Reflections on Organizational Politics and Power

It surprises me to discover that politics is defined as the resolution of different interests as found in Morgan’s book. “...In its original meaning the idea of politics stems from the view that, where interests are divergent, society should provide a means of allowing individuals to reconcile their differences through consultation and negotiation.” (Morgan, p. 150) I never knew that before. And to think the idea of politics for unity was advocated by Aristotle. I somehow missed this idea in my learnings before. This new discovery allows me to see politics with new lenses. I always thought of politics as a system that harbors discontent and destroys harmony. Politics for me used to be something that involved devious plotting and scheming and lying and cheating. Something advocated by the followers of Machiavelli and Sun Tzu. I never thought it as a tool for positive change. I guess this notion is because I have seen so many victims of organization politics in the workplace. And there were also occasions where I was the target of organizational politics, too.

Perhaps it is because of my Asian background but I believe that the cycle of organizational politics can be likened to the cyclical flow of nature. He/she who is the power center and the political maverick today just might be the victim tomorrow as the otherwise becomes true.

I could compare this to the metaphor of the bird and the piranha in the Amazon River. I saw the narrative on the National Geographic channel one day, and the message resonated.

During the rainy seasons when the Amazon River is full to the brim, piranhas living in the river jump out, grab, and eat the birds nesting in the trees found along the basin. It is a graphic sight. But the balance of power shifts during the summer, when the basin is nearly empty of water. The piranhas lay on the almost dry basin, helpless for the birds to feast on them as in a buffet.

So depending on the season, it is either the bird or the piranha that lives till another time comes.

Comparably, just like Morgan illustrates:  “A manager may control an important budget, have access to key information, and be excellent at impression management and be a powerful person for all these reasons. But his ability to draw on and use these sources of power is underpinned by various structural factors, such as intercorporate power plays or an impending merger that will eliminate his job. Many powerful managers have been the victims of downsizing.” (Morgan, p. 191)

If I had the power to change the world, I would push for soft power like I mentioned in my interview assignment. “Soft power” is like “a rough and ready power neutral relationship where a balance of sorts is possible.” (Rogers, Jenny, Coaching Skills: A Handbook, p.232)   I learned a lot from my interview with a senior manager in Satyam. He is an example of a pluralist manager with “soft power”. My subject fits the description of Morgan’s pluralist manager. He “accepts the inevitability of organizational politics, recognizing that because individuals have different interests, aims, and objectives, employees are likely to use their membership in the organization for their own ends. Management is thus focused on balancing and coordinating the interests of organizational members so that they can work together within the constraints set by the organization’s formal goals.” (Morgan, p. 198)  For my subject, it is exactly working together to become a win win situation because both manager and employee, leader and follower equalize each other’s interests, and both parties are empowered to make a difference.

The Role of the Anti

The Role of the Anti

“DO YOU know what is the most unpleasant, counter-productive and time-consuming predicament in our organisation?' asked my friend Armaan, in a rhetoric vein. `It is conflict, pure and simple.'

Conflict is perhaps one issue that causes emotional outbursts, extraneous frustration and pointless tension in the workplace. Most of us perceive conflict as damaging and destructive. Provided the energy associated with conflict is harnessed and channelled towards problem solving and organisational development, conflicts can turn into opportunities. It is an onerous task to promote healthy conflict and manage it so that it does not hamper productivity and teamwork of the employees.” (http://www.hinduonnet.com/jobs/0406/2004061600360900.htm)

I would like to focus on what struck me the most during the last class. It was the moment when the class was divided into groups – one was for change, the other was for replacement, and the third group which I was part of was the anti-change and anti-replacement group or the naysayers. I thoroughly enjoyed this interaction and I learned a lot especially on the significance of the “anti” – the rebel or the renegade. Perhaps sometimes the anti is considered as the voice of reason. Sometimes it is a pain in the butt that blocks organizational innovation. But no matter how it is experienced in the moment, the importance of hearing all voices, most especially the voices of disagreement, is essential not only to democracy but for organizational growth and development. We are tested by those who say we cannot and do not. Do we push ahead? Do we make the change? Do we convert the negative energy into a powerful force of human change? It presents such great opportunities for both the micro level and the macro level.

 However the voice of the anti is in the moment, the role of the anti is very significant most specially in large, multinational organizations like Satyam where everything is dynamic and in real time. We actually have an IT phase in our process, and we call this Testing and Validation. In Satyam, it is imperative that all activities are tested and validated to help in achieving operational excellence. Testing and Validation ensures that delivery conforms to requirements and that results are on track at each stage of value creation. Testing and Validating concepts, projects, processes, etc. help people in their decision-making by giving them informed and a balanced view of choices available. In my experience, a project that has undergone extensive, strict, and bloody Testing and Validation have more chances of greater success and acceptance by customers and stakeholders than if there were no Testing and Validation done.

The pain of course is how to manage divergent and conflicting views that have locked themselves in a meeting room for hours. After the heated debates and arguments, they can either think of the future of the team and win together by bringing in the diversity of their background to the table or they can think only of themselves and just oppose for opposition’s sake which is a losing proposition for everybody.  

Better solutions come out of drama and passion, when both sides measure up the situation and size which is the better road to follow. Opposition is not there to make things difficult or to bury the project or to protect their turf -- although, these often happen in political organizations. Opposition is there to provide a counter-weight of checks and balances so that an idea is deconstructed from all sides, both through the lenses of analysis and synthesis. This is where diversity comes in. In a homogenous crowd, people will go along with the singular course of action. Through diversity a unified decision comes from creative, thoughtful, and best possibilities.

“In today's business environment, work teams are becoming both more common and more diverse, intensifying the importance of understanding the dynamics of work-team diversity. Of particular importance to this chapter is diversity within decision-making teams. Organizations are rapidly restructuring to take advantage of the potential benefits of diverse decision making teams, making the assumption that the liabilities of such teams are worth the risk (or can be successfully avoided). Many of the specific assets and liabilities of work teams arise directly out of diversity. To be effective, diverse decision-making teams must carefully manage their assets and liabilities. Doing so presumes a thorough understanding of how and why diversity affects the behavior of teams and their members.” (http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~sjacksox/PDF/UnderstandingTheDynamicsofDiversityInDecisionMakingTeams.pdf­)

In conclusion, what I would like to say is that effective and powerful leaders are good listeners. They look at issues from all sides before making a decision whether it is simply to buy a ridiculously expensive cappuccino maker to enhance employee morale or to sign a deal for a merger that changes the very nature of doing business. Leaders must embrace diversity and opposition as long as they are valid and well-intended, not given out of spite or of negativity. To use a metaphor, it helps when the brakes in cars work for safety and use particularly during winter snow storms.