Power, Politics, and Conflict in Change Management

Power and Politics in Change Management

This section focuses on understanding the role of power and politics within organizations, particularly during periods of change. Key areas include:

• Factors emphasizing power and politics in organizations
• Personality traits and political behavior
• Diagnosing the political landscape
• Sources of power and strategies for conflict resolution

Factors Increasing Emphasis on Power and Politics

According to Buchanan and Badham (1999), the following factors contribute to an increased emphasis on power and politics in organizations:

1. Widened scope of organizational change strategies - Organizations increasingly seek varied approaches to change.
2. Increase in organizational uncertainty - Unpredictable environments necessitate more political maneuvering.
3. Competitive nature of managerial careers - Managers face greater competition for advancement.
4. Job insecurity and mobility - Workers are more aware of job instability and opportunities elsewhere.

Personality Traits, Power and Political Behaviour

Important personality traits related to power and political behavior include:

1. Need for Power - The desire to influence others and make impactful changes.
2. Machiavellianism - Characterized by manipulation and deceit; includes lack of morality and cynicism towards others.
3. Locus of Control - Belief in self-control vs. control by others.
4. Risk-Seeking Propensity - Willingness to engage in risky options.

Understanding Politics in Organizations

Rational vs Political Models

• Rational Model: Organizations function logically, making decisions based on clear goals and the analysis of alternatives.
• Political Model: Organizations consist of various groups with conflicting interests, requiring the use of power and influence for decision-making.

Definition of Politics

• Activities undertaken to acquire power and resources, especially in uncertain situations.

Political Climate

Reardon (2002) identifies four types of political climates in organizations:

1. Minimally Politicized: Amicable atmosphere, rare conflicts, cooperative spirit.
2. Moderately Politicized: Generally understood rules, some unsanctioned practices; conflicts are common but not pervasive.
3. Highly Politicized: Frequent conflicts, cliques exist; who you know is more important than what you know.
4. Pathologically Politicized: Non-productive environment marked by continuous conflict and distrust.

Political Styles

Reardon (2002) describes four political styles:

1. Purist: Relies on hard work and rules; rejects political maneuvering.
2. Team Player: Works for team goals, participates in mild political actions to benefit the group.
3. Street Fighter: Uses aggressive tactics and subliminal politics for personal advancement.
4. Maneuverer: Skillfully plays political games, often in an unobtrusive manner.

Fit of Style to Organization Type

Each political style can fit into various organizational environments:

Diagnosing the Political Landscape

Heifetz, Grashow, and Linsky (2009) emphasize the importance of understanding stakeholder dynamics:

• Identify each stakeholder's stakes in the challenge, desired outcomes, engagement level, and influence.
• Consider their values, loyalties, and hidden alliances as crucial factors.

Understanding Power

Power is defined as the control or influence over others’ behaviors, shaping how conflicts of interest are resolved. It can be viewed through:

• Processual Level: Power from daily interactions.
• Institutional Level: Power stemming from societal structures.
• Organizational Level: Internal hierarchies reinforce power.

Types of Power

• Coercive: Control through threats or force.
• Remunerative: Control via financial rewards.
• Normative: Control through social recognition and prestige.
• Legitimate, Referent, Expert Power: Recognized forms of power that relate to authority, respect, and expertise.

Power Tactics and Influencing Strategies

Buchanan and Huczynski (2004) outline various tactics and strategies:

• Image Building: Creating a favorable public image.
• Selective Information: Sharing only certain information to influence.
• Networking: Utilizing social connections to gain influence.
• Compromise and Rule Manipulation: Finding middle ground or bending rules.

Resolving Workplace Conflicts

Lytle (2015) suggests that conflicts, when managed well, can lead to positive outcomes:

• Healthy Conflict: Encourages trust and improvement.
• Understanding Areas of Misalignment: Identifying conflicting priorities and perspectives is essential.

Encouraging Trust

• Engagement Strategies: Surveys, recognizing positive actions, welcoming dissent, creating diverse teams, and facilitating accountability are recommended for fostering a trusting environment.

Conflict Resolution Approaches

Buchanan and Huczynski (2004) identify several conflict resolution methods:

• Competing/Forcing: Unilateral decision-making.
• Avoiding: Stepping back from the conflict.
• Compromising: Finding a middle ground.
• Accommodating: Yielding to others’ preferences.
• Collaborating: Working together for a mutually satisfying solution.

References

• Buchanan, D. & Huczynski, A. (2004). Organizational Behaviour; An Introductory Text. Essex: Pearson Education Ltd.
• Cummings, T.G. & Worley, C.G. (2005). Organization Development and Change. Ohio: Thomson South Western.
• Heifetz, R., Grashow, A. & Linsky, M. (2009). The Practice of Adaptive Leadership: Tools and Tactics for Changing Your Organization and the World. USA: Cambridge Leadership Associates.
• Lytle, T. (2015). How to Resolve Workplace Conflicts. SHRM, July 13.
• Reardon, K.K. (2002). The Secret Handshake: Mastering the Politics of the Business Inner Circle. New York: Currency Book.