Politics is ingrained in the human DNA. Some people are expert in playing politics while others act naive in these matters. So the application of politics varies from person to person. As the size of the organization grows, the roles allocated to people starts intersecting and overlapping. Thus giving rise to manipulation, mutual push and pulls, bargains, and compromises. This is essentially called organizational politics.
Humans are electrically wired to take the easiest path to any problem. So, when they see some organizational manipulation taking place, they tend to avoid it instead of taking it head on. For example, if some member is adopting ill-practices in the organization then most of us prefer to close our eyes and ignore the problem instead of directly confronting the issue. Many of us have grown up talking about idealist values. One oft-repeated line in ethics paper is "As a concerned officer I will not tolerate corruption" or "As a concerned officer, I will not compromise on the organizational values" blah blah.
In reality, when we enter in any organization, we meet new people. In the initial days, we develop a culture of bonhomie, and mutual harmony. Everyone becomes friend with each other. Especially, corrupt people are most friendly and helpful. So when one fine day, You find out that your friend or acquaintance is engaging in the corruption, you face emotional ambiguity.
As a result, we first deny any such possibility. When it becomes crystal clear, we prefer to avoid it and rather develop an indifference to the whole issue. General justification goes like, why to interfere in others matter? I am clean and that's enough for me. If he is doing, let him do it. Who all will you stop? It is a systemic issue and we can't take on the system. "kyun kissi ke fatte mein taang adana?"
Forget about corruption. Even if a person is creating a negative atmosphere in the office then we generally tend to forgive him. As long as he does not lock horns with you. But if the situation worsens and he falls on your trajectory then you would possibly be taking things up. But this is more because of your personal vengeance rather than your emotional professional commitment towards the organization.
In the past, twice I have faced the situation where my colleagues were involved in attitudinally disoriented behavior vis-a-vis organizational goals. They had their reasons for their disgruntled behavior. In those instances, I felt the pressure and brain waves which a whistle-blower generally faces. It is not always easy to simply stand up and confront the issue or even talk about the issue.
Similarly, I recent met an IRS friend. He is quite bold and someone who plays life on front foot. Even he had developed a condoning or escapist attitude on the issue of corruption. It is always said that confronting a stranger is always easy. But confronting the people who you may know is difficult because it leads to dissonance. Somewhere some myths, perception, and stereotypes are broken.
For this reason, I respect Rahul Gandhi. He may not be a good orator but he has organizational skills. He has introduced the system of primaries in a bulky organization like The Congress. This process of change is a real big deal. Not many leaders are prepared to take such changes and later own up the responsibility for the outcome.
People says he does not share the same political ambition as his ancestors. But I think that has more to do with his upbringing. He always had the power so what should he aspire for? Ultimately, only when you loose it then you realize the worth and develop the aspirations.
For this matter, I respect our PM as well. Though he may not have done visibly enough to change the country and ignite the engine of development. But he dared to abolish planning commission and brought many inter and intra-ministerial level changes which have helped in streamlining processes in the higher echelon of power.
Anyway, Coming back to the topic, How to deal with the organizational politics? The answer to this question depends on where in the organizational structure do you fit in and how you are placed vis-a-vis this chakravyuha of politics? And what sort of existential threat does this pose to the organization?
Humans are electrically wired to take the easiest path to any problem. So, when they see some organizational manipulation taking place, they tend to avoid it instead of taking it head on. For example, if some member is adopting ill-practices in the organization then most of us prefer to close our eyes and ignore the problem instead of directly confronting the issue. Many of us have grown up talking about idealist values. One oft-repeated line in ethics paper is "As a concerned officer I will not tolerate corruption" or "As a concerned officer, I will not compromise on the organizational values" blah blah.
In reality, when we enter in any organization, we meet new people. In the initial days, we develop a culture of bonhomie, and mutual harmony. Everyone becomes friend with each other. Especially, corrupt people are most friendly and helpful. So when one fine day, You find out that your friend or acquaintance is engaging in the corruption, you face emotional ambiguity.
As a result, we first deny any such possibility. When it becomes crystal clear, we prefer to avoid it and rather develop an indifference to the whole issue. General justification goes like, why to interfere in others matter? I am clean and that's enough for me. If he is doing, let him do it. Who all will you stop? It is a systemic issue and we can't take on the system. "kyun kissi ke fatte mein taang adana?"
Forget about corruption. Even if a person is creating a negative atmosphere in the office then we generally tend to forgive him. As long as he does not lock horns with you. But if the situation worsens and he falls on your trajectory then you would possibly be taking things up. But this is more because of your personal vengeance rather than your emotional professional commitment towards the organization.
In the past, twice I have faced the situation where my colleagues were involved in attitudinally disoriented behavior vis-a-vis organizational goals. They had their reasons for their disgruntled behavior. In those instances, I felt the pressure and brain waves which a whistle-blower generally faces. It is not always easy to simply stand up and confront the issue or even talk about the issue.
Similarly, I recent met an IRS friend. He is quite bold and someone who plays life on front foot. Even he had developed a condoning or escapist attitude on the issue of corruption. It is always said that confronting a stranger is always easy. But confronting the people who you may know is difficult because it leads to dissonance. Somewhere some myths, perception, and stereotypes are broken.
For this reason, I respect Rahul Gandhi. He may not be a good orator but he has organizational skills. He has introduced the system of primaries in a bulky organization like The Congress. This process of change is a real big deal. Not many leaders are prepared to take such changes and later own up the responsibility for the outcome.
People says he does not share the same political ambition as his ancestors. But I think that has more to do with his upbringing. He always had the power so what should he aspire for? Ultimately, only when you loose it then you realize the worth and develop the aspirations.
For this matter, I respect our PM as well. Though he may not have done visibly enough to change the country and ignite the engine of development. But he dared to abolish planning commission and brought many inter and intra-ministerial level changes which have helped in streamlining processes in the higher echelon of power.
Anyway, Coming back to the topic, How to deal with the organizational politics? The answer to this question depends on where in the organizational structure do you fit in and how you are placed vis-a-vis this chakravyuha of politics? And what sort of existential threat does this pose to the organization?
No comments:
Post a Comment