Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Power within an organization
Power within an organization
Power within an organization
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Power within an organization
Literature Review
This section includes the details of prior research related to organizational politics, job satisfaction and job stress of the employees and their associations with each other.
Organizational Politics
In every human organization, people that develop, influence and wield overwhelming powers in the decision making process and the underlying politics, power struggle and influence wielding is used by individuals and groups to achieve their own cherished goals. Organizational politics is considered as an unofficial struggle for achieving power Organizational politics is the process of gaining powers by various means rather than merit or by chance. It is used for gaining powers through unfair means. All the powers are gained on
…show more content…
Other researchers replicated these ideas and stated that organizational politics is not unseen and representative but different across individuals (Karen, 2015).
Awareness of organizational politics is not the awareness of an organization but it is the awareness of an entity about other political activities such as nepotism, stifling of opposing entities and exploitation of organizational politics (Kachmar & Ferris, 1991).
It creates variance because it is the struggle for authority. Various researchers recommended that it is significant viewpoints of individuals in functioning atmosphere. Organizational politics is measured as an unconstructive occurrence of an organization (Vigoda E., 2003). Influence, strength, and politics are considered as a whole. Organizational politics is associated with slyness, exploitation, rebellion or attainment of goals in inappropriate ways. Conflicts and politics create stability between varying atmospheres. Organizational politics has a positive outcome as well such as in case of promotion. Hence it is not necessary to say that it is negative behavior. It is a natural human activity. It is an individual skill (Amos & Vigoda,
This describes the diffusion of responsibilities within companies and departmental isolation. Having certain departments within a company isolated, with their own specific responsibilities can allow for deniability in the face of wrongdoing, as well difficulties in pin-pointing blame. In the case of Enron, during the oil scandal, two traders were recklessly gambling company money. When this was making the company millions, Ken Lay, the CEO, was informed of the actions but let them continue. Once this led to the company losing money, Ken Lay was able to claim he was unware of the reckless nature and that he couldn’t be blamed for something he did not know
Politics or politicking is a game that is more ostensible and reserved for the political arena; however, metaphorically, much of the political discourse can also be found within organizations. Politics in organizations, then, is design for groups to reconcile differences between interests, conflicts, and power (Morgan, 2006). The case study to be analyze (Cutting Back at City Hall) is one that illustrates all three aspects of interests, conflicts, and power as the City of Smithville, the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), the International Association of Firefighters (IAF), and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) deliberate the city’s proposed budget.
There are many theories pertaining to the nature of power in society. In modern society, it is important to identify where and when power is exercised, who benefits and who suffers from it being exerted upon them. In this tradition, it is useful to examine the managerialist perspective.
Almost every conflict situation consists of one party having more power than the other. When the power differential is significant, this usually has a major effect on both the matter and process of the dispute. In order for the outcome of the conflict to be fair, both parties must be relatively equal when it comes to power if resolution of the conflict is to be fair. If one side is far more powerful than another, they are more likely to impose their solution on the weaker party, who in turn will be forced to acquiesce, because they have no other choice.
There are several sources of power, some of them are authority, reward, expertise, and coercion.
Some theorists believe that ‘power is everywhere: not because it embraces everything, but because it comes from everywhere… power is not an institution, nor a structure, nor possession. It is the name we give to a complex strategic situation in a particular society. (Foucault, 1990: 93) This is because power is present in each individual and in every relationship. It is defined as the ability of a group to get another group to take some form of desired action, usually by consensual power and sometimes by force. (Holmes, Hughes &Julian, 2007) There have been a number of differing views on ‘power over’ the many years in which it has been studied. Theorist such as Anthony Gidden in his works on structuration theory attempts to integrate basic structural analyses and agency-centred traditions. According to this, people are free to act, but they must also use and replicate fundamental structures of power by and through their own actions. Power is wielded and maintained by how one ‘makes a difference’ and based on their decisions and actions, if one fails to exercise power, that is to ‘make a difference’ then power is lost. (Giddens: 1984: 14) However, more recent theorists have revisited older conceptions including the power one has over another and within the decision-making processes, and power, as the ability to set specific, wanted agendas. To put it simply, power is the ability to get others to do something they wouldn’t otherwise do. In the political arena, therefore, power is the ability to make or influence decisions that other people are bound by.
Authority: In bureaucratic organizations, authority resides in the office, and is as a result of one’s position on the organizational hierarchy.
The political frame relies on the assumption that organizations are alliances of unique people and interest groups. The people are unique due to their different views of the world, their morals, faith and activities and the information they have given these characteristics. The political frame also assumes that all key decisions arise from the need to allocate scarce resources such as time, money and information. These scarce resources and differences amongst people are what make conflict the core of organizational dynamics and make power such a crucial asset. Finally, the political frame assumes that all objectives and conclusions are e...
Workplace stress has become an increasingly serious issue due to its cost to organisational productivity and employee health and wellbeing. Over the years, the association between stress and counterproductive workplace behaviour (CWB) has become an increasingly popular topic of study among organizational researchers. CWB refers to behaviour by employees that harms an organization or its members (Spector & Fox, 2002). Spector and colleagues (e.g., Chen & Spector, 1992; Penney & Spector, 2005) have portrayed CWB as an emotion-based response to stressful organisational conditions.
As far back as history can be told mankind has struggled between balancing culture, power and politics. Many wars have been fought and many people have placed their lives on the line in order to stand up for what they believe in. The combinations of culture, power and politics have spilled over into the workplace. In today’s business environment individuals have much more to worry about than just completing their assigned tasks. Organizational culture, power and office politics influence day to day operations as well as govern the atmosphere within the organization. The amount of impact that power and politics have in the workplace, directly reflect the organization’s culture formally as well as informally.
Social-learning theory states that “people can learn through observation and direct experience (Robbins & Judge, 2009).” In many organic organizations, learning by “hands-on” is the essential ingredient to a successful organization. Their openness allows this type of training to flourish among the managerial-employee relationship. While social-learning may be applicable and positive for the concept of leadership, there may be a contrasting view in terms of the concept of office politics. In other words, learning by observation and experience from the daily transactions that go on in the organization will bring the best qualities out of leadership, and vice-versa, but it may bring about the worst of the organization in terms of politics.
If we think of organizations as complex social systems, we can appreciate the need for people to represent the system itself -even in times of change and diversity- and that may lead to their maximum development. Without any doubt, this is a difficult role to play by today...
Max Weber mentions that bureaucracy is characterized by impersonality (Weber, 1997), and this is another reason why it is an irrelevant phenomenon in the study of organizations. The relationships between the executive officials and their juniors in an organization that adopts a bureaucratic system of leadership in usually impersonal. Although impersonality of bureaucracy is praised as important in promoting equality by some scholars, it is a bureaucratic characteristic that cause infuriation in organizations as individual treatment of people is overridden by generalization, something that Gajduschek (2003) attests to. An important point to bear in mind is that offended employees are ultimately unproductive employees. Bureaucracies are often
(Asawo, 2011). Conflict can occur in any setting and as leaders in organizations guide and
Zeiger, S n.d., The Impact of Power and Politics in Organizational Productivity, Choron, viewed 5 April 2014, .