Organizational politics can be defined as the pursuit of individual agendas and selfinterest of individuals within the constructs of an organization to achieve his/her own
goals with no regard to the best interest of that organization.
This discussion answers, in my own words, what I feel organizational politics
is/encompasses. It also answers: How do organizations encourage political activity?
Which influence tactics are the most effective? Under what circumstances is it ethical to
manipulate people for the good of the organization?
According to businessdirectory.com, organizational politics is defined as, “The pursuit of
individual agendas and self-interest in an organization without regard to their effect on
the organization's efforts to achieve its goals.” Our textbook describes organizational
politics as the intentional acts of influence to enhance or protect the self-interest of
individuals or groups (Borkowski, 2011). To me, because the term is “organizational”
politics, I think that acts of influence will likely have an effect on the group simply
because I associate “organization” with something large (i.e. group) and not just an
individual. Regardless, I also feel that the term organizational politics has a negative
connotation simply because politics brings to mind: game-playing, greed, lying, cheating,
and misleading.
Nevertheless, organizational politics “happens” and it isn’t all negative. To a certain
extent, organizational politics are necessary both for “survival” as well as
“advancement.” Without meaning to sound presumptuous, I think that organizations
encourage organizational politics by rewarding those (either knowingly or unknowingly)
who participate in organizational politics. With that said, I think there are some
employees who don’t purposely utilize politics, but their actions appear to be politicallike (i.e. the type A personality employee who likes to be in charge, have a say, get things
done, praises teamwork, etc.). These employees may appear to be utilizing politics to
their advantage when in actuality they are doing their job the only way they know how.
Unfortunately, perception usually outweighs reality in situations like these. Regardless,
organizations often reward those (and rightfully so) who appear to have the rapport with
colleagues, support from their team, “know” the right information or the “right” people,
and “look” good within the company (and possibly outside the company).
There are many methods for influencing behaviors. In organizational politics, some ways
include: attacking or blaming others, using information, creating a favorable image,
developing a base of support, praising others, forming power alliances/coalitions,
associating with the “right” people, and creating obligations (Borkowski, 2011).
Furthermore, the following methods may have an effect on how the aforementioned ways
are utilized. For example: assertiveness, ingratiation, rationality tactic, exchange
category, upward appeal, and coalition formation (Borkowski, 2011). Of these, I feel that
the best method to utilize in organizational politics is creating and maintaining a
favorable image. In order to do this (as well as many of the other ideas), I feel the best
route to take will be to ingratiate colleagues with praise. Behaviors like giving praise and
practicing humility help build rapport as well as respect.
Lastly, the word “manipulate” doesn’t have the best perception either. When I hear it, I
automatically think of someone being “tricked” into doing something the other person
wanted but didn’t have the means necessary to carry out. Therefore, even if the intent of
the person doing the manipulating is “good,” it doesn’t mean it’s okay. If information is
used to mislead, misinform, trick, gain status, etc., it is not okay. Obviously data can be
“tweaked” to look like something it isn’t, but as long as the data is correct, I wouldn’t
consider it outright manipulating. With that said, if an organization is going to give
information that is technically correct but is going to be used to make something look
better than it is, there is a fine line between what is wrong and what is right. If the
organization’s goals are to get others to change their views/minds, then using data to
show the desired picture or political presence is probably okay if it’s for the best of the
organization/community, etc. However, if the data is going to be used so that others in the
organization can be “tricked” into believing a falsehood, the manipulation is not okay.
There may be a fine line between being ethical and being political savvy, but I would
agree with ethical on any given today.
Borkowski, N. (2011). Organizational Behavior in Health Care. Sudbury, MA: Jones and
Bartlett Publishers
Businessdirectory.com. (2014). Organizational politics. Retrieved from
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/organizational-politics.html