Gaining, maintaining, extending or expanding power are fundamental goals in politics and public affairs, business, sports, international relations and beyond.
But possessing power is one thing; utilizing it effectively is another.
Power can be abused or squandered.
The constellation of power held by a nation, institution or team may not fit every situation.
And leaders have to recognize the limits of power. A number of past and present issues and experiences should be instructive on this point.
President Obama recently addressed this topic, relying on baseball terminology: "You hit singles, you hit doubles, every once in a while we may be able to hit a home run."
Some critics quickly pounced on those comments as implying that Obama is a singles hitter (or, even worse, tends to strike out with the bat on his shoulder) instead of consistently swinging for the fences. A Wall Street Journal editorial referred to his "reluctance to use American power," specifically in regard to Syria and the school girls in Nigeria.
However, those who watch baseball know that often, even when a mighty swing makes contact with the ball, it only results in a long out. Instead, it might be more effective to bunch together a few singles, a hit-and-run play, and maybe a sacrifice bunt to advance a runner into scoring position.
Sometimes this is referred to as "small ball," a strategy that employs situational hitting and base-running tactics.
It might be said that this approach relies more on team work rather than on an individual power hitter. You can't expect a home run every time. However, there are those who want to see the U.S. project an image of strength and a confrontational approach at every turn.
Regardless of how much power the United States has, we can't resolve every issue. And in some situations we need small-ball tactics, and indeed, we have seen examples of that.
We should recognize that power is shifting. The title of Moises Naim's book, "The End of Power," may be overstated, but he correctly points out that power now manifests itself in new ways and places. New technologies and techniques allow non-state actors, inventors, hackers, activists and terrorists to exercise more influence. Consider the example of Edward Snowden. Or consider the damage cyber warfare can inflict. And modern tools of war, including drones, are cheaper and more accessible.
But power is not only shifting and dispersing. It is also decaying, Naim argues. Those in power today are more constrained in what they can do with it and more at risk of losing it than ever before -- and, as noted earlier, sometimes power is squandered or abused.
Squandering of American power in Iraq is an obvious example. Likewise, we have seen abuse of power in excessive monitoring of phone and online communication.
As international relations is experiencing a dispersal of power, business and economic trends are important contributing factors. Look at all the attention given to the potential clout of the Chinese firm Alibaba, which could become a global internet giant.
Indeed, it could be argued that the media technology realm is witnessing a concentration of power. The ongoing battle over net neutrality is evidence of how much is at stake. AT&T wants to acquire Dish; Comcast wants to take over Time-Warner Cable and increase control of content and delivery.
These telecom giants see growth as a strategy to deal with a changing media landscape at a time when streaming and wireless services are increasingly important. That growth involves not only gobbling up innovators, like Facebook's purchase of messaging service WhatsApp and virtual-reality eye wear firm Oculus, but expanding their power internationally. Facebook has 1.2 billion users globally, but the future will bring new challenges.
Internet titan Google has amassed enormous power and critics say it has too much. Just recently, the European Court of Justice dealt Google a blow, ruling that internet companies can be made to remove irrelevant or excessive personal information from search engine results. This presents technical challenges as well as potential extra costs for Google, Facebook and others. .Google is seen by many as a symbol of American power, particularly in Europe. Earlier, Microsoft, with all its power, ran afoul of European regulators.
Power has its perquisites, but it also has its perils and limitations.
The New York Yankees are proof that a huge payroll doesn't always guarantee great success. And there are times when swinging for the fences can be counter-productive or not really suited to a particular situation. It's especially hard to hit a home run in today's public and international affairs because the fences keep moving.
HOYT PURVIS IS A JOURNALISM AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS PROFESSOR.
Commentary on 05/25/2014