Power is the most important tool a manager has in guiding people under him. He inherits this power legitimately with assuming his post as the manager. As per the regulations of the institutions he could exercise this power to make people perform their duties and if not to punish them, make them to quit or to remove them.

This power could be shown (in various forms) and used (in various ways); rather it could be shown or used. Managers in this part of the world chose to show the power than use it; where as managers in the West and the Far East mostly use it than show it. Could this be one reason why we are poor and less developed?

Showing power against using it
To drive this point, I would like you to imagine what could happen in a train when the inspectors catch a person without a ticket. More often passenger would be bullied and scolded, if such a thing happens in our soil. If he pleads for mercy and sympathy, showing his weak and incapable soul he could win the heart of the inspector; he could get out of the situation even without a punishment. In the West the passenger will be called "Sir" and politely asked to pay the penalty. He has no option but to succumb to the punishment.

There is a famous saying that those dogs who bark loud aren't the type who bites. They bark because they are scared to bite; scared of the consequences of biting.

Use of power is associated with risk
The same thing applies to the managers. Managers don't use power because they are scared about the consequences (physically and morally). Hence they show power in all its manifestations but rarely use it, even nominally.

Showing power, hence, is very much related with the inclination to avoid uncertainty; to put it in another way to avoid risk (both physical and moral risk).

In this part of the world people are likely to avoid risk than facing it, whenever they have an option; in spite of risk bringing better returns. Farmers refusing to cultivate any cash crop other than rice, many people agitating for government jobs, larger group willing to move in to government even with a lesser salary, popular belief that known devil is better than the unknown god, can be given as evidence.

Risk is high in collectivistic and caring societies
In addition they also know that the risk in taking action against an individual (especially one that is sympathized by others) is higher, in a society where collectivistic and caring cultural attributes prevail.
In collectivistic societies a person is not an isolated individual but a member of a larger group, which normally take care of its members in spite of what they do, provided the member is loyal to the group. Hence a manager taking action against a subordinate often has to face the challenges of the group, which could be quite threatening (physically). The members of the group consider it as a threat to the whole group than to a single individual.

We witness hospital staff, university students and private bus drivers getting in to streets agitating against the authorities when their colleagues are punished for errant deeds.

In a caring society a person who is weak and incapable has to be looked after no matter what he/she does. If any one tries to punish a weak individual there is a moral risk in addition to the physical risk. Society would blame the manager (authorities) for the same.

Very often we see people who are alcoholics and engage in errant deeds as a result are tolerated and sympathetically looked at even in very formal institutions.

Power shown is power spent, wasted and exhausted
The society will not mind a show of power by the manager but not use of power against an even errant member. These errant members (in one's own group and especially if he is weak/incapable) are supposed to be protected by the manager; though a small reprimand by the manager (strictly within the inner circle) is permitted.

This show of power (reprimanding within the group without punishing) considered as the punishment. So subordinates are normally not punished as per the regulations; they are scoffed off and set free.
Power that is shown considered as already spent; exhausted. The managers who show power have nothing left with them to exercise it; it is already spent and exhausted.

Power Distance
Show of power is not only done when there is an issue. It is done in every action. It is shown in the office settings, resource allocation and in every communication and transaction. A distance is maintained by the superior with the subordinate and subordinate also make sure that the same distance is maintained by him too; there is a show of superiority and inferiority by maintaining this distance. The subtle message given by the subordinate is that I show my inferiority and I expect you to look after this weak and obedient soul. The message given by the superior is I am ready to protect you, you being very loyal and obliging. This invisible and very primitive agreement is in force in most institutions. A superior or subordinate who violates this agreement will be reprimanded, by the group or the superior, respectively. Superior entering in to this agreement has to surrender his powers to the group. Power takes a "visible" form and hence is without "energy"; its usable form.

This is why very few in this part of the world are punished for errand work and especially for negligence. If one looks at carefully you find most of the time people who are punished normally, are people who have failed to be a part of a larger group or had not been loyal to the group or the leader.

Errors and omissions happen - No one is held responsible
No wonder why very few people are found fault for corruption and bribery by the Commission for Corruption and Bribery and also why no politician who has done errand work end up in jail, though political platforms are full of stories about wrong doings by the politicians. But on the other hand we also find politicians going to jail for failure to stay obedient, not toeing the line of the group and the leader; not showing the respect to or not maintaining the distance with their superiors.

Larger cultural characteristics are responsible
What we discuss here does not stem necessarily from flaws of individuals but due to our cultural characteristics, which we all share. Hence the attempt here is not to point fingers on one or other agency or individual, but to raise it as a larger issue.

As it is not easy for managers in Sri Lanka to use power because of the reasons given they settle down to show power and as a result looses the power altogether.

Future belongs to managers who dare to challenge it
Though it is harder and riskier, the managers who learn to avoid showing power will have the right and the energy to use it, when such is warranted. Organizations are guided to intended destinations by such managers, who really wield power.

We see many such managers in the West. They are addressed by their first name by the subordinates. We need to have many managers and people who are willing to accept such managers in our part of the world as well.

The dilemma is that this is something people don't want though it is necessary to fulfill the interests of the larger society. Hence managers who are ready to raise themselves above the average mind set of the people only will be capable of adopting the same.

(Writer is the author of a book titled "Edahalena Devola Nohoth Peraliyaka Sihinaya" in Sinhala, which describes the Sri Lankan social psyche, where he discusses effects of similar cultural characteristics; he can be accessed thro nishanthakamaladasa@yahoo.com) Nishantha Kamaladasa, CEO, Distance Learning Centre Ltd.