Why do some people coerce people into doing things? Why do others invite people into creative, collaborative work together? Which is more powerful? Which one is more resilient?
Power is the amount of energy for a given period of time. In physics it is calculated as the work done over a period of time. More power can get more work done in the same amount of time. Power, or the energy available, to get things done can be used to get things done for oneself or for others.
There is an old saying that power corrupts. Having power often leads people to the power paradox: while they get their power–the energy to get things done–from others because of their work for others, they can also begin to use the power to do things for themselves. In the power paradox, people who begin to use their power for their own ends, start to lose their access to and grip on power. To maintain their relative power, they have three options. They can get more power through co-benefit, by doing things that benefit others, who give them the energy to do work. They can co-opt the energy of others through coercion, forcing others to give them their energy. They can decrease the power of others, through coercion, tipping the balance of power back in their own favor. So, people can increase their relative power by (1) doing good for others, (2) coercing others, or (3) decreasing the power of others. With the first, power is co-generated–they get more power, and others keep their power. With the second, power is diffused–they get more power, and others lose their power. With the third, power is dissipated–others lose their power to heat, to self-preservation. The first is generative. The second and third are coercive and destructive.
Power gains that are based on destruction must be less resilient, over time, than power gains based on co-generation. Resilience is the ability to continue to function when the context changes. While coercion can appropriate the energy of others, it must be mostly in the form of the energy resources of others, the capacities they already have. Energy gained through generative interactions often engages (1) the energy resources of others, and (2) their development of relationships and capacities over time, and (3) engagement of their creative potential. While destructive forces can get (1), generative forces can engage (1), (2), and (3). That has to be more resilient.
In our Institute for Strategic Clarity research on groups that focus more on coordination, cooperation, or collaboration, we find that collaborative efforts engage people around a deeper shared purpose, to which everyone contributes their unique gifts, their energy resources and learning and potential. We find that cooperative efforts invite people to contribute shared resources, and that coordination efforts assign people to use their own energy resources to do their own work, which might be pieced together later. In the three cases of coordination, cooperation, and collaboration, each group keeps their power, and is invited to contribute ever greater levels of it to the group effort.
In coercive efforts, the power of others is diminished. It is co-opted by the coercive enforcer, taking the other’s energy, their will, and using it for the coercer’s purposes. This can be done consciously and unconsciously. In conscious coercion, the coerced know they are being coerced, that their energy is being usurped for another person’ purposes. Bullying fits in this category. In unconscious coercion, the coerced have often unconsciously accepted a set of agreements where their energy is used by the coercer for the coercer’s purposes, without the coercer knowing that this is what they are doing. Many social settings fit this category, such as the use of fiat currencies to enrich the currency owners–we get loans and pay interest rates, with no clue as to how the monetary system works.
In collaborative efforts, the power of each individual and of the group is increased. The energy is co-generated by the impact resulting from the engaging and leveraging of the unique contributions of each individual. Everyone keeps their power and ends up with more.
In coercion, someone ends up with more, and others end up with less. In collaboration, everyone ends up with more. Which leads to greater resilience?