University of Nebraska - Lincoln

DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln

Management Department Faculty Publications Management Department

10-1977

Toward A Definition of Organizational Politics

Bronston T. Mayes
University of Nebraska - Lincoln

Robert W. Allen
California State University, Fullerton

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/managementfacpub

Part of the Business Administration, Management, and Operations Commons, Management
Sciences and Quantitative Methods Commons, and the Strategic Management Policy Commons

Mayes, Bronston T. and Allen, Robert W., "Toward A Definition of Organizational Politics" (1977). Management Department Faculty
Publications. 183.
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/managementfacpub/183

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Management Department at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has
been accepted for inclusion in Management Department Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of
Nebraska - Lincoln.
The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1977), pp. 672-678. Used by permission.

)I Conceptual Notes

Toward A Definition of Organizational Politics1

BRONSTON T. MAYES
University of Nebraska, Lincoln
ROBERT W. ALLEN
California State University, Fullerton

Viewing organizations as political entities is

tempts to shed light on the organizational politi-
not a recent phenomenon. March (7) suggested cal process by constructing a literature-derived
that organizations are political coalitions in definition of organizational politics (OP). Guid-
which decisions are made and goals are set by ing this effort are the following assumptions:
bargaining processes. Other writers stressed the
1. Behavior referred to as politics takes
utility of taking a political perspective when
place in varying degrees in all organiza-
studying organizations (1, 6, 9, 22). Anyone asso- tions.
ciated with almost any form of organization
eventually becomes aware of activities that are 2. Not all behavior in organizations can be
described by employees as "political", but what categorized as political.
is termed political by one observer may not be
3. The organizational political process can
viewed as political by another. To understand the be described in non-evaluative terms.
nature of political processes in organizations,
some agreement as to what constitutes political 4. While many variables involved in de-
behavior must be developed. This article at- scribing organizational politics may be
familiar to other organizational behavior
Bronston T. Mayes (Ph.D. candidate - University of Califor-
concepts, a combination of these varia-
nia, Irvine) is Assistant Professor of Management, University of
Nebraska, Lincoln. 1 Portions of this article were presented at the thirty-sixth
annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Kansas City,
Robert W. Allen (Ph.D. candidate - University of California,
Missouri, August 13, 1976. The helpful comments of Anthony
Irvine) is Lecturer in Management, California State University,
T. Cobb are gratefully acknowledged. Special thanks are ex-
Fullerton.
tended to Dan Madison, who commented on earlier drafts of
Received 10/20/76; Accepted 4/7/77; Revised 6/28/77. this manuscript and helped with data analysis.

672
 673
Academy of Management Review - October 1977

bles constitutes a unique process that ganization coalition. Wildavsky defines politics
cannot be described adequately by ex- as conflict over whose preferences are to prevail
isting paradigms. This unique process is in the determination of policy.
organizational politics. To define politics as a form of conflict seems
too narrow an approach, especially when one
Earlier Attempts to Define limits politics to the conflict over policy deci-
Organizational Politics sions. The administration of policy involves polit-
ical activities in its own right. Thus, a suitable def-
Claims Against the Resource Sharing System inition of OP must include the politics of policy
implementation as well as the politics of policy
Political behavior in an organization has determination.
been viewed as actions that make a claim against
Another view of politics in the determina-
the organization's resource sharing system. Har-
tion of policy is proposed by Wamsley and Zald
vey and Mills (4) utilized this definition in their
(19). Their work relating to public organizations
treatment of the political aspects of adaptation to
defines politics as the structure and process of
change. Their basic premise was that any adap-
the uses of authority and power to define goals,
tive change will produce conflict through its ef-
fect on the distribution of scarce resources
directions, and major parameters of the organi-
zational economy. This definition may be suit-
among organizational units. This conflict was
able at upper levels of the organization but polit-
thought to be resolved by political processes in-
ical processes also take place at lower levels
cluding coalition formation, bargaining, side-
where policy or system-wide decisions are not
payments, etc. made.
In a study of decision processes employed in
purchasing computer equipment, Pettigrew (11) Relationships of Control and Influence
defined the political process as generation of de-
In discussing power tactics used by execu-
mands for resources and mobilization of support
tives, Martin and Sims (8) state that politics is con-
for the demands generated.
cerned with relationships of control or influence.
Although some claims against an organiza-
Although control, power, and influence are key
tion's resource sharing system may constitute
issues in the study of OP, this approach allows in-
political behavior, normally many of these claims clusion of behaviors and forms of influence not
would not be considered political. For example,
normally considered political. An example of a
an employee's asking for a salary raise, which
non-political means of control in an organization
constitutes a claim against the resource sharing
is the periodic performance review when done
system, would not be political behavior, but the
use of threat to unionize to obtain a raise would in accordance with policy guidelines normally
provided for this purpose. The review/appraisal
be considered a political act. Circumstances sur-
constitutes a form of feedback to the ratee on
rounding the demand process must be consid-
his/her job performance and is a form of influ-
ered in defining OP.
ence or control in that the employee is expected
to correct performance deficiencies.
Conflict Over Policy Preferences
Burns (2) viewed politics as the exploitation
Wildavsky (21) suggests that the budgeting of resources, physical and human, for achieve-
process is a political method of allocating finan- ment of more control over others, and thus of
cial resources, a notion consistent with the earli- safer, more comfortable, or more satisfying terms
er Cyert and March (3) proposal that the budget of individual existence. Although this is a quite
represents the outcome of bargaining in the or- agreeable definition of politics, it fails to account
674 Conceptual Notes

for the fact that controlling others for personal the issue of situational uncertainty in its effect on
benefit makes determination of what is political the power base of political actors, purchasing de-
and what is not a province of the intent of the cisions would usually be considered rather struc-
actor. A more rigorous approach would allow a tured and programmable in nature. Thus political
definition of OP based on observable criteria ex- activity surrounding these decisions might be re-
clusive of the actor's intent. stricted by rational problem solving techniques.
Although purchasing decisions are generally
Self-Serving Behavior well structured, budget allocations are not. Re-
Some writers have considered politics as be- cent work assessed the political nature of budg-
havior directed toward personal gain (2, 14). Al- eting decisions in a university (12, 15). Research-
though this approach is intuitively appealing, the ers used unobtrusive measures to study the ef-
argument can be made that all willful behavior fects of departmental power on allocation of
ultimately serves some self-interest. If personal budgets. Departmental power was highly related
gain is the underlying motive for all calculated to the department's ability to obtain outside
behavior, its inclusion in the definition of politi- grants and contracts. The greater the depart-
cal activity adds nothing and may detract from ment's power, the less budget allocations were
definitional clarity. How is behavior classified if dependent on universalistic criteria of depart-
mental work load and student demand for the
it is specified by the organization but also obtains
department's courses. To assess the effects of un-
rewards for the actor? Including self-interest in
the definition of OP forces consideration of rou- certainty on criteria used to make research grant
tine job performance as a political act. A suitable
allocations, this research team in a later study
definition of OP must allow exclusion of routine (13) again employed unobtrusive measures. Their
job performance from consideration. findings indicate that social influence is more
likely to be used in uncertain situations. Unfor-
Field Research tunately, none of these budgeting studies in-
volved collecting data from individual actors in
A growing body of literature relates to the the decision processes. Influence effects were in-
social influence process involving use of power ferred from outcomes rather than measurement
and its effects on both the agent and the target of of processual elements.
influence (17, 18). Almost no research has been
conducted to explore organizational politics per Toward A Definition of
se. Studies in print are concerned primarily with Organizational Politics
the effects of influence and power on decision
processes. The definitions and research briefly pre-
Interviews and questionnaires were used by sented above allow us to formulate a definition
Strauss (16) to determine which techniques pur-of OP that meets certain necessary conditions.
chasing agents used to expand their power/in- First, a suitable definition would allow either
fluence in an organization. Of thirteen tacticsmicro or macro levels of analysis - consideration
of both individual and organizational political
discovered, he classified three as personal-polit-
ical. Purchasing decisions were also studied byphenomena. Second, it must allow for the use of
politics in other than decision processes sur-
Pettigrew (11) and Patchen (10). Both field studies
focused on who was influential in making pur- rounding resource allocation. Third, any suitable
chasing decisions, what bases of power were definition of OP must clearly discriminate be-
used, and what methods of conflict resolution tween political and non-political behaviors. For
were apparent. Although Pettigrew addressed example, routine job performance is not a politi-
Academy of Management Review - October 1977 675

TABLE 1. Dimensions of Organizational Politics

Influence Ends
Influence
Means Organizationally Not Sanctioned
Sanctioned by Organization

Organizationally Non-Political Organizationally

Sanctioned ob Behavior Dysfunctional
I II Political Behavior

Not S d Political Behavior 11 IV Organizationally

Not Sancitioned Potentially Functional Dysfunctional
by Organization to the Organization Political Behavior

tionally desired job outcome and the limits of

cal activity but could be considered so if earlier
constructs are employed. discretionary behavior acceptable in attaining
What, then, is an acceptable definition those
of outcomes. Thus, the existing organization
organizational politics? A thread of continuitydelineates both acceptable outcomes and appro-
priate means to their attainment for each job po-
through the existing literature is best recognized
as influence. If outcomes alone are not sufficient sition. Activities within these sanctioned boun-
to define political behavior, the processes daries must be considered non-political. These
whereby outcomes are influenced must be ex- considerations lead us to the following definition
amined. Thus the notion of influence is a neces- of OP:
sary but not sufficient condition for the infer- Organizational politics is the management of
ence of political action. A supervisor making rou- influence to obtain ends not sanctioned by
tine job assignments influences the behavior of the organization or to obtain sanctioned
subordinates, but this form of influence is not ends through non-sanctioned influence
political. Likewise, some forms of influence may means.

not be intentional. Politics implies calculated in- This approach to a definition of OP is sch
fluence maneuvering. But even restricting pol- matically represented in Table 1. Quadrant I
itics to calculated influence is not a sufficient characterized by organizationally specified j
condition, in that some forms of calculated in- behavior, is the only non-political quadrant
fluence should also be excluded from the OP the classification system. Quadrant II contai
construct. Is not the organization itself a form of political activities recognized by some burea
influence calculated to restrict the behavior of cratic theorists as abuses of formal authorit
its members? The organization structure as it ex- power (20). Behavior in this quadrant is dysfunc
ists at some given point in time should be ex- tional from the standpoint of the organization,
cluded from the OP construct, although changes that organizational resources are being utili
made to the existing structure could be political- to further non-organizational objectives. The bu
ly relevant. reaucratic form of organization can be viewed
Therefore OP is a dynamic process of influ- an attempt to eliminate this type of behavior.
ence that produces organizationally relevant Quadrant III defines political behavior un
outcomes beyond the simple performance of job dertaken to accomplish legitimate organizatio
tasks. Common organizational practice is to pro- objectives. The use of charisma or side-payme
vide each member of the organization with a de- to accomplish sanctioned objectives would be
scription of duties that specifies the organiza- cluded in behaviors assigned to this quadran
676 Conceptual Notes

FEEDBACK

Formulate End- Identify Determine Mobilize Execute

Political _ Means _ Targets Incentives _ Incentive Plan and
Goals Analysis of Desired by Relevant Monitor
Influence Target Resources Results

STRATEGY TACTICS
(Planning) (Implementation)

FIGURE 1. The Influence Management Process.

Quadrant II1 activity could be functional

identification toofthe
of targets influence and the in-
organization if undesirable side-effects
centives required to did
effect not
the desired target be-
occur. Indeed, some writers view organizational-
havior (see Figure 1). At this point in the process
ly functional Quadrant III behavior as leadership
a political objective can be inferred if an individ-
(5). ual other than the actor must be involved and if
Quadrant IV behavior, like Quadrant II be- either the outcomes desired or the means of in-
havior, is dysfunctional from the organizational fluencing the other person are not sanctioned by
perspective. It deviates from organization norms the organization (see Table 1). Thus the combi-
with respect to both outcomes and methods. This nation of outcomes and means employed to
form of OP will not be tolerated if it is discov- reach the outcomes defines the political nature
ered. Due to the possibility of being dismissed of the influence process, while the process itself
from the organization for such actions, individ- is a traditional managerial approach to problem-
uals engaging in such behavior probably will be solving.
highly secretive, making Quadrant IV resistant to Although the influence management proc-
research attempts. ess is represented as a series of discrete actions,
The management of influence (the process in reality it may be impossible to demonstrate
of politics) can be viewed as formulation of polit- clear distinctions among them. For example,
ical objectives, ends-means analysis leading to identification of influence targets and their de-
decisions of strategy and tactics, execution of sired incentives would be expected to originate
tactics, and feedback/control methods. Figure 1 in the process of ends-means analysis rather than
is a simplified representation of the process of to follow it discretely. The concurrent execution
influence management. of two or more stages of the influence manage-
In formulating political objectives,an individ- ment process is highly probable. But this should
ual within an organization should first take stock not detract from the utility of this conceptuali-
of whether desired outcomes are sanctioned by zation of the process.
the organization. The political actor would de- This view of OP as an influence management
termine if these outcomes are attainable through process allows inclusion of variables already rec-
solitary action or if other persons must be in- ognized by prior researchers. Even the earliest
volved. This ends-means analysis would lead to political writers were concerned with ends-
Academy of Management Review - October 1977 677

means analysis as a strategic activity. The vast lit- pothesized to differ from other employees in
erature dealing with power and its effects fits in- their willingness to pursue non-sanctioned ob-
to the political process model since influence jectives or in their use of non-sanctioned influ-
targets (persons) and power bases (resources) are ence means. Non-political employees would be
included in both strategic and tactical model ele- expected to discard objectives rather than to vio-
ments. Also implied in this model is the concept late organizational sanctions. Situational or struc-
that political activity can be an on-going organi- tural variables would be expected to interact
zational phenomenon such that one political act
with personality variables in the conduct of the
can trigger a chain of related political occur-
political process. Some individuals might be ex-
rences. pected to evidence political behaviors only un-
With an acceptable definition of derorganiza-
certain conditions, for example where goals
orto
tional politics a logical step should be procedures
formu-are ill defined or in situations
where thena-
late an integrated theory of OP. The dynamic organization faces considerable un-
ture of the political process seems to dictate
certainty. a
Others may derive intrinsic benefits
systems approach to political conceptualization.
from engaging in politics and may do so in almost
Within such systems, attention must be anydirected
situation. Clearly an opportunity exists in de-
to individual as well as situational variables. For veloping OP theory to provide a linkage be-
example, personality characteristics of political tween micro-oriented and macro-oriented or-
actors should be identified; politicians are hy- ganizational theoreticians.

REFERENCES

1. Allison, G. T. "Conceptual Models and the Cuban Mis- 10. Patchen, M. "The Locus and Basis of Influence on Or-
sile Crisis," American Political Science Review, Vol. 63, ganizational Decisions," Organizational Behavior and
No. 3 (1969), 689-718. Human Performance, Vol. 11 (1974), 195-221.
2. Burns, T. "Micropolitics: Mechanisms of Institutional 11. Pettigrew, A. M. The Politics of Organizational Decision-
Change," Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 6 (1961), Making (London: Tavistock, 1973).
257-281.
12. Pfeffer, J., and G. R. Salancik. "Organizational Decision
3. Cyert, R. M., and J. G. March. A Behavioral Theory of the Making as a Political Process: The Case of a University
Firm (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1963). Budget," Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 2
4. Harvey, E., and R. Mills. "Patterns of Organizational (1974), 135-151.
Adaptation: A Political Perspective," in Mayer Zald (Ed.), 13. Pfeffer, J., G. R. Salancik, and H. Leblebici. "The Effect of
Power in Organizations (Nashville, Tenn.: Vanderbilt Uncertainty on the Use of Social Influence in Organiza-
University Press, 1970), pp. 181-213. tional Decision Making," Administrative Science Quar-
5. Katz, D., and R. L. Kahn. The Social Psychology of Organ- terly, Vol. 21 (1976), 227-245.
izations (New York: Wiley, 1966). 14. Robbins, S. P. The Administrative Process: Integrating
6. Kaufman, H. "Organization Theory and Political Theory," Theory and Practice (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-
The American Political Science Review, Vol. 58, No. 1 Hall, 1976).
(1964), 5-14. 15. Salancik, G. R., and J. Pfeffer. "The Bases and Use of Pow-
7. March, J. G. "The Business Firm as a Political Coalition," er in Organizational Decision Making: The Case of a Uni-
Journal of Politics, Vol. 24 (1962), 662-678. versity," Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 4
8. Martin, N. H., and J. H. Sims. "Power Tactics," in D. A. (1974), 453-473.
Kolb, I. M. Rubin, and J. M. Mcintyre (Eds.), Organiza- 16. Strauss, G. "Tactics of Lateral Relationships: The Purchas-
tional Psychology: A Book of Readings (Englewood ing Agent," Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 7
Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1974), pp. 177-183. (1962), 161-168.
9. Pandarus. "One's Own Primer of Academic Politics," 17. Tedeschi, J. T. (Ed.). The Social Influence Process (Chi-
American Scholar, Vol. 42 (1973), 569-592. cago: Aldine, 1972).
678
Conceptual Notes

18. Tedeschi, J. T. (Ed.). Perspectives on Social Power (Chi-
cago: Aldine, 1974).
19. Wamsley, G. L., and M. N. Zald. The Political Economy of
Public Organizations (Lexington, Mass.: Heath Co., 1973).
20. Weber, M. The Theory of Social and Economic Organi-
zation (New York: Free Press, 1947).
21. Wildavsky, A. "Budgeting as a Political Process," in David
L. Sills (Ed.), The International Encyclopedia of the Social
Sciences (New York: Crowell, Collier, and Macmillan,
1968), pp. 192-199.
22. Zaleznik, A. "Power and Politics in Organizational Life,"
Harvard Business Review, Vol. 48, No. 3 (1970), 47-60.

A
A Life
LifeCycle
Cycle
Approach
Approach
to Management
to Management
by Objectives
by Object

ROBERT W. HOLLMANN
and
DAVID A. TANSIK
University of Arizona

Management
Management byby
Objectives
Objectives
(MBO)
(MBO)
has expe-
has expe-
such
such aa program
programentails
entailsintroduction
introduction
of of
a new
a new
rienced
rienceditsits
greatest
greatest
popularity
popularityand organizational
and organizational"technology"
"technology"that
thatmust
mustprogress
progress through
through
various
various
application
application during
duringthethe
last last
ten years.
ten years.
Yet, in
Yet,
spite
in spite
developmental
developmentalstages
stagesbefore
before it it
is is
effectively
effectively
inte-
inte-
of
of this
thisincreased
increased growth,
growth, many many
organizations
organizations
grated
grated into
intothe
theorganization.
organization. These
These
stages
stages
of de-
of de-
have
havedropped
dropped MBOMBOandand
numerous
numerousothers others
are dis-
are dis-
velopment
velopment represent
representspecific
specific "cycles"
"cycles"
in the
in the
lifelife
satisfied
satisfiedwith
with
their
their
programs
programs (2, 10).
(2,Most
10). of
Most
us ofofusthe
of the new
newtechnology
technology(11).
(11).
probably
probablyknow
knowof of
at least
at least
one one
organization
organization
that that
has
has stopped
stoppedoror
is thinking
is thinking
of abandoning
of abandoning
its MBO
its MBO The
The Life
Life Cycle
CycleTheory
Theory
program.
Many of these "failures" and abandonments In
In studying
studyingorganizations
organizationsanan
important
important
topic
topic
seem to be due to expectations of immediate is how
how new
newtechnologies
technologies(products
(productsor or
processes)
processes)
short-run results, accompanied by unwillingness enter
enter and
andbecome
becomeintegrated
integrated into
into
thethe
organiza-
organiza-
to make the long-run commitment necessary for tional
tional workflow.
workflow.AsAsa amanagement
management tool
tool
or or
proc-
proc-
development of an effective MBO program. Or- ess,
ess, MBO
MBO can
canbe
beexamined
examinedinin
terms
terms
of of
its its
intro-
intro-
ganizations do not adequately account for the duction,
duction, growth,
growth,and
andeffectiveness
effectiveness
in in
organiza-
organiza-
time dimension of MBO and thus perhaps aban- tions.
tions. In
In keeping
keepingwith
withrecent
recent
attempts
attempts
to explain
to explain
don the program prematurely. They would be the
the mechanism
mechanismwhereby
whereby new
newtechnological
technological
more inclined to make the requisite time com- processes
processes are
areintegrated
integratedinto
into
organizations
organizations
(3, (3,
mitment to MBO by recognizing that starting 6, 7,
7, 8,
8, 9,
9,11,
11,12),
12),we
weshall
shall
identify
identify
several
several
phases
phases
which are believed to be milestones in the life his-
Robert W. Hollmann (Ph.D. - University of Washington) is tory of a new process.
Assistant Professor of Management and David A. Tansik (Ph.D. Organizational changes, such as the intro-
- Northwestern University) is Associate Professor of Manage- duction of MBO, can be understood best by
ment, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.
viewing change as a process systematically mov-
Received 10/8/76; Accepted 11/29/76; Revised 12/27/76. ing through distinct developmental stages rather