Discussion Topic #4 Prompts

​

Prompt #1:  What did you learn about organizations, and/or the behavior of individuals within an organization?  How do the ideas presented in Part Four (the Political Frame) of the B&D textbook enrich your understanding of the ways in which organizations and the people working in them function?

​

Prior to reading about the Political Frame, I’m not sure that I had a true understanding of the role of politics in organizational operations. That is not to say that I was unaware of the presence of politics at work – in fact, I have personally engaged in the political process. However, I always saw the utilization of politics as an optional element of business. As stated in our text, though, “like it or not, political dynamics are inevitable under three conditions most mangers face every day: ambiguity, diversity, and scarcity.” (B&D, pg. 220) The reading this week helped be to understand that inevitability of politics in business. Rather than approaching politics with hesitation and optional participation, managers must “learn to acknowledge, understand, and manage political dynamics….” (B&D, pg. 194)

 

Prompt #2:  How can you apply the concepts that you have learned about in the readings to your personal or organizational life?  Be specific.

​

So much of what I have experienced in terms of the political frame has been demonstrated through the use of power. From my own perspective, I’ve learned that my power as a leader is not limited to the authority of my position in the store. As a leader at Starbucks, I have spent the past eight and half years leading teams through times of challenge, success, growth and innovation. As a result, I have established power based on information and expertise as well as having established a positive reputation through the success of our team endeavors. The fact that I have worked with teams in six different stores across two districts has also helped me to develop a strong set of alliances and networks in our area. There have been times when I’ve needed support in achieving my goals and I’ve not been afraid to apply my various forms of power in order to garner that support.

​

Prompt #3:  Compare how structural theorist, human resource, and political frame theorists view power.

I don’t believe that anybody involved in an organization would deny that power (in its many forms) is an integral part of how things get done. However, the role of power in organizational operations can be viewed differently depending on the theory of evaluation. Structural theorists, human resource theorists, and political frame theorists each approach power in organizations differently.

​

Structural theorists adhere closely to the idea that power is organized through a formal hierarchy and, as such, they “find[s] virtue in a well-defined, authoritative chain of command.” (B&D, pg. 206)

Human resource theorists believe that power must be achieved through balance of needs. Employees within the organization must have their personal needs met (as demonstrated by Maslow’s hierarchy of needs) while leaders must have their production needs met by the people who work for them. This balance of power is achieved through the building of relationships.

​

Political frame theorists focus on the role of power in developing connections with others. Those connections can either lead to positive or negative results depending on how power is utilized. With a view from the political frame, each person in an organization must utilize whatever power they have available (position power, control of resources, coercive, information and expertise, reputation, personal, alliances and networks, access and control of agendas, and framing) in order to bargain for resources and support. Theorists of the political frame recognize that these power plays will inevitably lead to conflict and, as such, see conflict as a natural part of the organizational process. In this view, it is imperative that managers “be a persuasive advocate for their group on a political field…without physical or psychological bloodshed and with wisdom as well as grace.”(B&D, pg. 207)

 

Prompt #4: What are the four strategies of principled bargaining?  Come up with an example of a bargaining situation in which you were involved (or that you are familiar with).  Connect the use (or failure to use) each of the strategies within the context of your example.  

​

The four strategies of principled bargaining are: separate people from the problem, focus on interests not positions, invent options from mutual gain, and insist on objective criteria. As an organization, Starbucks maintains a constant focus on problem solving through a variety of different approaches. One of our many problem solving activities utilizes the process of a “go see” in order to identify organizational needs and develop a strategy for success. This process aligns with the four steps of principled bargaining as follows:

​

Separate people from the problem: The “go see” begins with the clearly stated expectation that we “focus on the what – not the who”. Problems are rarely the result of one person’s actions. Instead, they result from organizational opportunities - evaluating people will only deliver minimal results.

​

Focus on interests, not positions: The process of a “go see” is formed based on common needs. This is not a directive from somebody in a higher position, but instead is a tool for identifying issues of shared interest. The goal of the “go see” is agreed upon by the involved parties before it is ever implemented.

​

Insist on objective criteria: The “go see” activity relies on the observation of relevant yet objective measures of success/failure. The criteria for measurement must be consistent across all areas of evaluation and must be defined in objective terms.

Invent options from mutual gain: Once completed, a “go see” evaluation will present a collection of relevant observations. Identifying the “next steps” in the process of improvement relies upon establishment of common goals. The steps we take as a result of a “go see” must not only serve as a way to fix one problem, it must also support the positive development of team behavior across all positions.

 

Prompt #5:  Throughout your progression in the Organizational Leadership program, you have had a number of courses that include content complementary to the political frame.  Please highlight what you would consider to be two of the most important things (ideas, concepts, theories, models, processes, skills, etc.) that you have learned in previous coursework that you can relate to the Political frame.  Briefly discuss each key learning, the course where you learned it, and its connection with the Political Frame.

​

In OGL 300 (The Theory and Practice of Leadership), much of what we learned was focused on the implementation of leadership ability across many different situations. This class taught me how to identify the needs of my followers and how to adjust my leadership approach to best meet those needs. It also focused on the role of leadership in the achievement of organizational goals while simultaneously achieving the goals of my direct team. This very closely mirrors the concepts of the political frame as it, too, focuses on a leader’s ability to meet the demands of many individuals through the use of power, persuasion, and bargaining.

​

In OGL 321 (Project Leadership), the primary focus of the course was to learn about meeting the needs of the triple constraint (scope, time, cost) when managing projects. The course topics were primarily implemented through the use of a digital project management scenario. Each week, we were given a project to lead and a set of expectations within which we must work. However, many weeks also included unforeseen challenges which complicated the process of our work. As a project leader, I needed to make decisions that not only supported the needs of my organization, but also that met the needs of our prospective clients. And, what’s more, I needed to consider the impact of those decisions on the wellbeing of my team. These challenges align with the aspects of the political frame as I learned that managing the leader/follower relationship is as much part of the process as me implementing strategies through my position power.

​

Prompt #6:  How does politics work in an organization, group, or team with which you are affiliated? 

​

In my experience at Starbucks, politics plays a fairly significant role in the organization. One of our company’s guiding principles is focused on leading through the lens of humanity. That means that when you make decisions as a leader, you must do so with a focus on the people involved in the process (partners, customers, community citizens) as well as with a focus on organizational demands. Being part of a large corporation means having large organizational goals that have been established on our behalf. But, we like to look at each store as an independent entity with needs and goals of its own. Sometimes, each store may demonstrate unique abilities in terms of human resources, organizational planning, structural operations, or resource management. In order to achieve the needs of your own store, it is often necessary to leverage the talents of the surrounding locations. However, this can be time consuming and other people need to understand why it is worth their time and energy to support the needs of a different store. That’s where the power of politics comes into play. Store managers must be able to persuasively bargain with one another and exercise their own levels of power and influence in order to identify mutual incentives. For new managers, this can be difficult as the value of reputation and relationships cannot be overstated.

 

Prompt #7:  How does politics affect outcomes in your place of employment (or other organization) for, say, customers, employees, colleagues, stockholders, surrounding community and/or any other stake-holders?  How has your organization or team demonstrated being a political arena and/or political agent?  Describe enough of a situation concretely to provide context and use concepts from the readings in your response. 

​

In my organization, politics can be the defining difference between meeting the needs of your people (customers, partners, stakeholders) and failing them. While often operated with an individual mentality, each store is reliant on each other to maintain the commitments of our brand. If we are unsuccessful in working with each other, then our customers are likely to feel a difference in their experience from store to store. If managers are unwilling to support each other’s growth and development, then partners may lose sight of our organizational culture. And, if we are failing to create a consistent and inspired environment for our customers and partners, then we are also likely to fail at creating long-term value for our stakeholders