Organizational Change Chapter 5 PDF

Chapter 5: Power, politics and change Organizational politics Poli$cs is the act of preven$ng people from taking part in a:airs which properly concern them (Paul Valéry, 1943). De'ning power and polics 34 Power is the capacity of individuals to overcome resistance on the part of others, to exert...

Chapter 5: Power, politics and change Organizational politics Poli$cs is the act of preven$ng people from taking part in a:airs which properly concern them (Paul Valéry, 1943). De'ning power and polics 34 Power is the capacity of individuals to overcome resistance on the part of others, to exert their will, and to produce results consistent with their interests and objec$ves (Huczynski and Buchanan, 2013). Poli$cal behaviour is the prac$ce of power and includes both overt and covert ac$ons by which people use their power to favour their interests. Poli$cal behaviour in organiza$ons consists of those ac$vi$es that are not required as part of an individual’s formal role but that aCempts to in8uence, the distribu$on of advantages and disadvantages within the organiza$on (Robbins and Judge, 2013). Organizaons and modes of polical rule - - - - Autocracy – absolute government where power is held by an individual or small group and supported by control of cri$cal resources, property or ownership rights, tradi$on or charisma. Bureaucracy – rule exercised through use of the wriCen word, which provides the basis for a ra$onal-legal type of authority or ‘rule of law’. Technocracy – rule exercised through use of knowledge, expert power and the ability to solve relevant problems. Codeterminaon – the form of rule where opposing par$es combine in the joint management of mutual interests, as in coali$on government or corpora$sm, each party drawing on a speci=c power base. Representave democracy – rule exercised through the elec$on of oJcers mandated to act on behalf of the electorate for a certain $me period or as long as they command support, as in parliamentary government and forms of worker control and shareholder control in industry. Direct democracy – the system where everyone has an equal right to rule and involved in all decision making, as in many communal organiza$ons such as coopera$ves and kibbutzim. This poli$cal principle encourages self-organiza$on as a key mode of organizing. Power in organizations What is power? power means being able to in8uence the behaviour of others, some$mes in a direc$on which the person or group would not, otherwise, have chosen. Power is a func$on of rela$onships. It also derives from di:erences between people and groups (some people have more knowledge, exper$se or resources than others = elas$city of power). In summary power is about the poten$al to in8uence as well as the actual use of in8uence. It is a func$on of rela$onships and di:erences between people, their beliefs about each other and how much one person has in rela$on to another. Sources of power Five sources of power were iden$=ed by French and Raven (1959): 1. Posional (legimate) power – power invested in a person’s formal posi$on in a hierarchy. This is the most obvious source of power that we are used to. We give our boss some power simply because they are our boss and they have rights to ask us to do things. 2. Expert power – this derives from a person’s skills and knowledge and was recognized by Francis Bacon (1597) in his observa$on ‘knowledge itself is power’. 3. Referent power – this is power deriving from charisma, i.e. the ability to aCract others to a cause. It is about liking and iden$fying with another. Referent power can cut across hierarchy 35 – a well-liked person at the boCom of an organiza$on may develop referent power perhaps as a spokesperson in communica$ons with higher management. 4. Reward power – the ability to give some sort of reward, for example, salary, promo$on, $me o: or access to a resource. 5. Coercive power – the power of forcing someone to do something that they would not want to do. It is nega$ve and based on the use of punishment for non-compliance. Formal power relates to the posi$on of the individual within the organiza$on and incorporates coercive, reward, legi$mate and informa$on power, all of which are par$cularly important in $mes of uncertainty and change. Personal power derives from the ‘unique characteris$cs’ of individuals such as their skills and exper$se, their personali$es and their favoured associa$on with others. Power sources, in8uence and change Weber (1947) drew aCen$on to three types of authority: - The =rst derives from tradi$on, that is, authority legi$mized by custom and prac$ce and a belief in the right of certain individuals to rule others. The second is charisma$c authority, which is legi$mized through the leader’s par$cular quali$es being valued and an inspira$on to others. The third type of authority is called ‘ra$onal-legal authority’. This type of authority characterizes the power held by people because of their posi$on in a formal or understood hierarchy that has independent standing with regard to the rules and procedures sustaining it. Power and in8uence The possible sources of individual power that give one person the ability to in8uence others are as follows: - Physical power – the power of superior force. Resource power – the possession of valued resources; the control of rewards. Posi$on power – legi$mate power; comes from the role or posi$on held in the organiza$on. Expert power – vested in someone because of their acknowledged exper$se. Personal power – charisma, popularity; resides in the person and in their personality. Nega$ve power – illegi$mate power; the ability to disrupt or stop things happening. Methods of in8uence Di:erent types of power are used in di:erent ways. Par$cular methods of in8uence aCach themselves (more or less) to par$cular types of power: - Force – derived from having physical power; bullying, loss of temper. Rules and procedures – derived from having posi$on power, backed by resource power; devising rules and procedures to result in par$cular outcomes. Exchange – derived from having resource power; bargaining, nego$a$ng, bribing. Persuasion – derived from having personal power; use of logic, the power of argument, evidence of facts. Ecology – derived from di:erent power sources; manipula$ng the physical and psychological environment to achieve certain purposes. Magne$sm – derives from personal and some$mes expert power; inspiring trust, respect; using charm, infec$ous enthusiasm. 36 Posion and resource power Posion power is generally considered to be ‘legi$mate’ power, given that it derives from a posi$on of authority inside the organiza$on. Posi$ons power bestows certain rights on those who have it, for instance the right to order others to do things or to refuse other people’s requests. Resource power is frequently associated with being able to distribute or withhold valued rewards. In order to in8uence others, both ‘push’ and ‘pull’ strategies can be used. Push (or threat) strategies aCempt to in8uence people by imposing or threatening to impose ‘costs’ on the people or groups concerned if they do not do what is desired. The ability to impose such costs will depend largely on a person’s posi$on and the resources that they control. Pull strategies re8ect content theories of mo$va$on that emphasize material, social and other extrinsic rewards. Rewards are o>en used to in8uence people by a process of exchange. Pull strategies may follow from any of the power bases. Invisible power One invisible asset is the power to control informa$on. The ability to slow down or accelerate the 8ow of informa$on gives power to people who may not occupy senior posi$ons but who act as messengers or copier of informa$on from one part of the organiza$on to another. Some people in organiza$ons get to hold ‘gatekeeper’ posi$ons. They are so called because they can open or close access to informa$on thereby including or excluding others from the informa$on. (e.g. Stalin under Lenin). Types of ‘gated’ There are several types of ‘gated’ with each type shaped by how much of four key aCributes they possess: poli$cal power, the ability to produce informa$on, rela$onships with the gatekeeper and alterna$ves to get around the gatekeeper’s control. Five classes of gated can be theorized depending on which combina$on of aCributes a person possesses: - - - - Tier 0 – tradi$onal gated who possess none of the four aCributes. They are controlled by the gatekeeper. Tier 1 – dormant gated possess one aCribute. E.g., the ‘cap$ve audience’ has a rela$onship with the gatekeeper and thus a communica$on channel. But any informa$on exchanged conforms to the prevailing agenda and orthodoxy. Tier 2 – poten$al gated possess two aCributes. E.g., the ‘exploited appren$ce’ has the ability to produce and exchange informa$on with a gatekeeper but has no poli$cal power or alterna$ves. The gatekeeper uses reciprocity to raise and communicate only ‘safe’ informa$on. Tier 3 – bounded gated possess three aCributes. E.g., the ‘threatening gated’ possess poli$cal power, alterna$ves and informa$on but lack the communica$on channels with the gatekeeper so they cannot open a discourse that could lead to change. The gatekeeper is threatened because this type of gated could develop alliances with other gatekeepers and leverage their aCributes. Tier 4 – challenging gated possess four aCributes. This class of gated has the highest bargaining power. However, having all four aCributes does not make them into gatekeepers. To make that transforma$on they need to have the capability to perform acts of informa$on control and the discre$on to exercise gatekeeping behaviour, which may derive from close aJlia$on with a powerful top manager. 37 A second type of invisible asset is that of right of access. E.g., to alliances and the informal organiza$on: The skilled organiza$onal poli$cian systema$cally builds and cul$vates such informal alliances and networks, incorpora$ng whenever possible the help and in8uence of all those with an important stake in the domain in which he or she is opera$ng (Morgan, 2006). The right to organize which stems from posi$on power is another invisible asset. An example is the power to say who gets the best oJces or to overlook certain rules according to convenience. Controlling decisions and covert power Issues that are not, strictly speaking, directly concerned with the decision itself can be presented in such a way as to in8uence the outcome. This type of power is ‘covert’ power. ‘here power is exercised through “non-decision making” rather than by means of aCempts to in8uence readily iden$=able (and commonly known) decision topics’. Expert or knowledge power On some issues, we rely on and accept the judgements of people who possess a par$cular know-how or understanding. However, expert power is something that one group gives to another group or person. Symbolic power Symbolic power is the power to manipulate and use symbols to create organiza$onal environments and the beliefs and understandings of others to suit one’s own purposes. Includes the use of language, rituals and myths as examples of symbolic power. Individual power Another source of power is that which derives from the personal characteris$cs of those wielding power. These include: - Energy, endurance and physical stamina, as well as the ability to focus energy and to avoid wasteful e:ort. Ability to read and understand others. Flexibility and selec$ng varied means to achieve goals. Personal toughness; willingness to engage in con8ict and confronta$on. Able to ‘play the subordinate’ and ‘team member’ to enlist the support of others. The politics of powerlessness If there is one thing that symbols of power are intended to do, it is to make others who do not control these symbols feel their own lack of power. Gender and powerlessness The reasons for having more women on boards become increasingly recognized. They include: - Men and women bring complementary skills to corporate management. Women may be more risk averse. Assessors of corporate reputa$on believe that women contribute dis$nc$vely to boards. Barriers to change 38 There are several explana$ons for why women, on average, do less well than men and, if they have achieved professional status, s$ll do not rise in similar propor$ons to the higher levels in their profession or higher levels of management. They include: - Percep$ons of the social roles that men and women should perform. Placement of women in non-strategic roles from which it is harder to progress to the top and which brings exclusion from networks that are important for career advancement. Child-bearing and child-care, which limit the amount of $me available for work given that progress to the top o>en calls for long working hours and dedica$on. The use of upward in8uence tac$cs helps individuals to advance at work and there may be di:erences in the ways that men and women use in8uence. Upward in8uence concerns the ways that people try to in8uence the aLtudes of people above them in their favour. Tac$cs include: - Ra$onality – using facts and =gures to support arguments and thinking. Coali$on – claiming that lots of other people support you. Ingra$a$on – managing the impressions of others and 8aCering them. Exchange – using the exchange of bene=ts to gain favour. Asser$veness – being forceful in pushing for your way of thinking. Upward appeal – geLng support of higher levels of managers for one’s ideas and plans. Smith and colleagues (2013) found di:erences in the in8uence tac$cs used by men and women. Men were more disposed to using asser$ve and direct methods whereas women used more ingra$a$on and collabora$ve approaches. Women may also be less likely to use self-promo$on tac$cs and rely on their own high performance and commitment. Naonal culture and powerlessness Since cultural di:erences in8uence many aspects of organiza$onal life, care must be taken not to assume that prac$ces in one culture, can be transferred to another. People from di:erent cultures behave di:erently and bring di:erent values and aLtudes to the workplace. Posion and powerlessness Many employees =nd themselves rela$vely powerless due to their posi$on. They are powerless because of the par$cular posi$ons they occupy. People near the boCom of the hierarchies do not have much access to resources, informa$on and support to get a task done or the coopera$on of others to do what is necessary. Kanter (1979) iden$=ed three ‘lines’ of organiza$onal power: 1. Lines of supply 2. Lines of informa$on 3. Lines of support Kanter (1979) says: - - Power is most easily accumulated when one has a job that is designed and located to allow discre$on (non-rou$nized ac$on permiLng 8exible and crea$ve contribu$ons), recogni$on (visibility and no$ce), and relevance (being central to pressing organiza$onal problems. Power also comes when one has rela$vely close contact with sponsors (high-level people who confer pres$ge, or backing), peer networks (circles of acquaintanceship that provide reputa$on and informa$on), and subordinates (who can be developed to relieve managers of some of the burdens and to represent the manager’s point of view). 39 Politics, power and con)ict The unitary frame of reference assumes that organiza$ons are uni=ed around common interests and therefore con8ict should not arise. Managers with pluralist views of organiza$ons recognize that people have both common (shared) and divergent interest that will some$mes result in con8ict. Unitarists consider con8ict as an aberra$on from the normal state of a:airs which recognizes only formal authority as the legi$mate source of power. So from a unitarist posi$on, managers are considered as having the ‘right to manage’ while others are expected to subordinate their own personal interests. From this point of view, the only type of power recognized is formal posi$on power. The diJculty for managers, in accep$ng a unitary view of organiza$onal life, is that it leaves no room for dealing with the mul$plicity of interests which are now accepted as part of a democra$c way of doing things; hence the concept of pluralism. Con)ict in organizations Con8ict is best viewed as a process that begins when an individual or group perceives di:erences and opposi$on between him/herself and another individual or group about interests, beliefs or values that maCer to him or her (De Dreu and Beersma, 2005). - Con8ict must be perceived by the par$es to it otherwise it does not exist. One party to the con8ict must be doing something that the other party does not want. In other words there must be opposi$on. Some kind of interac$on must take place. Con8ict can occur at di:erent levels: between individuals, between groups or between organiza$ons. Con8ict is inevitable, the best thing to do is manage it and use it construc$vely for change. This interaconist view holds that situa$ons without con8ict are prone to becoming vulnerable to threats and that con8ict, within reason, will keep a group or organiza$on more living and alert. Con8ict, therefore, can be seen as an instrument of change instead of a breakdown of rela$onships. Sources of con8ict Five factors as the main sources of organiza$onal con8ict: 40 - - - - Interdependence – di:erent organiza$onal groups depend upon each other to a greater or lesser extent. Con8ict can also arise between two individuals whose tasks are interdependent when there are di:erences of opinion over priori$es and procedures. Organizaonal structures – con8ict can arise from the power imbalances that prevail in organiza$onal structures. Speci=c problems can include delays in making decisions, power struggles for the dominant posi$on, di:ering priori$es between regional managers and product managers, etc. Rules and regulaons – on the one hand, high formaliza$on creates fewer opportuni$es for disputes about who does what and when. On the other hand, where there is low formaliza$on, the level of ambiguity is such that the poten$al for jurisdic$onal dispute increases. In situa$ons of over-regula$on, people can become frustrated by a lack of autonomy and see rules and regula$ons as an expression of low trust by management. Resource limitaons – in condi$ons of austerity or when redundancies are occurring the poten$al for con8ict over resources rises. Cultural di+erences – people from di:erent cultures regard and resolve con8ict in di:erent ways. Some na$onali$es prefer to avoid con8ict, others are happy to confront it whilst s$ll others favour accommoda$ng it. Con8ict can arise through misunderstandings or through inappropriate behaviour when working across na$onal cultures. Manging con8ict Strategies for managing con8ict vary. Managers who have a unitarist aLtude towards those they manage will try to suppress con8ict whenever possible and the dominant strategy will be to exclude the opposi$on form involvement in decisions. The suppression of con8ict within a unitary frame of reference will be successful so long as those without power fear the consequences of con8ict. Techniques of con8ict management can be mapped on two dimensions: concern for produc$on and concern for people. On each dimension, an individual can score from low to high There are =ve con8ict-handling styles. Each con8ict-handling style has an outcome in terms of its capacity to tackle the content of the con8ict and the rela$onship with the other party as follows: 1. Compeng – this creates a win/lose situa$on and so the con8ict will be resolved to suit one party only. The win/lose situa$on can lead to nega$ve feelings on the part of the loser and damage the rela$onship. 2. Collaborang – this creates a win/win outcome, where both par$es gain. It frequently brings a high-quality solu$on through the results of the inputs of both par$es. Win/win outcomes result in both sides being reasonably sa$s=ed. 3. Compromising – the needs of both par$es are par$ally sa$s=ed. It requires a trading of resources. A compromise might set up a rela$onship that, in the future, could move to collabora$on. 41 4. Avoiding – this does not tackle the problem. It creates a no-win situa$on. It does, however, allow a cooling-o: period and allows the par$es to gather more informa$on to begin nego$a$ons afresh. 5. Accommodang – this can create a lose/win situa$on, but retains a good rela$onship between par$es. It involves recognizing when the other party might have a beCer solu$on than oneself. It is used when rela$onships are more important than the problem. It builds goodwill. Power, con)ict and change The two faces of power the nega$ve face of power is characterized by a primi$ve, unsocialized need to have dominance over submissive others’. Posi$ve power derives from a more socialized need to ini$ate, in8uence and lead and recognizes other people’s needs to achieve their own goals as well as those of the organiza$on. Nega$ve power is about domina$on and control of others; posi$ve power seeks to empower not only the self, but also others. The use of power Cynthia Hardy argues that power ‘can provide the energy needed to drive the organiza$on and its members through the strategic change process’ (1996). In addi$on to resource power and process power she iden$=es: - - Power over meaning – that is, aCemp$ng to alter values and norms. This involves the contemporary phenomenon of ‘spin’, for example, giving a set of reasons for change steeped in greater eJciency, moderniza$on and cost savings when the real reason is to reorganize certain people out of a structure and away from posi$ons of in8uence – possibly so that others more acceptable to the ruling class can be sloCed in to posi$ons of in8uence. System power – this is not a source that can be rasped and manipulated, rather it is a power source lying with the organiza$on and exis$ng by virtue of its par$cular culture and structure it is the power embedded in people’s acceptance of the social condi$ons they work in. it is hard to change. Some types of change are less problema$c than others. Radical, frame-breaking change is more likely to bring the greatest condi$ons of fear and uncertainty. Even so, small-scale, incremental change can upset the balance of power through small but signi=cant redistribu$ons of resources or changes in structure that make the skills or experience of some people more desirable than those of others. Nadler (1988) suggests that three major problems are associated with this transi$on process: - The problem of resistance to change. The problem of organiza$onal control. The problem of power. Covert polical acon Covert poli$cal ac$on is a phrase used to describe ac$ons of the most extreme kind witnessed during episodes of change. It embraces four interrelated themes, each of which helps to explain change in situa$ons: - Contesta$on of power and authority. Percep$ons of collec$ve injury. Social occlusion. 42 - OJcially forbidden forms of dissent. Why does cover poli$cal ac$on occur? - - - Declining control – if control held by organiza$ons or groups fall below a threshold level then ac$on is taken to restore control to an acceptable level. Identy – people who iden$fy with and who try to in8uence powerful groups are much less likely to engage in covert ac$on than, say, employees who iden$fy with each other more strongly than they iden$fy with the organiza$on that is pushing for change. Social networks – the extent of social networks in an organiza$on in8uences the extent of covert ac$on since an individual is less likely to take ac$on against a target if a friend is connected to the target. Hence, the more extensive networks are, the less the climate for covert ac$on. Organizaon structures – in par$cular how well they allow employee voice. If people feel unable to say what they are feeling there is greater likelihood of covert ac$on. Lack of voice is likely to foster the condi$ons in which grievances become long standing and eventually covert ac$ons begin to take shape. The posive use of con8ict and power Robbins and Judge (2013) regard func$onal con8ict as a posi$ve force that is absolutely necessary for e:ec$ve performance – although func$onal con8ict is con=ned to generally low-level issues. De Dreu and Beersma (2005) maintain that, between low con8ict and high con8ict, there is an op$mal level of con8ict that engenders self-cri$cism and innova$on to increase unit performance. Guidelines for dealing with con8ict 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Encourage openness. Model appropriate responses. Provide summaries and restatements of the posi$on. Bring in people who are not directly involved. Encourage people to take $me to think and reassess. Use the strengths of the group. Focus on shared goals. Try to build objec$vity into the process. Lehman and Linsky (2008) recommend the following prac$ces: - Build a container – the container metaphor represents a space where people can ‘vent their spleen’. A.k.a. a space that guarantees that there will be no repercussions for speaking out. Leverage dissident voices – Leaders of change should be openminded about what dissidents say and not let other par$es, with their poli$cal interests, suppress them. Let others resolve the con8icts – leaders are o>en expected to intervene and make rulings to resolve a con8ic$on situa$on. But there are $mes when the disputants have to be told to sort out their di:erences and report back to the top. 43 - Raise the heat – whereas leaders are o>en expected to maintain a climate of calm it is some$mes necessary to turn up the heat on a group to force fresh thinking. E.g., confron$ng a group with informa$on about its (bad) performance. Acon on power, con8ict and change Four ac$on steps help to shape the poli$cal dynamics of change: 1. To ensure or develop the support of key power groups. This involves iden$fying those individuals and groups who have the power either to assist change or to block it, although not all power groups have to be in$mately involved in the change. 2. Using leader behaviour to generate energy in support of the change. Sets of leaders working together can signi=cantly in8uence the informal aspects of organiza$onal life. 3. Using symbols and language to create energy. 4. For shaping the poli$cal dynamics of change is the need to build in stability. This is the use of power to ensure some things remain the same. It is helpful to provide sources of stability to provide ‘anchors’ for people to hold on to during the turbulence of change. Analysing the poten$al for ac$on: 1. Iden$fy who holds suJcient power to assist change or, alterna$vely, to work against it, that is, to carry out a ‘power audit’ (=gure 5.5, p. 203). 2. Compare the power of any individual or group to block change with their desire or mo$va$on to do so (=gure 5.5 & 5.6, p. 203). 44