Power Play Lesson Plan The Power Play
Teacher Facilitation Guide
Lesson ID PSY-PWR-01
Executive Summary
This lesson investigates the psychological mechanisms behind leadership and social influence. Students will explore French and Raven's Bases of Power, analyze the impact of leadership styles (Authoritarian, Democratic, Laissez-faire), and evaluate the ethical implications of authority through historical and modern case studies.
Duration
90 Minutes (2 Class Periods)
Target Grade
12th Grade (Soc/Gov/Hist)
Key Concepts
French & Raven's Bases
Social Influence Theory
Leadership Typology
Ethical Frameworks
Learning Objectives
Cognitive Skills
Identify and categorize types of power in real-world scenarios.
Contrast the psychological outcomes of different leadership styles on group morale.
Critical Evaluation
Analyze the tension between individual agency and systemic authority.
Evaluate the ethical boundaries of social influence in political leadership.
Instructional Sequence
10m
The Hook: The Social Elevator
Quick-fire prompt: "If everyone in this room had to choose one leader for a desert island survival scenario, who would it be and why?" Use this to identify innate leadership traits students value.
25m
Direct Instruction: Mechanics of Power
Utilize the Authority Archives Slides . Focus on French & Raven's 5 Bases (Legitimate, Reward, Expert, Referent, Coercive). Discuss the Milgram experiment briefly as a foundation for obedience.
30m
Guided Practice: Influence Lab
Students work through the Influence Lab Activity . They analyze historical leaders (e.g., Napoleon, MLK Jr., Steve Jobs) and map their "Power Profile" using the theoretical frameworks discussed.
25m
Deep Dive: Ethics of Influence
Use the Ethics of Influence Discussion Guide . Focus on the transition from 'power over' to 'power with'.
Required Assets
Authority Archives Slides
The Crown Weight Reading
Influence Lab Activity
Ethics of Influence Discussion Guide
The Crown Weight Reading The Weight of the Crown
Unit: Social Dynamics Topic: The Mechanics of Influence
Power is not a static property, nor is it a title bestowed upon a person. To the social psychologist, power is a fluid and transactional exchange. It is the capacity to modify the behaviors, thoughts, or feelings of others. While we often view power as a monolithic force of command, its structural integrity relies on the psychological consent—whether voluntary or coerced—of the governed.
"The problem of power is not who has it, but what it does to the person who possesses it and the person who submits to it."
The Architecture of Consent
French and Raven’s 1959 study on social power identified five distinct bases that leaders utilize to influence their groups. These bases are divided into two broad categories: Positional Power and Personal Power . Positional power is external—it is the authority granted by an organization or society (Legitimate, Reward, Coercive). Personal power, however, is internal—it stems from the leader's unique traits or skills (Expert, Referent).
Positional Power
Reliance on this base often results in Compliance . Subordinates follow orders to avoid punishment or gain rewards, but rarely internalize the leader's vision.
Personal Power
Reliance on this base leads to Commitment . Followers obey because they believe in the leader's expertise or identify with their character.
The Dark Side of Influence
Social psychologist Philip Zimbardo famously noted that authority can dehumanize both the wielder and the subject. When power is exercised as "Power Over," it focuses on control and the suppression of agency. This often leads to a cycle of reactance—a psychological state where individuals feel their freedom is threatened and are motivated to regain it through rebellion.
In contrast, "Power With" is an additive model. It suggests that a leader's strength is multiplied, not divided, when shared. Transformational leaders—those who inspire through vision and empowerment—tend to move their groups toward a state of collective efficacy.
Case Study: The Napoleon Complex
Napoleon Bonaparte rose through Expert Power (military genius) but transitioned rapidly into Legitimate Power (Emperor). His eventual downfall is often attributed to a shift toward Coercive Power across Europe, which triggered massive psychological reactance among conquered populations.
Critical Inquiry: Can a leader maintain expert power once they become a symbol of legitimate authority?
Points for Consideration
01
Which base of power is most sustainable in a democratic society?
02
Why does coercive power almost always lead to resistance, even if it is initially effective?
03
Is it possible for a leader to exercise "Power With" while maintaining strict hierarchy?
Influence Lab Activity Influence Lab
Case Study & Power Profile Analysis
Name:
Date:
The 5 Bases:
Legitimate Reward Coercive Expert Referent
Leadership Styles:
Authoritarian Democratic Laissez-faire
01
The Visionary Dissident: Nelson Mandela
Mandela spent 27 years in prison, yet emerged to lead a peaceful transition from Apartheid to democracy. His power came not from an official title while in prison, but from his moral authority, his refusal to renounce his beliefs, and the symbolic hope he represented for millions.
Primary Base of Power:
Analysis: Why did this base work in this context?
02
The Iron-Willed Innovator: Steve Jobs
Jobs was known for his "reality distortion field"—the ability to convince himself and others of anything. While his technical expertise was renowned, he was also famous for berating employees, making unilateral decisions, and demanding perfection at any cost.
Dominant Leadership Style:
Evidence: List specific traits mentioned above.
Synthesis: Your Power Profile
Consider a leader you admire (historical or contemporary). Map their influence using the frameworks.
Subject Name:
Bases of Power (Rank 1-5):
Expert ____
Referent ____
Legitimate ____
Reward ____
Coercive ____
How did this leader balance 'Power Over' vs 'Power With'?
Ethics of Influence Discussion Guide Ethics of Influence
Socratic Seminar & Debate Guide
Power Over
Centered on dominance . Power is viewed as a zero-sum game: for someone to have power, others must lose it. It relies on compliance, hierarchy, and often coercion.
Power With
Centered on collaboration . Power is viewed as an expansive resource. It relies on collective efficacy, shared goals, and mutual empowerment.
The Central Question
"Is it possible to be an effective leader in a crisis using only 'Power With' frameworks?"
Discussion Tracks
01
The Corruption of Competence
When does "Expert Power" cross the line into "Legitimate Tyranny"?
Consider a scientist or technologist who believes they know what is best for a population. Should their expert power overrule the democratic will of the people if the people are "wrong"?
02
The Illusion of Choice
Does "Reward Power" manipulate or motivate?
If a leader uses status and wealth to gain followers, are those followers acting of their own free will, or are they being psychologically "purchased"? Is there an ethical difference?
03
The Burden of Referent Power
Can a charismatic leader ever truly share power?
Referent power is based on the cult of personality. If the group's success depends entirely on one person’s charisma, does that naturally prevent the group from ever becoming self-sufficient?
Seminar Notes & Argument Framing
My Stance on the "Crisis" Question:
Key Evidence / Historical Examples:
Authority Archives Slides Revised Authority Archives
The Psychology of Power
Module 1.1
Defining Power
"The potential of one person or group to influence another."
Power is relational .
Power is situational .
The 5 Bases of Power (French & Raven)
Reward
Ability to provide positive incentives like status or praise.
Impact: Compliance
Coercive
Ability to punish or withhold rewards. Fear-based.
Impact: Resistance
Legitimate
Based on official position or hierarchy (CEO, General).
Impact: Duty
The 5 Bases of Power (Part II)
Expert Power
Based on specialized knowledge or skills that others lack.
Outcome: Commitment
Referent Power
Based on charisma and identification with the leader.
Outcome: Identification
Leadership Typologies
Authoritarian
Single source of authority
Little input from others
Effective in crisis
Democratic
Decision-making is shared
High group satisfaction
Higher creative output
"A leader is best when people barely know he exists."
— Lao Tzu
The Ethics of Influence
01
Power Over
Dominance and control. Focused on maintaining hierarchy.
02
Power With
Collaboration and empowerment. Focused on shared goals.
The Influence Lab
Apply these frameworks. Analyze a leader's Power Profile in your group.
Identify their primary base of power
Leader Profile Answer Key Leader Profile Key
Teacher Reference & Answer Guide
Resource for: Influence Lab Activity
This guide provides expected psychological profiles for the case studies in the Influence Lab Activity . While student interpretations may vary, look for the use of French & Raven terminology and specific textual evidence.
01: Nelson Mandela
Primary Base
Referent Power
Suggested Analysis
Mandela’s influence while imprisoned was purely Referent . He had no legitimate position or ability to reward/coerce. His power stemmed from the identification of followers with his character and his role as a symbol of the anti-apartheid struggle. Later, as President, he gained Legitimate Power , but maintained a Democratic leadership style to ensure stability.
02: Steve Jobs
Leadership Style
Authoritarian / Autocratic
Suggested Analysis
Jobs utilized Expert Power (visionary product sense) but often paired it with Coercive Power (berating employees, fear of dismissal). His "reality distortion field" is a hallmark of high Referent Power , but his decision-making was strictly unilateral, fitting the Authoritarian typology.
Synthesis Grading Criteria
Conceptual Accuracy
Student correctly applies French & Raven's 5 bases (e.g., distinguishing between Legitimate and Expert power).
Evidence-Based Reasoning
Student cites specific actions or traits from the leader's life to justify their categorization.
Ethical Nuance
The "Power Over vs. Power With" section should reflect an understanding that leaders often use both depending on the context.
Reference: Source-Outcome Matrix
Coercive
Resistance
Reward/Legit
Compliance
Expert/Referent
Commitment
