SOCI110 Module 12 - CONFLICT, POWER & POLITICS

0.  OBJECTIVES

• the difference between horizontal and vertical conflict between groups within the organization
• the social psychological consequences of group conflict
• a general model of the potential for conflict based on attributes of the groups involved
• the concepts of power, legitimacy, and authority, and the distinction between vertical and horizontal power
• the different sources of vertical power for employees of the organization
• the sources of horizontal power differentials according to the Pfeffer-Salancik theory of strategic contingencies
• the rational, political, and mixed models of the use of politics in organizational decision making (including the 4 decision making situations which are most likely to generate political activity)
• a contingency model of the amount of politics involved in organizational decision making
• all you need to know to be successful at organizational politics!

1. CONFLICT

Minicase:  PATCO  (Daft 6e pp. 484-485).  The failure of the (illegal) strike by PATCO, the air controllers' union, against the federal government in the early 1980s (during the Reagan administration) illustrates the psychological & behavioral patterns associated with group conflict.

1. Horizontal versus Vertical Conflict

Vertical conflict = conflict between different levels in hierarchy (EX: management vs. workers)

• Exhibit:  Horizontal vs. vertical conflict  (Daft 6e E13.1 p. 483)

Q - What kind of conflict does the PATCO strike illustrate?  (HORIZONTAL/VERTICAL)

Q - "Horizontal conflict occurs between groups or departments on different hierarchical levels."  (TRUE/FALSE?)

2.  Behavioral Changes During Conflict

• heightened identification with in-group
• out-group loathing
• acceptance of autocratic leadership
• overestimation of own strength
• decreased communication between groups
• losing group experiences internal conflict and tries to find scapegoats

NOTE: this description of the social psychology of group conflict applies to conflict in general, not only conflict within organizations.

Q - What aspects of the social psychological description of group conflict above apply (or do not apply) to rivalries in team sports such as basketball?

3.  Model of Intergroup Conflict

• Exhibit:  Model of intergroup conflict  (Daft 6e E13.2 p. 486)  

Q - How does the model of the next exhibit apply to the Lantech case?

Conflict has its sources in attributes of intergroup relationships which themselves derive from contextual & organizational factors.   (Note how this exhibit is "blown up" from parts of the previous exhibit.)

• Exhibit:  Sources of horizontal conflict  (Daft 6e E13.3 p. 489)

Four sources of intergroup conflict (a subset of previous exhibit) are especially important:

1. Goal incompatibility

This is considered to be the most common cause of intergroup conflict.  The next exhibit illustrates goal incompatibility between marketing & manufacturing.

• Exhibit:  Potential areas of conflict between marketing & manufacturing  (Daft 6e E13.4 p. 490, cf 7e E12.1 p. 444)

Another example would be the contrast between goals of campus police (safety by locking up all buildings at night and on weekends) and researchers who want free acees to their offices and labs.

2. Differentiation

Defined earlier as "the differences in cognitive and emotional orientations among managers in different funcitonal departments". EX: orientaitons of the R&D and sales departments. This aspect relates to the work of Lawrence and Lorsch.

3. Task Interdependence

This relates to Thompson's typology of task interdependence among departments. Potential for conflict increases with increasing interdependence (from pooled through sequential to reciprocal interdependence).

4. Limited Resources

Competition among groups for money, physical facilities, human resources, etc.

4. Rational Versus Political Model

When there are many sources of conflict (i.e., goals are incompatible, and/or departments are differentiated, and/or there is a high degree of task interdependence, and/or there is competition for limited resources) the organization tends to be characterized by the political rather than the rational model. This distinction is discussed under POLITICS below.

• Exhibit: Sources of conflict and use of rational versus political model (Daft 7e E12.2 p. 446)

Q - What authors (discussed earlier) emphasized the tendency of departments to differentiate in terms of goals and orientation?

Q - What is probably the greatest cause of intergroup conflict in organizations?

Q - "Intergroup conflict and the associated changes in perception and hostility are the result of neurotic tendencies on the part of group members."  (TRUE/FALSE?)

Q - The potential for horizontal conflict will increase as

• environmental uncertainty increases  (T/F?)
• organizational size increases  (T/F?)
• departments become more independent of each other  (T/F?)
• task interdependence changes from pooled to reciprocal  (T/F?)
• individual performance is rewarded more substantially  (T/F?)
• boundaries between departments are made clear  (T/F?)

2.  POWER

1.  Concepts

Authority - form of power that is

• vested in an organizational position
• accepted by subordinates (= legitimate)
• flows down the vertical hierarchy

Power is an intangible force: it cannot be seen but its effect can be felt.

Q - Think of an organization in which you are (or have been) working or participating and recall a situation in which

• you have been aware of the exercise or power (by yourself or by another person)
• you have been involved in organizational politics, i.e. you have used power to achieve an outcome you desired, or witnessed another person use power in that way

2.  Vertical Sources of Power

There are 4 main sources of vertical power for employees at all levels of the hierarchy. (Although higher-level managers typically have more power from all sources than lower level employees.)

1. Formal Position. Power derived from the formal position of an employee in the organizaiton, also called legitimate power.
2. Resources. Resources include salaries, equipment, space, supplies, etc. Control over the distribution of resources within the organization increases the power of an employee. Resources can be used for reward and punishment.
3. Control of Decision Premises & Information. Decision premises consist of a frame of reference or guidelines for decisions. See the case of Clark Ltd below.
4. Network Centrality. This is the degree to which an employee has access to informaoitn and people who are critical to the success of the organization. Centrality can be used to remain informed, to build alliances, etc.

The case of Clark Ltd. illustrates the importance of controlling decision premises and information.

• Exhibit:  Control of information at Clark Ltd  (Daft E12-1 p. 446)
  

  Q - Which of the following are consequences of network centrality for an employee:

• he/she suffers a decrease in power (T/F?)
• he/she is well informed (T/F?)
• he/she has less access to other people (T/F?)
• he/she has only a few key people dependent on him/her (T/F?)

• task variety and flexibility are high (T/F?)
• publicity about job activities and contact with senior officials is low (T/F?)
• approval is needed for non routine decisions (T/F?)
• participation in programs, conferences, and meetings is high (T/F?)

• Exhibit:  Lyndon Johnson at San Marcos College  (Daft old edition)

Minicase: Xerox (Daft 7e pp. 452-453). This case shows how new employee Cindy Casselman built a network of allies supporting her project for a company intranet and thereby succeeded in accomplishing her goal.

3.  Horizontal Sources of Power

• Exhibit:  Ratings of power among departments in 4 firms  (Daft 7e E12.4 p. 454)  
  

To explain power differentials among departments Jeffrey Pfeffer & Gerald Salancik have developed the theory of strategic contingencies (= activities inside and outside the organization that are essential to attain organizational goals). The main principle of the theory is that departments involved with strategic contingencies tend to have more power.

• Exhibit:  Sources of horizontal power for departments (theory of strategic contingencies)  (Daft 7e E12.5 p. 455)

Minicase:  University of Illinois  (Daft 7e p. 456).  Some departments at UI have more power than others.  Relative power of departments is closely related to the financial resources generated by department from research grants and contracts.

Minicase:  Crystal Manufacturing  (Daft 7e p. 457-458).  The power of the industrial relations department increased at CM after the workers voted to join a union and the department successfully coped with the new uncertainties it entailed.

Q - "Strategic contingencies refer to outside constituents who may affect organizational strategy in the future."  (TRUE/FALSE?)

Q - Which of the following circumstances are sources of dependency power:

• having a charismatic personality (T/F?)
• having something someone else wants (T/F?)
• a paternalistic management style (T/F?)
• immature subordinates (T/F?)

Q - "Departments that reduce uncertainty for other departments will usually have more power."  (TRUE/FALSE?)

3.  POLITICS

1.  Concept of Organizational Politics

Dual view of organizational politics as

1. self serving behavior in pursuit of personal ambitions (and therefore disreputable or "tacky")
2. natural organizational process for resolving differences among interest groups (and therefore almost inevitable and ultimately useful to the organization)

Surveys of managers in organizations have found that most managers

1. have a negative view of organizational politics and believe that politics more often hurts than helps the organization
2. believe politics are common in all organizations
3. politics occurs more often at upper rather than lower levels of an organization
4. politics occurs in certain decision domains, such as structural changes, but not in others, such as handling employee grievances

2.  Domains of Political Activity

1. structural change (= reallocation of legitimate authority)
2. interdepartmental coordination (horizontal relationships poorly defined -> high uncertainty -> "turf" disputes)
3. management succession (= hiring, promotion, transfer decisions that can upset power balance)
4. resource allocation (EX: salaries, equipment, office space)

3.  Power Tactics in Organizations

All you need to know to use power in your organization!

Tactics include techniques for increasing the power base, for using power, and for enhancing collaboration.

• Exhibit:  Tactics for increasing power base and for using power  (Daft 6e E12-9 p. 466, cf 7e E12.6 p. 461)

Collaboration may be enhanced enhanced by using Win-Win strategies of negotiation.

• Exhibit: Negotiating strategies (Daft 7e E12.7 p. 466)

Minicase:  Halifax Business Machines  (Daft p. 469).  Jeff Glover failed to obtain company backing for his new idea for a piece of medical equipment because he ignored the political process involved and was victim of power maneuvering by someone opposed to his idea.

4.  Rational, Political, & Mixed Model

Political model - cf. Cyert-March-Simon (aka Carnegie) decision making model

• Exhibit:  Rational vs. political model  (Daft 6e E12-7 p. 463, cf 7e E12.2 p. 446)(Repeat)

Mixed model - in many real organizations, rational & political models describe the organization part of the time

Minicase:  Britt Technologies  (Daft p. 464).  The failure of BT to resolve in a timely manner disagreement concerning the amount of customization to allow in manufacturing disk drives illustrates a situation where the political model was appropriate and the rational model failed.

5.  Organizational Politics Framework

• uncertainty
• disagreement

concerning issues.

In turn, uncertainty and disagreement are amplified in the specific domains of political activity listed earlier (structural change, interdepartmental coordinaiton, management succession, resource allocation) as shown in the next exhibit.

• Exhibit:  Organizational politics framework  (Daft 6e E12-8 p. 465)