Power And Politics

Power and Politics: A Dominating Influence

Abstract

Speaking the words "power" and "politics" may bring a sense of empowerment to many. However, power and politics in the workplace can either be a positive or a negative factor. The following paper was assigned to the students for them to describe the premise of power and politics in the workplace and then to compare the influence of power and politics on real-world companies. This comparison shows how power and politics were used in these companies and the influence they had on not only the organization itself but on other companies and the outside community at large. This command in organizations by management of all levels is a large responsibility not to be taken lightly. The overall success of the organization lies in the hands of those who wield control through power and politics.

In order to compare and contrast the dramatic influence of power and politics the definitions of both must be examined. In addition to defining these terms Team B will examine the interaction and widespread implications that occurred from the influence of power and political posturing that occurs in corporations daily.

Power Defined

Power is the ability to make someone do something you want done or the ability to make something happen in the way one desires them to do it (Schermerhorn, J.R; Hunt, J.G; & Osborn, R.N., 2006a, p.2, ch.12). When one discusses power in a business setting there are two types of power: positional power and personal power. The effect of the use of power on behavior is called influence.

Positional power in a business setting is the power that a person holds due to their position in the organization. For a manager there are six aspects of positional power that a manager can use: reward, coercive, legitimate, process, information, and representative power. All these have their place and uses in business.

To control people a manager may use reward power, which uses rewards to control people including money, promotions, and compliments; coercive power, when withholding or threatening to withhold rewards; and, legitimate power which comes from the belief and values that the position in a company has intrinsic power to approve or deny items such as vacations, time off, or overtime. This type of power works as long as the employees or subordinates respect or believe the manager has that authority.

Additionally, managers use process power, which is power given to an individual to control the methods or processes of production and information power, which is the access of the control of information. The information that is given on a need to know basis is often determined by the employee's position in the company.

A manager may also be given representative power which is the formal right conferred by a firm to speak as a representative for a group and may have personal power which resides in an individual and does not have anything to do with the individual's position. Personal power has three aspects which include knowledge or expertise, rational persuasion, and reference (Schermerhorn, J.R; Hunt, J.G; & Osborn, R.N., 2006b, p.5, ch.12).

In regard to personal power, the manager may have expert power, rational persuasion and/or referent power. Expert power is the ability to control other individuals through knowledge, expertise, or judgment. Rational persuasion occurs when an individual accepts a method or process because they agree with the outcome or goal achieved. And, referent power is the ability to control another person's behavior because the individual identifies with the boss, manager, or other source of power.

Politics Defined

A unique power in itself, office politics may be intimidating. The definition of organizational politics is basically a matter of interpretation based on the circumstances. The text defines organizational politics, according to Schermerhorn, Hunt, and Osborn, as the management of influence to obtain ends not sanctioned by the organization or to obtain sanctioned ends through non-sanctioned influence means (Schermerhorn, J.R; Hunt, J.G; & Osborn, R.N., 2006c, p.15, ch.12). By this "definition" managers use their positional power and influence to make things happen in the organization that suit their personal goals. Sometimes this style of politics "pushes the envelope" when it comes to the organizational goals and legal limits. Simply stated, it is the act or behavior of getting ahead at the expense of others in the workplace. This sort of politics does not only apply to managers and above; it applies to everyone in an organization. For example, employees applying for an open position may rationalize to their supervisor or manager that they are the best candidate for the job and why. By rationalizing, it is very common for the political participant to degrade and emotionally harm the victim of their verbal assault. Some organizations support organizational politics and feel that those who "claw their way to the top" are the best candidates for the job. Those employees will do whatever it takes to get to the position that they want.

Another "definition" of organizational politics is the art of creative compromise among competing interests (Schermerhorn, J.R; Hunt, J.G; & Osborn, R.N., 2006d, p.16, ch.12). This style of politics serves both the organization's and the individual's interest while avoiding confrontations and developing compromises. An example of this sort of "politics" is a regional manager authorizing a new position within his organization (below an existing area manager) in order to place an-already-designated supervisor into the role. The designated supervisor is put in place to oversee the operation that the regional manager feels the area manager is not doing. Having a strong supervisor to oversee the operation relieves the worry of a failing organization from the shoulders of the regional manager, while leaving the area manager in place to handle the existing customer issues for that area. Because having clearly defined goals directly impacts organizational politics, he is setting the tone for the relationship between the area manager and the newly assigned supervisor by having a predetermined plan. This is a prime example of how a manager would use organizational politics to meet his or her own needs, while at the same time meeting the company's overall goals.