitional influence are in a state of social misalignment, because their interests and those of the other party are misaligned. As a result, they pursue dissociative strategies (dominance for high-power actors, or passivity for low-power actors). To help distinguish between power and volitional influence, we offer a new capital-based typology of power and outline key antecedents of volitional influence. We conclude by outlining future directions for research on power and key topics in organizational behavior.