Workplace politics

Psychological aspects

Psychologist Oliver James identifies the dark triadic personality traits (psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellianism) as central in understanding office politics.

John Eldred describes politics as "simply how power gets worked out on a practical, day-to-day basis". Jarie Bolander emphasizes that "Politics is the lubricant that oils your organization's internal gears".

Office politics can also take the form of influencing others not to hire strong candidates in order to prevent one's own status and authority from being diminished by a high achiever. For example, for a position that requires a high technical level on competency, a manipulator who feels threatened might persuade others to vote against the candidate because they lack marketing experience, even though the responsibilities for the position do not include marketing.

Aims

The aims of office politics or manipulation in the workplace are not always increased pay or a promotion. Often, the goal may simply be greater power or control for its own end; or to discredit a competitor. Office politics do not necessarily stem from purely selfish gains. They can be a route towards corporate benefits, which give a leg up to the company as a whole, not just an individual. "A 'manipulator' will often achieve career or personal goals by co-opting as many colleagues as possible into their plans."

Issues

The practice of office politics can have an even more serious effect on major business processes such as strategy formation, budget setting, performance management, and leadership. This occurs because when individuals are playing office politics, it interferes with the information flow of a company. Information can be distorted, misdirected, or suppressed, in order to manipulate a situation for short-term personal gain.

Games

One way of analyzing office politics in more detail is to view it as a series of games. These games can be analyzed and described in terms of the type of game and the payoff. Interpersonal games are games that are played between peers (for example the game of "No Bad News" where individuals suppress negative information, and the payoff is not risking upsetting someone); leadership games are played between supervisor and employee (for example the game of "Divide and Conquer" where the supervisor sets their employees against each other, with the payoff that none threatens their power base); and budget games are played with the resources of an organization (for example the game of "Sandbagging" where individuals negotiate a low sales target, and the payoff is a bigger bonus).

Dealing with organizational politics

Organizational politics is itself similar to a game, one that requires an assumption of risks just like any contact sport. "It must be played with diligence and a full understanding of the landscape, players and rules.

"The dynamics of the situation should always dictate a reexamination of the players and how they fit into the landscape."

One must be careful relying on alliances made on previous circumstances; once the situation changes, alliances need to be reassessed.

Building strong alliances will maximize the efficiency of the collective political radar and alert you before conflicts arise. In time of conflict, data-driven employees who rely on hard facts will have an easier time diffusing political conflicts.

Always looking out for the best interests of your company is a certain way to ensure that your motivation will remain unquestioned. L.A. Witt, from the University of New Orleans, through his findings, believes that if supervisors were to mold employee values to match their own, it would protect employees from the negative effects of organizational politics and help improve their performance.