Overstreet 1
Beth OverstreetDr. Randy BarkerRhonda Clark Case AnalysisOctober 24, 2012Rhonda Clark: Taking Charge at the Smith FoundationRhonda Clark possesses and attempts to use multiple sources of power and contingenciesof power in her time leading the Smith Foundation. The one Clark relied on the most heavilywas coercive power, which can be used in a positive way but can also be used as a tool of intimidation. This tool can be used either up or down the ladder depending on the circumstance.When using coercive power, it can be employed by threatening punishment, peer pressure, or in
Clark’s case, in more of a quid pro quo relationsh ip. This type of relationship was introduced bysome of the board members initially, but Clark agreed to it. In a purely quid pro quo situation, itis difficult for either party to truly trust the other as both make it clear that they are only in therelationship to satisfy their own needs. In speaking about the relationships she formed with some of the female board members, she noted “you scratch my back, and I scratch yours.”
In additionto the nature of the relationship they established, there is a fairly low degree of structural trust to begin between board members and the CEO of an organization. The board’s responsibility is to the organization – not its CEO. Thus, when Clark agreed to use coercive power as a strategy tomove forward, it broke down any remnant of trust that could have been established with thosemembers of the board or any others. Another consequence of using coercive power is that if in the future Clark loses her ability to “scratch a board member’s back,” she loses all power and will likely only face resistance moving forward.Clark also decided to rely on substitutability as a source of contingency power.Substitutability is defined by the ability of an organization to replace someone in a role. Shelikely