How do power, politics, conflict and negotiations affect organizations? - Chapter 13

What is the connection between power and politics?

Power is the ability of a person or group to cause another person or group to do things that they would otherwise not have done. Power is a means of managing and controlling organizational goals and activities.

Organizational politics are the activities undertaken by managers to increase their power and to pursue their goals in favor of their personal and group interests. On the one hand, the terms power and politics have a negative sound because people associate them with self-interest; managers who abuse power and politics act in favor of their own interests at the expense of others.

On the other hand, power and politics can help the organization. First because of the discussions that can arise as a result of different opinions about solutions. These discussions ensure better quality decision-making. This is called political decision-making.

Secondly, different perspectives can promote the change that the organization needs to adapt better to a changing environment. When coalitions, groups of managers with the same interests, lobby for an organization to use new strategies or change its structure, the use of power can lead to shifting the organization in other directions.

What are the sources of individual power?

People differ in the power they have over others. Where do these people get their power from and how do they get power? Individual power consists of formal power and informal power.

Formal individual power is the power obtained by the position of the person in the hierarchy of the organization. This power can be reflected in different ways.

• Legitimate power gives a person the legitimate authority to use and control the organization's resources to achieve organizational goals. Legitimate power is the ultimate source of a person's power in an organization. The greater the legitimate power of a manager, the more authority they have and the more responsible they are for the organization's performance and the use of the organization's resources.

• Reward power is the power to give wage increases, promotions, praise, interesting projects and other rewards to subordinates. The manager can use remuneration to influence and monitor the behavior of the subordinates, provided that employees appreciate the remuneration. The amount of rewards that an organization can give is usually limited.

• Coercive power is the power to give or withhold punishment. Since penalties have negative side effects, organizations usually have clear rules about how and when subordinates receive punishment. Equality is important when using this kind of power. It does not matter what kind of reward or punishment subordinates get, they compare it with the rewards and punishments that others get. If they feel unfairly treated subordinates may perform worse, be dissatisfied with their work, or quit.

• Information power is the power that one has by having access and having control over information. The more information a manager has, the better he or she can solve problems of subordinates. This increases the subordinates dependence on the manager. In the most effective organization, the managers make the information accessible to everyone. Subordinates, therefore, feel more responsible for the performance of the organization and they work with more motivation. Informal power is the power that derives from personal characteristics such as personality, skills and, capacities. Here are several sources that lead to this power: expert, referent, and charismatic power.

  • Expert power is the power one gets through superior skills or expertise in completing a task. Group members often come to these individuals for advice and thus become dependent on these individuals. Often people with expert power are promoted in the hierarchy of authority so that their informal power eventually becomes formal power.

  • Referential power is the power that people have because they are liked, admired and respected.

  • Charismatic power is an extreme form of referent power that the person obtains through his personality, physical skills or other skills that lead to others believing in this person and following him/her. When someone has charismatic power, legitimate power, reward power, and coercive power fall into nothingness because the followers let the charismatic ruler make the decisions such as defining the vision and goals of an organization and its members.

Charismatic power can also have a dark side if followers blindly follow the charismatic ruler and do not take personal responsibility for their actions because they think this leader knows what is best for the organization. It is only an advantage if there is also a formal hierarchy of authority to control the charismatic ruler.

Sources of power in a function or department

A department or function gains power when other departments or functions are dependent on the tasks they perform. An unforeseen event is an event or problem that could occur, so plans must be made for it. For this, the organization needs people and resources that can handle it.

A department or function has power over others if it has the ability to reduce the uncertainties of the others. Today, the ability to control information technology is a way to gain such power. A department or function is given power when it is irreplaceable, i.e. when no other department or function can take over its activities. How irreplaceable they are depends on how difficult it is to find a replacement for the department or position.

The power of a department or function also depends on its centrality in the organization. That means, how central the operations of this department or functions are in the organization and what role they play in the information flow. Central functions, of which many other functions or departments depend, have access to a lot of information and therefore have a lot of power in dealing with others. Many organizations use cross-functional teams to ensure that everyone shares valuable information. This promotes the speed of work with these teams.

The ability to manage and produce the resources for the organization is another source of power for departments and functions. The department that gives the organization the most profit becomes the most important department in an organization.

How can managers increase their power?

Organizational politics are activities that managers use to increase their power. Once this is achieved, they can use that power to influence decision making so that organizations strive for goals that match their individual, functional and departmental interests. One reason why so many people take part in organizational politics is because jobs are scarce and the competition for them is large. The higher the position, the harder it is to promote because the higher in the hierarchy, the fewer jobs.

Managers can use different tactics to increase their power:

1. The first tactic is by draining the sources of power in departments and functions. First, managers can make themselves irreplaceable, for example by developing a specialized skill. Secondly, a manager can specialize in an area of great importance for the organization so that he or she ultimately manages a crucial unforeseen event. In addition, a manager can make himself more important to the organization by taking on express responsibilities that bring him or her into contact with many functions or managers.

2. The second tactic is to recognize who has power. If a manager knows who has power, he or she knows who has to be influenced and on whom he or she has to make an impression. There are five factors that determine the relative power of managers in an organization.

• The sources of power, for example, expertise.

• The consequences of power. People who have the most power gain the most benefit from decisions made by the organization.

• The symbols of the power, such as working titles.

• Personal reputations. The reputation and trust that employees have in the manager also indicate that power they have to influence the decision-making process.

• The representative indicators. The organizational roles people play and the responsibilities that managers have are indications of power.

3. The third tactic is managing the agenda: determining which problems are addressed and which ones are ignored. In this way, powerful managers reduce the considerations of alternative choices.

4. The fourth tactic is to get an expert from outside. When there is a difference of opinion about goals or ideas people are often seen as politically motivated or motivated by self-interest. If a manager brings in an outside expert who is seen as a neutral observer, the manager can use this 'objective' view to support his or her own position.

5. The fifth tactic is making coalitions and alliances. In a coalition or alliance manager has more influence and he or she can gain more power in decision making.

Organizational policy management is primarily in the hands of the CEO because only the CEO holds legal power over all other managers. However, if the CEO is seen as weak, other senior managers will lobby for their own interests and compete against other managers for managing the sources.

Power struggles take power out of the organization, waste resources and divert the organization from the goals it wants to achieve. To combat power struggles, the organization must have a strong CEO who can balance and manipulate the power structure so that no manager or coalition becomes strong enough to threaten organizational interests.

What is an organizational conflict?

Organizational conflict is the struggle which arises out of self-interest and when the purposeful behavior of a person or group blocks the purposeful behavior of another person or group. Conflicts are inevitable but can often increase the performance of the organization if they are carefully managed and discussed.

The best level of conflict in an organization is an average level. In the first place, conflict can increase the performance of an organization by showing weaknesses in the organizational decision-making process, and so changes can occur to improve it. Managers can change the power structure and give the group that is good for the organization more power. But too much conflict is bad again and decreases performance because the conflict goes too far and the organization consists of two competing groups.

Managers must be aware of the sources that can cause conflict so that they can avoid them.

Three important sources of conflict and inter-group conflicts are differentiation, task relationships, and scarcity of resources:

1. Differentiation. Differentiation in an organization occurs when people and tasks are divided into functions and departments to produce goods and services. Breaking up the organization functions and departments creates conflict because it shows the different functional orientation and status inconsistencies.

   • Differences in functional orientation. Functions have different orientations and therefore they have different views on the organization's priorities. These differences can lead to conflict that can do much harm because it reduces the cohesion of the organization and reduces performance.

   • Status inconsistencies. If a group with a central function thinks that it has more status than other groups, it can undermine other groups. Also, the department does not take into account the needs of other functions and by failing to acknowledge this it blocks the goals of other functions. Even if functions see themselves as central and essential for the organization, they may try to achieve their goals at the expense of the less essential functions.

2. Task relations. Conflicts can arise because organizational tasks are connected and influence each other. Overlapping authority, mutual task dependency, and incompatible evaluation systems can stimulate conflicts between functions and departments.

   • Overlapping authority. If two different functions or departments require authority over the same task, a conflict can arise. Such confusion can arise, for example, if a growing organization has not yet fully established the relationships between different groups.

   • Mutual task dependency. The development or production of goods and services depends on the flow of work from one function to another: each function works with the contributions of the previous function. If a job does not do its job well, the next function can no longer do its job properly and conflict can arise. If mutual task dependency goes from merged, to successive to reciprocal, the potential conflict between departments and functions increases.

   • Incompatible evaluation systems. If an unjust evaluation system rewards one group of employees and another does not, this can cause conflict. This opportunity is increased with mutual task dependency, where individual performance is difficult to measure.

3. The scarcity of sources. If there are few sources (such as materials or finances) people and groups will have to fight for it and this can lead to conflict.

What are the stages in Pondy's model of organizational conflict?

Pondy views conflict as a dynamic process that consists of five successive stages.

1. Latent conflict is the first stage when there is no real conflict yet. The potential for conflict is there, because of the causes of conflict described above.

2. Perceived conflict is the second stage when an individual or group perceives that his goals are being counteracted by the actions of another individual or group. Each party looks for the principles of the conflict, defines why there is a conflict, analyzes how it has resulted in conflict and considers how it came about that there is a problem with another party or parties.

The conflict starts when different parties fight about the cause of the problem.

3. Felt conflict is the third stage of conflict when parties develop negative feelings about each other. Each group chooses a side, gets a counter-stance and blames the other group for the problem. When the groups fight to communicate their views, the whole problem is usually blown up.

4. Manifesting conflict is the fourth stage in which 1 party decides how to respond to the other party he sees as the source of the conflict and both parties try to oppose and violate each other. You can manifest it in different ways. Open aggression and violence can even occur. They may also no longer be able to work together and this can seriously affect the organization.

5. Conflict aftermath is the last stage when the conflict is solved in some way. Whatever the outcome (dismiss someone, reorganize the organization), it is almost certain that the conflict will occur again in a different context. This is called the aftermath and will influence how both parties look at things and respond to them. If a conflict for the manifestation stage is resolved through compromise or cooperation, the aftermath will be good for future working relationships. If, however, the conflict is resolved at a later stage, the cooperation between the two parties will not work out well.

How can it best be negotiated to resolve conflicts?

An important responsibility for a manager is to help in conflicts by having different individuals, departments or functions work together to resolve their disagreements.

Negotiation is a process in which groups with different interests make offers, accept offers and make concessions to resolve their differences. It is an important technique because it can lead to a compromise between groups.

Managers must help the parties not to view the situation as a competition; a win-lose situation. They have to change the situation so that both parties strive for a win-win situation.

Managing conflict at an individual level is aimed at changing the attitudes or behaviors of those in the conflict. If conflict comes from different personalities who do not understand the other person's vision, the organization can help by calling in outside help for advice. Education, sensitivity, and awareness training can help people to understand others who are not like themselves with diversity in the workplace.

If conflict comes from a general disagreement about how the work should be done or about the performance of the other, managers can help through a step-by-step negotiation method that solves the disagreement.

The steps are:

1. A manager addresses both employees in conflict and explains how their behavior affects the performance of their work and the other employees. Then the manager asks both employees to express their feelings about the conflict so that the manager and the other employee know how the employee sees the conflict.

2. The manager then writes a report about their positions so that they are linked and the main points of the conflict become clear.

3. The manager then discusses the facts from the report separately with both employees as a neutral third party in order to arrive at a solution that both employees accept.

4. The manager agrees with both employees to confirm the agreement and declares that they will come back to the manager if problems arise again.

If the conflict can not be solved, another solution is to have an employee posted. Promotion is also sometimes used to change attitudes. Lastly, the organization can fire people and accept other people who have no history with dysfunctional conflicts.

Managing conflict at a group level. Managing conflict at a group level is aimed at changing the attitudes or behavior of groups in conflict. Managers can physically separate the work groups so that they can no longer communicate face-to-face and thus no direct conflict can occur. However, often this solution only offers temporary solutions to the problem.

Direct negotiations between groups can be held with or without a third party negotiator: an outsider who is good at negotiating. Sometimes the general supervisor of the teams acts as a third party. If the third party acts as a mediator, he or she adopts a neutral attitude and helps the parties to reconcile their differences. If the parties can not find a solution, the third party can act as a leading figure, or judge, and impose a solution.

There are five basic ways in which negotiation can take place to resolve a conflict: compromise, cooperation, adaptation, avoidance, and competition:

1. First, you compromise. A compromise is a solution that is acceptable to both parties. This happens when the interest in achieving your own goals and other people's goals is average.

2. Parties can also collaborate. Each party not only tries to achieve its own goals, but also that of the other party. This happens when the interest in achieving your own goals and other people's goals is high. This is best for the organization because the parties are very motivated to work together.

3. Accommodation happens when one party allows another party to achieve its goals at the expense of their own goals. This happens when one party realizes that they do not have enough power and resources to win the conflict and so they let the other party win.

4. With avoidance, both parties deny the cause of the problem and pretend there is no problem. This happens when the interest in achieving your own goals and other people's goals is low. Adaptation and avoidance lead to major problems for the organization and for either one or both parties who are in conflict.

5. Lastly, you have competition ('competition') where both parties want to fulfill their own interests and have no interest in the other party. This happens when the interest in achieving your own goals is high and reaching someone else's goals is low.

There are six specific characteristics that a manager can use in negotiation to promote cooperation and compromise:

1. The emphasis on shared goals helps both parties to keep the bigger picture in mind which is the fact that they work for the organization and they must achieve their goals even though they disagree.

2. Both parties in conflict must continue to concentrate on the problem and not on each other personally.

3. Parties must concentrate on interests, not on requirements. Requirements are what a person wants, interests are why a person wants them. When people are in conflict, it is often impossible to meet both requirements. The underlying interests can often be achieved.

4. Create opportunities for joint profits. Try to achieve a win-win situation, instead of a win-lose situation.

5. Concentrate on what is fair, according to the fairness theory. This theory emphasizes the fair distribution of outcomes based on input and contributions that people make for the organization. The party that provides more input deserves more results.

Negotiations for union-management

Negotiations between trade unions and managers are one of the most common types of negotiation.

In a negotiation situation, two processes are engaged at the same time. In dividing negotiations, the parties negotiate how to distribute the sources, decide who gets what and how much. When conducting behavior, the parties try to influence the attitude of each other. Trade unions and management negotiators usually develop a long-term relationship with each other and try to work together because they know that trying to destroy each other works to everyone's disadvantage.