Power Analysis

Purpose

Power Analysis goes beyond formal authority to map the multiple forms of power operating in an organization. Drawing on frameworks from Steven Lukes, John Gaventa, and VeneKlasen & Miller, it distinguishes visible power (formal decision-making), hidden power (who sets the agenda, who is excluded), and invisible power (internalized beliefs about who deserves power). Understanding all three is essential for designing change that actually shifts dynamics rather than reinforcing them.

At a glance

How to run

1. Introduce the three faces of power (5 min). Visible: Who makes decisions? Hidden: Who sets the agenda, controls information, or excludes voices? Invisible: What beliefs about power are so internalized that people do not question them?
2. Map visible power (10 min). Draw the formal org chart and decision-making structures. Who approves budgets? Who hires and fires? Who is in the room when strategy is set?
3. Map hidden power (10 min). Discuss: Who actually influences decisions informally? Who controls access to information? Who gets heard and who gets ignored? What topics are off the agenda and why?
4. Map invisible power (10 min). Discuss: What beliefs about who "deserves" power are taken for granted? What groups have internalized messages about their place? What cultural norms make power invisible?
5. Identify implications (10 min). For the change initiative: How does the power map help or hinder our goals? Whose support is essential? Whose hidden power could block us? What invisible power assumptions must we surface?

Materials needed

• Three-column template (Visible / Hidden / Invisible) on wall
• Sticky notes and markers
• Org chart as starting point
• Case examples of each power type

Pitfalls & common mistakes

• Staying at visible power. The most important insights come from hidden and invisible power. Push past the org chart.
• Making it personal. Power analysis is about systems, not villains. Frame it structurally.
• Not acting on findings. A power analysis that sits in a drawer changes nothing.
• Assuming power is only top-down. Frontline workers, gatekeepers, and informal networks hold significant power.

Inclusion & accessibility

• Include diverse voices — people at different levels experience power differently.
• Creating safety is critical — naming hidden power can feel risky.
• Acknowledge that the exercise itself is an act of power — who gets to name power dynamics?
• Use anonymous inputs for the hidden and invisible power layers if trust is limited.

Variations

• Power flower: Individuals map their own positions of power and powerlessness across multiple identity dimensions.
• Power walk: Experiential exercise where participants physically step forward or back based on power statements.
• Intersectional power analysis: Map how race, gender, class, and other identities interact with organizational power.

When NOT to use this

• When the exercise would put participants at genuine risk (retaliation for naming power).
• When there is no commitment to acting on findings.
• When it would be used to consolidate rather than distribute power.

Source & further reading

• Lukes, S. (2005). *Power: A Radical View*. 2nd ed. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Gaventa, J. (2006). "Finding the Spaces for Change." *IDS Bulletin*, 37(6).
• VeneKlasen, L. & Miller, V. (2007). *A New Weave of Power, People & Politics*. Practical Action Publishing.