Discuss using political strategies and tactics in organizations. Are the strategies and tactics realistic elements of modern organizational life? What were your reactions to the descriptions of political strategy and tactics?

Political Strategies

A political strategy is a written or unwritten plan to reach a goal using specific political tactics. The strategy specifies the goal to reach and the political means to reach that goal. A well-designed political strategy includes a plan for dealing with changes in the political context within which the person works. The plan explicitly recognizes that political events in organizations do not always happen as expected. A political strategy specifies political tactics in various combinations and sequences for dealing with different political events as the strategy unfolds.

Executives, managers, and supervisors are not the only ones who use political strategies. Strategies are available to people at all levels of an organization. This aspect of political strategies is one reason political behavior is so pervasive in organizations. It also helps explain the intrigue organizational politics brings to organizational life.

Researchers have documented political strategies in the following areas:

Decisions about resource allocations, such as budgets, choice of senior executives, and the design of the organization

Career development and enhancement

Performance appraisals prepared by a supervisor or manager

Pay increase decisions

Major organizational change

Political Tactics

Political tactics are specific political influence behaviors used to reach a goal. The tactics involve either building power or using power unobtrusively. A political strategy can use a mix of tactics, moving from one to another as the political landscape changes.

Decision-making processes can have a distinctly political dimension. Politically oriented decision makers can affect the choice of alternatives that favor themselves or their organizational units. A decision maker can use his power to affect the process by selectively emphasizing a favored decision alternative. The alternative he wants will enhance or increase the power of the decision maker or his unit.

A politically oriented decision maker can also call upon an outside expert or consultant. Because the consultant is an outsider, he can bring an aura of objectivity and legitimacy to the decision alternatives under consideration. Decision makers call in consultants when power within the decision-making process is about equally dispersed and the issue is critical to either the organization or the individual. When power is well balanced, the decision maker needs another lever to increase his power within the process.

An unobtrusive way of using power in an organization is to control the decision-making agenda. People who want matters to stay as they are often use this tactic. By controlling the agenda, they can decide both whether an issue or problem is considered at all and, if considered, where it will appear on the agenda. Items toward the end of an agenda may get less attention than those presented earlier. Decisions made about earlier issues on the agenda can affect later decisions.

People build coalitions when they want to create a power base to reach the goals of their political strategy. The coalition can be internal, formed around people and groups within the organization, or external, formed around people and groups outside the organization. In both cases, the decision maker believes the individuals or groups are important to his position.

A person uses co-optation as a political tactic to persuade outsiders or insiders to favor his position. Through co-optation, he tries to lure people to his side. The targets of co-optation are potential opponents or people whose help can smooth the way to reaching his goals. Placing outsiders on boards of directors, advisory councils, or task forces can give them information that persuades them that a particular issue or position is important. A politically savvy person can use committees to co-opt insiders. Issues or problems that require information from many sources and the commitment of those sources to a decision can benefit from a committee approach.

Impression management is a highly manipulative political tactic. People use this tactic to control the image they project to another person. Behaviors such as looking busy and asking for more tasks and responsibilities can build positive impressions. Supervisors who want to convey an impression of impartiality during performance feedback can begin with positive commentary before moving to any negative feedback.

Other political tactics include a repertoire of eight influence tactics People can use these tactics to influence others’ behavior in the three power flow directions described earlier. The following summarizes the eight tactics:

Assertiveness: Using threats, demands, and intimidation to affect behavior, especially with someone of lower status and power; similar to coercive power, described earlier.

Ingratiation: Using flattery and creating goodwill with another person to affect his behavior; an element of impression management, described earlier.

Rationality: Using a logical argument, oral or written, to affect another person’s behavior.

Sanctions: Using organizationally based punishments to affect a person’s behavior; coercive power, described earlier in the chapter. Used more with subordinates than with coworkers or superiors.

Exchange of benefits: Using favors and benefits to influence another person, especially a coworker.

Upward appeal: Getting support for a cause from higher levels in the organization.

Inspirational appeal: Focusing on a person’s values to arouse emotional support for a proposal. Similar to transformational and charismatic leadership, described in Chapter 12, “Leadership and Management.”

Consultation: Involving the person you want to influence in the decision process.

Recall that power flows in all directions: downward, laterally, and upward. Some research shows that managers often use consultation, rationality, inspirational appeal, and ingratiation in all three directions.43 Because power most easily flows downward in organizations, supervisors can use all political tactics in supervisor–subordinate relationships. For example, a supervisor could use sanctions to change the direction of someone’s behavior in his work unit. Tactics that can work in lateral relationships include coalitions and upward appeals. A marketing manager who is trying to influence peer managers to accept a marketing campaign could appeal to a higher authority for support. The higher authority could then coerce the peer managers to accept the campaign. Upward influence efforts call for tactics that do not directly use formal authority. Impression management and rationality can help a junior team member affect the thinking of the team leader about the team’s direction.