The word ‘Power’ has its roots is Latin ‘potis’ ‘posse’ or ‘pot-ere’ which signify ‘to be also’. The word has been used in several senses in daily life like ‘horse power’ that measures energy, ‘power-loom’ as distinct from the hand-loom, conveying the idea of mechanical energy. In mathematics when we write x3, that means x is multiplied by itself three times. If the value of x is 2 than 23 is 2 raised to the power 3, that is 2 x 2 x 2 = 8. Here ‘power’ is used for making a small number larger. These examples give a general idea that power implies a capacity to increase energy and to enable a person or a thing to enlarge its scope.

In ordinary usage, the term ‘power’ means strength or the capacity to control.

Sociologically, Power is considered to be an aspect of all relationships ranging from macro social systems like nation-state to the intimate interdependence of husband and wife. It is not restricted to a battlefield or to politics. Power is always relational: it is essential to say that a person or a group ‘has power’ in relation to some other people or groups. To exercise power it is necessary to have some control over others to be able to withhold what they need.

Whenever two or more individuals or groups perform specialized functions (division of labour), each has a measure of potential power over the other; but the balances of power between them may be relatively equal or unequal, relatively stable or constantly fluctuating, and they change and develop through continual trials of strength.

Following Weber, power may be defined as the capacity of a person or group of people to execute his will despite opposition from others. For example, suppose there are two persons A and B. If A wants B to obey his order and B does it despite his unwillingness because A can dictate him to carry out his order it is the case of power of A exercised upon B.

However, power must be distinguished from other concepts such as ‘legitimacy’, ‘authority’ and ‘coercion’. When the ‘power’ of a body of people or a group gets the sanction of the society it is legitimized. Further, if the legitimized power is vested in a individual/group in the larger interest of the society, it becomes authority’. There is, however, some difference between authority and coercion. Coercion is illegitimate use of power. It is also referred to as force.

Power is a crucial dimension of stratification. It forms part of all other forms of stratification be it class, caste, race or gender.

Generally, power is of two types: individualistic and organisational. Power relationships are individualistic when exercised by individuals and they become organisational when organised by social organisations. The two aspects of power can also be termed as micro and macro, respectively. The personal relationship between husband and wife wherein the husband tortures his wife would be individualistic or micro aspect of power, whereas if a woman is made to commit sati it would be organizational or macro aspect of power.

In fact, anything, which provides a person or a group degree of control over what others want or need, can be seen as a ‘power resource’. The most common resources of power are ownership of the means of production, income, status-honour, priestly status and magical powers, scare skills or knowledge and charisma. What works as a power resource depends upon the type of society: for instance, ownership of means of production is less significant in a hunting-gathering society than in a capitalist society, while control over sacramental or magical rites is less significant in modern industrial societies than in pre-industrial societies.

Scholars have identified different sources of power according to their perceptions. For instance, Bierstedt (1969) identifies three sources of power, namely, numbers of people, social organization, and resources. He includes various components in the third source of power, such as, money, property, prestige, knowledge, competence, deceit, fraud, secrecy, and natural resources. Mann (1986) would identify four sources of power, namely, ideological, economic, military, and political relationships. Tumin (1992) opines that there are five sources of power, namely, role specific authority, goods and services, skills and abilities, personal qualities, and coercive power. Galbraith (1984) classifies three sources of power personality, property and organization. There are also many other scholars who classify them in many different ways. Therefore, it is difficult to follow one single classification of the sources of power.

But all of these classifications have more or less similar elements of the sources of power. A general discussion on sources of power would include the following.

Economic success increases the chances of gaining power. The rich, for example, have the power to influence laws and policies concerning taxes, industrialisation, land relations etc., in their favour. However, it is also observed that economic success and power do not necessarily correspond with each other. This argument is based on several points. Money is a resource that can be used to enhance power, but a decision must be made to use money for that purpose. For instance, there are always some rich who use their economic resources to gain political power. They may use their money directly or indirectly for political purposes.

Money and ownership of means of production are not the only resources that can be used as the basis for power. Expert knowledge can also be used to enhance power. For instance, many lawyers use their legal knowledge for gaining substantial power in political field. Eminent lawyers such as Nani A. Palkhiwala, Ram Jethmalani and L.M. Singhvi acquired political clout along with their high status in the field of law. Other possible resources for acquiring power include eloquence, style of life and sometimes even maneuverability.

Power is also attached to status. Husband is usually considered more powerful than wife. Elected office-bearers enjoy more power than others. Professionals enjoy more power than commoners and at times even more than top industrialists.

Finally, one can gain power by acquiring organizational ability and clinching issues, which can appeal to the people at a particular point of time. Napoleon, Hitler, Churchill all gained power based on some of these criteria.