![office politics definition office politics definition](https://i.etsystatic.com/23812196/c/2137/1706/9/100/il/547e36/2545597550/il_340x270.2545597550_fpvf.jpg)
This brings up the question of why we have policies and standard operating procedures (SOPs) in organizations.
79–100.Īs a result, contemporary managers must be sensitive to political processes as they relate to the acquisition and maintenance of power in organizations. Mays, “Organizational Politics: An Exploration of Manager’s Perceptions,” Human Relations, February 1980, pp. Efforts to restructure a particular department, open a new division, introduce a new product line, and so forth, are invitations to all to join the political process as different factions and coalitions fight over territory.īecause most organizations today have scarce resources, ambiguous goals, complex technologies, and sophisticated and unstable external environments, it seems reasonable to conclude that a large proportion of contemporary organizations are highly political in nature.ĭ. Periods of organizational change also present opportunities for political rather than rational behavior. Hence, we are likely to see more political behavior on major questions, such as long-range strategic planning decisions. Programmed decisions, on the other hand, are typically specified in such detail that little room for maneuvering exists. When decisions are not programmed, conditions surrounding the decision problem and the decision process are usually more ambiguous, which leaves room for political maneuvering. A distinction is made between programmed and nonprogrammed decisions. Under these conditions, ambiguity and uncertainty are increased, thereby triggering political behavior by groups interested in pursuing certain courses of action. In general, political behavior is increased when the nature of the internal technology is nonroutine and when the external environment is dynamic and complex.
![office politics definition office politics definition](https://thepowermoves.com/wp-content/uploads/office-politics-example.jpg)
If resources were ample, there would be no need to use politics to claim one’s “share.” Politics surfaces when resources are scarce and allocation decisions must be made. As a result, members may pursue personal gain under the guise of pursuing organizational goals. When the goals of a department or organization are ambiguous, more room is available for politics. These are shown in (Figure), along with possible resulting behaviors. Leana, “Power Relinquishment versus Power Sharing: Theoretical Clarification and Empirical Comparison of Delegation and Participation,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 1987, 72, pp. Miles, Macro Organizational Behavior (Glenview, III.: Scott, Foresman, 1980) C. The least politics would be expected under conditions of low uncertainty and complexity and little competition among employees over resources.
![office politics definition office politics definition](https://thepowermoves.com/wp-content/uploads/office-politics-strategies.jpg)
As can be seen, we would expect the greatest amount of political activity in situations characterized by high uncertainty and complexity and high competition among employees or groups for scarce resources. On the basis of findings such as these, it is possible to develop a typology of when political behavior would generally be greatest and least. These decisions are typically characterized by clearly established policies, procedures, and objective criteria. On the other hand, the managers in the study ranked as least political such decisions as personnel policies, hiring, and disciplinary procedures. Such decisions are typically characterized by an absence of established rules and procedures and a reliance on ambiguous and subjective criteria. Results showed that the most political decisions (in rank order) were those involving interdepartmental coordination, promotions and transfers, and the delegation of authority. Murray, “The Experience of Workplace Politics,” Academy of Management Journal, 1980, 23, pp.