By Shadreck Zangairai
In every organisation there is a hierarchy, which, more often, is characterised by an uneven distribution of power. Some employees are more likely to pursue this power than others, which is considered political behaviour in the workplace. The term ‘organizational politics’, also known as workplace politics, refers to the agenda of each employee within a company and the activities they engage in to acquire, increase, and wield power and resources to gain a desired outcome. Organizational politics is imminent in most organizations. It affects all employees and they experience its impact throughout their careers, whether positive or negative. For some employees, it’s a means of engaging in office gossip, while for others, it’s an opportunity to climb the career ladder.
Many people perceive the word politics with disdain, and visions of shady behaviour that is manipulative, divisive, and exclusively self-serving. But is that so? This view seem to originate from society’s perception of the ‘politics’ of the politician. In just one of countless examples, Mencken noted that a good politician is quite as unthinkable as an honest burglar. Researchers corroborate society’s increasingly negative opinions by documenting politicians’ status as one of the least trusted occupations. Contrary, research in the organizational sciences largely has run parallel to other academic disciplines, opting for a less than flattering treatment of the construct. There are two ways of viewing organisational politics: either as a symptom of social influence processes that benefit the organisation, or a self-serving effect that goes against the organisational goals. Nevertheless, the concept of organisational politics is a key social influence process that can either be functional or dysfunctional to employees and organisations. This paper delves much into the down side of organisational politics, with a little bit analysis of the up side of the subject.
The impact of Organisational Politics
Organisational politics cannot be ignored, but you join it at your own peril or ignore it at your own peril again. However, despite all that, the thing is inevitable, it’s either you are caught in between or you participate. The bad part is that, unchecked organizational politics can destroy a company when left to spiral out of control. But, although it being portrayed negatively, organizational politics are not inherently bad. Instead, it’s important to be aware of the potentially destructive aspects of organizational politics in order to minimize their negative effect. However, as John Kotter wrote in the book, ‘Power and Influence’, ‘without political awareness and skill, we face the inevitable prospect of becoming immersed in bureaucratic infighting, parochial politics and destructive power struggles, which greatly retard organizational initiative, innovation, morale, and performance’. Organizational politics are a normal part of the workplace. However, it is important that organizations create an environment whereby politics don’t become destructive. This can be achieved through implementing key objectives that create standards within the organization. There are various characteristics of organizational politics, although not exhaustive, the following are some of the characteristics; Indirect and informal communication, Use of underground tactics to advance, Manipulation, Not offending the wrong people, Courting attention, Truth management, Concealment of vulnerability, Currying favors, Scapegoating, Passing the bulk, and Learning how to use others.
The Up Side of Organizational Politics
Politics exist in all organizations and it can either be a blessing or curse . Organizational politics do indeed matter. The aim of organizational politics is to sell ideas, influence others and to achieve objectives; they are informal and unofficial and can sometimes occur ‘behind closed doors. However, despite this negative perception of organizational politics, there is evidence that organizational politics are not necessarily evil but that, if used effectively, can aid in gaining compromises in difficult workplace situations. Since the main thrust of this write-up focuses mainly on the downside of organisational politics, I will go straight to the main theme of the discussion.
The Down Side of Organizational Politics
The dark side of organizational politics is that it can be a curse and negatively affect job performance. Because of hunger for power, most organisations are being run like a jungle where the stronger eat the weaker ones. As a result of the stiffening macro-political platform, the micro-political platform prevailing in offices is also making it very difficult for professionals to thrive in the business world. In order to remedy this overly political behaviour, company leaders can provide equal access to information, model collaborative behaviour, and demonstrate that political manoeuvring will not be rewarded or tolerated. Moreso, leaders should encourage managers throughout the organization to provide high levels of feedback to employees about their performance. High levels of feedback reduce the perception of organizational politics and improve employee morale and work performance. Remember that politics can be a healthy way to get things done.
Allowing dark politics to exist has long-term performance implications, particularly on the talent management front. It has a debilitating effect on competent employees who are driven by doing what is right for the organization. They become disengaged, they leave or they are pushed out. When employees see that their boss successfully climb the ladder through cunning, the message will be loud and clear: the perception will be that, success as a leader requires mastering dark politics. The more political the culture becomes, the more it reinforces that message and the more political people get. Such a political culture tends to attract “corporate politicians’’, thereby clearly creating a vicious circle. True to this notion, when managers play politics, they don’t have enough time for leadership. The bottom line is that it will spell trouble for the organization’s leadership pipeline and its ability to attract ethical talent. Looking forward to, say a decade or so to come, the company might be dead. This is a strategic issue that Human Resources (HR) management should be very concerned about. HR leaders should therefore lead by example. They should not play dark politics and allow corporate politicians to win the day in HR. There is need to raise awareness about the light and dark sides of politics, explain about the importance of the former and the implications of the latter, both immediate and future.
Again, politics within the company will not allow employees to be efficient in production. Most of them will be working at a low capacity. This will reduce production and is likely to lead to losses. Equally, the efforts of the hardworking employees will not be noticed. Furthermore, negative organizational politics also encourage laziness among some employees, thereby affecting the work of serious employees in the company. For instance, if 10 workers are serious with their work, whereas 20 workers are not serious with their work, the net effect will be poor work. Moreover, workers will divert their energies and resources to organizational politics. Thus, little energy will be left for production processes. Serious employees will be demoralized and will give up in their quest to productivity for the company. Likewise, it will be hard for the team leaders and managers to lead people with a negative attitude towards work. The end result is that, workers will not listen to their departmental heads. This will cause conflicts that affect the company.
The other negative effect of organization politics is the presence of demotivated employees. Motivation amongst employees ensures that there is increased productivity. Lack of motivation will underpin failure within the company. Sometimes, non-performers are favoured by managers because of their involvement in politics. This might not be taken well by other employees. Performers will not have any reason to work hard for the company. They will be demotivated and will not perform their tasks. For instance, employees involved in service delivery, they will perform poorly and are likely to discourage customers from using the services of the company. They will not provide services in a satisfactory manner. Customers are likely to boycott the products and services of the company leading to reduced revenue for the company.
Organizational politics could ruin the ambience. The world of business require people and organizations to have good relations to foster unity in production and service delivery. However, organizational politics interfere with good relations among employees of a company by creating an unfriendly work environment. Employees will not have peace in their workplace. Situations of negative work environment will enhance high turnover rates in the company.
Office politics take away trust that 0employees have in management. All decisions made by management even those that are rational, are all seen as influenced by a few crafty employees for their benefit. Trust among staff is critical in fostering team work and. When employees cannot trust each other, synergy cannot thrive and little output is registered. This is in support of John Kotter’s, assertion that when an organization is punctuated by an environment where employees do not trust each other, the pursuit to the successful achievement of the organization-wide vision and strategy is completely lost.
An environment where the weak ones are eaten by the stronger ones inhibits staff morale. It creates more fear in the weaker members of staff and thus takes away their energy to be expended on the job. The end result is talent flight. The most talented members of staff may not be the most crafty ones who have mastered the game called ‘office politics’. Office politics therefore, can make the most talented members of staff to either be eaten by the stronger ones by being ‘fired’ or make them resign. More often, greed and corruption will thrive in the organisation. Although it is nearly impossible to stop office politics or choose not to be affected by it, all that we can do is to constantly foster our respective professional ethics which have the potential to effectively address the dark side of office politics.
The Ethical Paradox of Organizational Politics
Before engaging in organizational politics, it is advisable to consider some ethical principles for guidance. Taking a leaf from SUN TZU’s view in the book titled, ‘The Art of War’, the following were given as advice to army troops, but in this case I equate it to an organization’s troops, who are the employees. It goes by saying, if it is not advantageous, do not act. One should ask, what benefit will be derived from/by engaging in the war/politics. If not in danger, do not battle, if it is not attainable, do not employ troops. Many a times, battles are lost by engaging troops to an unattainable battle. Many leaders fail this test as they force their employees to achieve goals that are beyond their reach. Victory is the general’s goal, so do not engage in military activity if there is no. Determine the ethical action to follow, ie, what is the value of the action? How does the value balance out any harm it will do to others and the organization? Does the action conform to standards of equity and justice?
In that same vein, it is ideal to consider the landscape one will be operating in. The great lesson in knowing this is that the landscape dictates the actions to be taken. Every activity takes place on a certain ground, and every ground suggests the response appropriate to it. One is therefore challenged to know the political landscape of his organization so as to be guided in all actions. In that same book, The Art of war, SUN TZU has this to say, in spread out ground do not encamp, in junction ground join with allies, in crossing ground do not linger, in enclosed ground strategize, and in death ground do battle’. Knowledge of the landscape include knowing the key players which lead you to successful alliances, knowing the rules which will help you to survive. This will assist to know who not to offend, which helps you in the actions to choose. So the landscape can be many things.
In a battle, it is recommended not to fight the enemy head on but rather shape the enemy ground. This narrows their course of action and leads them where you want. They have no alternative if the offer is made from the perspective of victory. They choose it as if it were their own idea. In the sense of organizational ground, it consists of the formal hierarchy, ie the reporting structure and who works for whom. In contrast to this, there is informal hierarchy which runs parallel to the formal one. This comprises of people with power and gatekeepers. Some of these know the office gossip while others may control the boss’ schedule.
Disclaimer; Shadreck Zangairai is the Principal Human Resources Officer at Masvingo Provincial Hospital. He writes in his personal Capacity
(sh***********@gm***.com)
