2. LEARNING OBJECTIVES
By the end of this chapter, you will be able to:
explain what is meant by organizational politics;
distinguish between different sources of power and
ways of using power to influence change;
define and discuss the links between power, politics
and conflict;
identify different ways of resolving conflict and the
situations they can be applied to.
3. ORGANIZATIONAL POLITICS
Can organizational politics be eliminated?
If so, how? If not, then what is the alternative?
Defining politics and power. Huczynski and
Buchanan (2007. p. 797) offer that
Power concerns the capacity of individuals to
exert their will over others, while political
behaviour is the practical domain of power in
action, worked out through the use of techniques
of influence and other (more or less extreme)
tactics.
4. POWER AND POLITICS
Power is the ability to make things happen and to
overcome resistance in order to achieve desired
objectives or results.
Political behavior is the observable but often covert
actions by which executives (and others) enhance
their power to influence decisions.
Robbins (2005) says that political behavior is
. . . those activities that are not required as part
of one’s formal role in the organization, but that
influence, or attempt to influence, the distribution
of advantages and disadvantages within the
organization. (pp. 400-401)
5. MORGAN’S (1997, p. 157)
ORGANIZATIONS AND MODES OF POLITICAL RULE
Autocracy. Absolute government where power is
held by an individual or small group and supported
by control of critical resources, property or ownership
rights, tradition, charisma.
Bureaucracy. Rule exercised through use of the
written word, which provides the basis for a rational-
legal type of authority or ‘rule of law’.
Technocracy. Rule exercised through use of
knowledge, expert power and the ability to solve
relevant problems.
6. MORGAN’S (1997, p. 157)
ORGANIZATIONS AND MODES OF POLITICAL RULE
Codetermination. The form of rule where opposing
parties combine in the joint management of mural
interests, as in coalition government or corporatism,
each party drawing on a specific power base.
Representative democracy. Rule exercised
through the election of officers mandated to act on
behalf of the electorate and who hold office for a
specified time period or so long as they command
the support of the electorate, as in parliamentary
government and forms of worker control and
shareholder control in industry.
7. MORGAN’S (1997, p. 157)
ORGANIZATIONS AND MODES OF POLITICAL RULE
Direct democracy. The system where everyone
has an equal right to rule and is involved in all
decision making, as in many communal
organizations such as cooperatives and kibbutzim.
This political principle encourages self-organization
as a key mode of organizing. (p. 157)
Morgan, G. (1997). Images of organizations. London: Sage.
8. WHAT IS “POWER”?
Of the 4 definitions for “power” given on page 180,
which do you prefer and why?
Senior and Swailes (the textbook) summarize:
. . . power means being able to influence the
behaviour of others, sometimes in a direction
which the person or group would not, otherwise,
have chosen. (p. 180)
What do the author’s mean when they say: “Power is
a function of relationships?”
9. FRENCH AND RAVEN (1959)
FIVE SOURCES OF POWER (P. 181)
1. Positional (legitimate) power
2. Expert power
3. Referent power
4. Reward power
5. Coercive power
Can a person have more than one?
Do multiple sources increase power?
Would you add any other to this list?
10. SENIOR AND SWAILS (2010)
POWER SOURCES AND CHANGE
Resource power : power associated
with ability to distribute or withhold
valued rewards.
What kinds of rewards could this be?
Push strategy : imposing or
threatening to impost costs (stick)
Pull or reward strategies : exchange
behavior for rewards (carrot)
11. SENIOR AND SWAILS (2010)
POWER SOURCES AND CHANGE
Invisible power : Control over resources
that are invisible, such as the power to
control information.
Morgan says, “These people are often
known as ‘gatekeepers’ who open and
close channels of communication and
filtering, summarizing, analyzing, and thus
shaping knowledge in accordance with a
view of the world that favors them.
12. SENIOR AND SWAILS (2010)
POWER SOURCES AND CHANGE
Controlling power : Wilson refers to
this type of power as ‘covert’ power
saying: “Here power is exercised
through ‘non-decision making,’ rather
than by means of attempts to influence
readily identifiable (and commonly
known) decision topics. (Passive
aggressive?)
13. SENIOR AND SWAILS (2010)
POWER SOURCES AND CHANGE
Expert or knowledge power : People
who possess a particular know-how or
understanding. Those who have
specialist knowledge or expertise in
scarce supply have a particular kind of
resource power.
14. SENIOR AND SWAILS (2010)
POWER SOURCES AND CHANGE
Symbolic power : The power to manipulate
and use symbols to create organizational
environments and the beliefs and
understandings of others to suit one’s own
purposes. For example: calling someone
“boss” symbolizes their power in relation to
one another.
Symbolism comes in various forms:
terminology, use of time, seating, etc.
How is this important for change?
15. SENIOR AND SWAILS (2010)
POWER SOURCES AND CHANGE
Individual power : that which derives from the
personal characteristics of those wielding power,
including:
Energy, endurance and physical stamina;
Ability to focus energy to avoid wasteful effort;
Sensitivity and ability to read others;
Flexibility and selecting varied means to achieve
goals;
Personal toughness; willingness to engage in
conflict and confrontation;
Able to “play the subordinate” and “team member”
to enlist support of others.
16. THE POLITICS OF POWERLESSNESS
Gender and powerlessness
Why do women, on average, do less
well than men in terms of reaching
equality in opportunities and pay?
What potential qualities do women
bring to the workplace that are
beneficial and highlight the need to
work toward gender equality?
17. THE POLITICS OF POWERLESSNESS
National culture and powerlessness
What cultural barriers may limit the power
of one culture in another culture?
18. THE POLITICS OF POWERLESSNESS (P. 197)
Position and powerlessness
Power is most easily accumulated
when one has a job that allows what
three things?
Power also come when one has
relatively close contact with what
three groups of people?
19. POLITICS, POWER, AND CONFLICT
Conflict in organizations
The nature of conflict
The layers of organizational conflict
Misunderstandings
Differences of viewpoint
Differences of interest
Interpersonal differences
Interdependence: The direction
20. ANTAGONISTS IN THE CHURCH
Haugk, K. (1988). Antagonists in the church: How to deal with
destructive conflict. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg.
21. ANTAGONISTS IN THE CHURCH
Haugk, K. (1988). Antagonists in the church: How to deal with
destructive conflict. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg.
22. POLITICS, POWER, AND CONFLICT
Conflict in organizations
At the heart of most conflicts is competition for
scarce resources (physical, emotional, time,
promotions, power, rewards, etc.)
Conflict defined:
Conflict is best viewed as a process that begins
when an individual or group perceives differences
and opposition between him/herself and another
individual or group about interests, beliefs or
values that matter to him or her.
(De Dreu and Beersma, 2005)
23. POLITICS, POWER, AND CONFLICT
Conflict in organizations
Organizational structures
Rules and regulations
Limited resources
Cultural differences
Environmental change
24. POLITICS, POWER, AND CONFLICT
Conflict in organizations
Managing conflict
Accomodating – (high concern for people, low for
production)
Avoiding – (low/low)
Competing – high production, low people)
Collaborating (problem solving) – a more
constructive approach of information sharing, trying
to meet both sides, represented by high scores on
both dimensions.
Compromising – (moderate scores on both
dimensions)
25. See textbook page 206, Illustration 5.11 for conflict resolution and
situational appropriateness.
30. POWER, CONFLICT AND CHANGE
Guidelines for dealing with conflict (Ill. 5.12)
1. Encourage openness
2. Model appropriate responses
3. Provide summaries and restatements of the position
4. Bring in people who are not directly involved
5. Encouraged people to take time to think and reassess
6. Us the strengths of the group
7. Focus on shared goals
8. Use directions and interests to develop areas of new
gain
9. Try to build objectivity into the process
10. Adopt an enquiring approach to managing
Discretion, recognition, and relevance
Sponors (high level people); peer networks, and subordinates
Misunderstandings – These are ‘getting the wrong end of the stick’- genuine misconceptions about what was said or done and which have the capacity for speedy resolution.
Differences of values – Value differences are the other end of the scale to misunderstandings. Conflicting values lead to the most serious disagreements. The values involved may be based on ethical considerations such as whether to take bribes to win contracts; the level at which safety should be set; whether to deal with regimes that condone particular ways of behaving (e.g. imprisoning those who disagree with them). Difference of values may also involve disagreements about the purpose of the organization, i.e., the ends for which it exists. Thus differences of values are almost always about ends or goals or objectives.
Differences of viewpoint – Different parties may share the same values but have different views on how particular goals or purposes should be met. Thus differences of viewpoint are disagreements on the means by which particular ends should be achieved. For example, two parties may agree on a goal but disagree on how to reach it. One may argue or increasing prices, the other may argue of cost cutting and redundancies.
Differences of interest – Status, resources, advancement are all desirable outcomes that most people want and, fi they have them, they want to keep hold of them. The distribution of these outcomes is not a once and for all process; it is constantly being adjusted through budget setting, organizational restructuring, strategic planning and so on. Therefore, competition between individuals and, particularly, departments is ever present.
Interpersonal differences – Some people find it difficult to work with others – what most people would refer to as personality clashes. This might be because 9of differences of temperament, style or ways of behaving. Care should be taken, however, not to mistake other types of differences for personality clashes. Accounting for conflict under this heading is often used as an excuse for not facing up to differences that might be occurring for other reasons.
Adapted by Haugk from the work of Speed Leas (1985). Moving your church through conflict. Washington, DC: The Alban Institute.
Level I: Problems to Solve – The objective is to work out a solution to the problem, whatever it is. Anger may surface (as on any level), but the focus remains on finding an amicable resolution to the conflict as person-oriented. Full use is made of rational opportunities to work out a solution, and communication is quite open. Individuals operating on this level use language that is straightforward and centered in the here and now. They have no hidden agendas.
Level II: Disagreements – The objective becomes colored with a need for self-protection. There is a shift from unreserved openness to some guardedness (not actually hostile, except perhaps in the appearance of sarcastic overtones in the language used). At this level, individuals move away from dealing with specifics and tend toward generalizations. Those operating at Level II frequently turn to compromise as a medoth of dealing with differences.
Level III: Contests – Those operating at this level view conflict from a “win/lose” perspective. The objective is no longer to solve the problem. Even self-protection has faded into the background. What matters is winning, putting ones opponents “in their proper place.” The language used by those operating on this level reveals some perceptual distortion. Although it occurs infrequently, healthy resolution of conflict at this level is still possible.
Level IV: Fight/Flight – Parties at this level have the objective of hurting their opponents in some way, getting rid of them, or both. The good of the organization is not a concern at this level. Being right and punishing those who are wrong predominates. The language used appeals to generalized and personalized principles (such as truth, freedom, and justice) and avoids the specific issue or issues at hand. At this level, the choices have crystallized into two: fighting for fleeing.
Level V: Intractable Situations – Leas described this level as “conflict run amok.” Whereas the objective at Level IV is to punish or get the other out of the organization, the objective of individuals in conflict at this fifth level is purely and simply to destroy opponents irrespective of cost to self or others.
