Isegi kui organisatsioonid püüdlevad liikmeskonna võimestamise poole, siis ei pruugi see tingimata soovitud tagajärgedeni viia. Autorid väidavad muuhulgas:

However, empowerment initiatives often fail to reach their intended outcomes (e.g. Lorinkova, Pearsall, & Sims, 2013; Sharma & Kirkman, 2015). In this respect, empowerment initiatives may give rise to cynicism (Brown & Cregan, 2008) and increase job-related tensions (Lee, Cheong, Kim, & Yun, 2017). Empowerment is also likely to generate tensions because key actors do not give up power, control and autonomy that easily (Yukl & Fu, 1999). These unintended outcomes may even reinforce the existing power balance, instead of transforming it (e.g. Bunderson & Boumgarden, 2009; Mulder, 1971).

Uurimustöö eesmärgiks seatakse:

we aim to explore these unintended outcomes of empowerment initiatives, by drawing on key notions from the power literature (see Boje & Rosile, 2001; Hardy & LeibaO’Sullivan, 1998). We conceptualize empowerment as the transformation from ‘power over’ to ‘power to’, which serves to uncover power dynamics and tensions arising from empowerment initiatives in ways that go beyond prior work. In essence, empowerment initiatives can be conceived as efforts to strike a new functional balance between ‘power over’ and ‘power to’ (Clegg, Courpasson, & Phillips, 2006). Whereas power over others typically involves domination, coercion and/or manipulation, the power to act draws on the idea of self-determination (Göhler, 2009; Haugaard, 2012).

Võimestamise võimalike “kõrvalnähtudena” märgitakse:

our findings show how empowerment initiatives may give rise to tensions within actors and tensions between actors. These two types of tensions manifest themselves simultaneously and tend to reinforce each other – ultimately undermining the empowerment effort.

Viis väidet-järeldust:

First, our findings illustrate the existence of within-actor tensions and how they can undermine empowerment initiatives. Within-actor tensions emerge from differences between an actor’s cognitive disposition and public actions (e.g. in meetings and speeches).
Second, our findings illustrate how within-actor tensions fuel between-actor tensions to further undermine the empowerment initiative. While some actors adopt a transformative approach regarding empowerment, others continue to draw on power-over practices, resulting in tensions between the key actors involved in the empowerment initiative.
Third, our findings suggest that powerful actors can be highly different in terms of their individual power stance (e.g. a preference for ‘power over’).
Fourth, this study contributes to the literature on power in and around organizations. Most studies of the relationship between power-over and power-to have remained conceptual in nature (Gergen, 1995; Haugaard, 2012; Pansardi, 2012).
Finally, by conceptualizing empowerment as the transformation toward power-to enabled by power-over, this study has opened up new ways for scholars to integrate the empowerment and power literatures. The discourse on empowerment has developed rather separately from the discourse on power.

van Baarle, S., Dolmans, S. A., Bobelyn, A. S., & Romme, A. G. L. (2021). Beyond Command and Control: Tensions Arising From Empowerment Initiatives. Organization Studies, 42(4), 531–553.