The Political Puzzle: Navigating the Influence of Politics in the Workplace

/0 Comments/in /by

StrategyDriven Business Politics Impacts Article | The Political Puzzle: Navigating the Influence of Politics in the Workplace

In the labyrinth of office cubicles and conference rooms, a ⁢curious phenomenon lurks around every corner, subtly shaping the ​dynamics of ‌the⁤ workplace: politics. Like a complicated puzzle that requires careful navigation, the influence of political behavior in professional settings can present both opportunities and obstacles ⁤for those trying​ to ⁤succeed in their careers. ‍In this article, we will delve⁤ into the intricate world of ​office​ politics,‍ exploring ‍the⁣ strategies to decode⁢ and⁤ maneuver this complex landscape with finesse and integrity. Join us as we unravel the ​enigmatic⁢ connections between power, influence,⁤ and success⁤ in the modern workplace.

Understanding the Intersection of Politics ⁣and Work Dynamics

Politics ⁢in the workplace can be like​ navigating a complex puzzle, ‌with ⁣various pieces interlocking and ​influencing ‌each other in unexpected ways. Understanding how ‍politics impacts work dynamics is essential⁣ for successfully maneuvering ⁢through office ⁤dynamics⁤ and achieving career success.

One key aspect to consider is ‌the power dynamics at‌ play within the organization. Hierarchical structures can greatly⁤ influence ⁣how politics manifest in the workplace, with​ individuals in positions of ‌power often exerting more influence over decisions and relationships. Additionally, personal relationships and ​alliances​ can also shape the political landscape, as individuals may form‍ coalitions to further⁣ their agendas or protect their interests.

Nurturing a‍ Positive and Inclusive Work Environment

In today’s fast-paced work environment, the influence of‌ politics ⁣can often be felt within the office walls. Navigating these political waters can ​be tricky,⁣ but there are ways to ensure that your work environment remains positive and inclusive for all ‌employees. One key strategy is to focus on fostering open ⁣communication and respect⁢ among colleagues.

Another important aspect of‍ is to promote diversity and inclusion within the ⁤workplace. Encouraging employees to embrace different perspectives and⁣ backgrounds​ can lead to⁤ a more harmonious and productive work environment. By fostering a culture ‍of respect and understanding, you can help to create a ‍space where all employees feel ⁣valued and included.

Effectively Managing Power Dynamics ⁣and Conflicts

When it comes to navigating power dynamics and conflicts in the workplace, it can often feel like solving a ‍complex political puzzle. ‌Understanding‍ the various‍ players, their motives, and the dynamics at play is⁣ crucial to effectively managing these situations. One key aspect to⁤ keep in mind is the influence of politics within the organization.

Influence Factors:

  • Positional power
  • Personal relationships
  • Communication styles
Power Dynamics Conflict Resolution
Identify key stakeholders Listen actively to all parties
Establish clear communication ‍channels Find common ground for compromise

Strategies for Building Productive⁢ Relationships Across Political Differences

When it comes to navigating political differences in the workplace, it can often feel like ⁤putting⁣ together a⁢ complex puzzle. However, by utilizing⁣ strategic approaches, individuals can build productive relationships ‌across political divides. One effective strategy is to listen actively to‍ others’ perspectives,⁤ even if they ⁢differ from your own.⁣ By​ demonstrating empathy ⁢and understanding, ⁢you can establish common ground and foster a sense of ‍mutual respect.

Another​ key strategy is to focus on⁢ shared goals and values rather than divisive political beliefs. By highlighting areas of agreement and collaboration, you can work towards common objectives while⁣ minimizing conflict. Additionally, setting boundaries around political discussions in the‍ workplace can help maintain ‍a positive ⁢and productive environment for all employees. By approaching political differences with patience, open-mindedness,⁤ and a ⁣willingness to find common ‍ground, individuals can navigate the⁢ complexities of politics in⁢ the workplace ‌with ‌grace and professionalism.

Final Thoughts…

In conclusion, navigating the influence of politics in the workplace can be a complex puzzle⁣ to solve.‍ Understanding ⁢the dynamic relationships, ⁢power struggles, and potential ⁤pitfalls that come‌ with political maneuvering is essential for successfully navigating ⁢the corporate⁣ landscape. By taking ‌a strategic ‍approach, remaining​ open-minded, and focusing on collaboration‌ and communication, employees can mitigate the negative impact ‌of office politics and create a more⁤ harmonious⁤ work environment. Remember, the key to success is to stay informed, remain adaptable, and always keep your professional ⁢integrity intact. Happy puzzling!

StrategyDriven Business Politics Impacts Article |Internal Competition|How Internal Competition Can Destroy Your Business From The Inside

How Internal Competition Can Destroy Your Business From The Inside

/0 Comments/in /by

StrategyDriven Business Politics Impacts Article |Internal Competition|How Internal Competition Can Destroy Your Business From The InsideYou often hear people say things like ‘the business world is dog-eat-dog,’ or ‘competition is king.’ Unfortunately, the role of competition in business is often misunderstood and many business owners are damaging their own chances of success as a result.

It’s true that competition is what drives the market and striving to outperform your competitors is what pushes you forward and encourages you to innovate. Without that competition model, the economy would stagnate and progress would slow down.

However, many business owners make the mistake of thinking that internal competition between employees will have the same effect. The thinking is that if you pit people against one another, they will work harder to come out on top, ultimately making everybody more productive. In reality, it doesn’t work that way and although internal competition can have benefits, to some extent, it can be a lot more damaging to productivity. Here’s why internal competition is bad for business.

It Discourages Skill Sharing And Teamwork

When you pit people against one another and provide rewards and opportunities for progression to those at the top, it discourages skill sharing and teamwork. Business leaders like Wayne Blazejczyk ASIC run successful companies because they understand the importance of helping your team to develop their skills, and skill sharing is a big part of this. Everybody has different strengths and combining those strengths and helping one another improve on weak areas makes everybody more effective. But in an incredibly competitive environment, people are concerned about sharing the credit for work, so they are less likely to collaborate or help others. In the end, this just means that your whole team is less productive and the quality of the work they produce is worse.

The Wrong People Get Promoted

If you are promoting people based on this system of internal competition, you will end up promoting the wrong people and leaving good people behind. The people that come out on top in this environment are people that will step on others to get ahead and won’t work in a team because they want all of the credit. These are awful qualities to have in a position of responsibility. Unfortunately, when you base decisions on internal competition, these are often the people that end up in management positions because they overshadow better employees that are less willing to push themselves forward at the expense of others.

It Creates A Toxic Work Environment

It’s only natural that competition leads to conflict. Certain employees that are trying to outdo one another at every turn will keep clashing, and this creates a very toxic work environment. You are far more likely to have issues with bullying and harassment and all relationships in the office will be strained. When you create an environment like this, good employees will simply leave and find a new job. So, your employee turnover rate shoots up and you lose all of your best people.

Sometimes, a bit of fun competition can be helpful. An employee of the month scheme, for example, gives a little incentive and rewards hard work without causing problems. But once you start ranking people by performance and trying to encourage a lot of competition, you are just setting yourself up for failure.

StrategyDriven Business Politics Impacts Article | The Consequences of Bad Leadership

The Consequences of Bad Leadership

/0 Comments/in , , /by

StrategyDriven Business Politics Impacts Article | The Consequences of Bad LeadershipAn area of Buenos Aires nicknamed Villa Freud boasts the highest concentration of psychoanalysts per capita in the world. Even the bars and cafe?s have Freudian names, such as the Oedipus Complex and the Unconscious. Many of the residents are therapists, in therapy, or both. In fact, psychoanalysts are only allowed to be therapists if they are in therapy themselves. The requirement creates a self-perpetuating and ever-expanding universe of psychoanalysts and patients. It’s like an inverted – and unhealthy – pyramid scheme. Every new shrink is another shrink’s new patient, and the arrangement keeps both supply and demand perennially high.[wcm_restrict plans=”25541, 25542, 25653″]

I grew up in Villa Freud. Even our dog saw a shrink, though it was always clear to me – perhaps even to our dog – that the dog shrink was really dealing with our problems, rather than our dog’s. When I had to decide on a career, the choice was almost inevitable: I had to become a psychologist.

Growing up in Argentina also nurtured my interest in leadership, especially the problematic type. A century ago, Argentina was the future. It was not just the land of opportunity, but also one of the richest countries in the world, with a GDP per capita higher than that of France and Germany. Yet Argentina has been in constant decline ever since, being one of the few perpetually devolving countries in the world. The main reason? One bad leader after another. So, I asked myself the obvious questions: How can smart and educated people make self-destructive leadership choices, political term after term, without learning the les- sons from previous failures? How can rational people who have their own best interests at heart fall for charismatic con artists who promise them the impossible while pursuing harmful agendas and corrupt selfish interests? Although this depressing state of affairs eventually propelled me to leave Argentina, I promised myself that I would do what it took to understand – and help fix – this toxic side of leadership.

And indeed, today I am a leadership psychologist. Much of my work focuses on helping organizations avoid incompetent leaders and make the already-installed leaders less ineffective. The work has important repercussions. When you get it right, you see enormous benefits to the organization and its people. And when you get it wrong, you get . . . Argentina.

In business, a bad leader significantly affects subordinates by reducing their engagement—their enthusiasm for their jobs and the meaning and purpose people find at work. Global surveys report that a staggering 70 percent of employees are not engaged at work and that only 4 percent of these employees have anything nice to say about their bosses.9 Quite clearly, good leadership is not the norm, but the exception.

The economic cost of disengagement is even more astounding. In the United States alone, lower engagement translates into an annual productivity loss of around $500 billion.10 This estimate is probably conservative, since it is based on large multinational corporations: organizations that actually bother asking employees how they feel about their jobs and that devote considerable time and money to improve how their employees experience work. The average employee in the world is probably even more miserable.

Productivity loss is not the only downside of disengagement. Disengaged employees are also more likely to quit their jobs. Employee turnover incurs a huge burden, including separation costs, damaged morale, and productivity losses associated with the time and resources needed to find and train newcomers. Between 10 and 30 percent of the employees’ annual salary is lost to turnover costs. The figure is even higher for replacing leaders, since top executive-search firms will charge around 30 percent of the leader’s annual salary on top. And turnover is not always the worst-case scenario for businesses. When disengaged employees do decide to stay, they are more likely to misbehave, for example, abusing staff, bending the rules, and committing fraud.[/wcm_restrict][wcm_nonmember plans=”25541, 25542, 25653″]

Hi there! Gain access to this article with a FREE StrategyDriven Insights Library – Sample Subscription. It’s FREE Forever with No Credit Card Required.

Sign-up now for your FREE StrategyDriven Insights Library – Sample Subscription

In addition to receiving access to this article, you’ll help advance your career and business programs through anytime, anywhere access to:

  • A sampling of dozens of Premium how-to documents across 7 business functions and 28 associated programs
  • 2,500+ Expert Contributor management and leadership articles
  • Expert advice provided via StrategyDriven’s Advisors Corner

Best of all, it’s FREE Forever with No Credit Card Required.

Access the Article Now!

[/wcm_nonmember]

Reprinted by permission of Harvard Business Review Press. Excerpted from Why Do So Many Incompetent Men Become Leaders: (And How to Fix It) by Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic. Copyright 2019 Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic. All rights reserved.

About the Author

StrategyDriven Expert Contributor | Tomas Chamorro-PremuzicTomas Chamorro-Premuzic is the Chief Talent Scientist at Manpower Group, co-founder of Deeper Signals and Metaprofiling, and Professor of Business Psychology at University College London and Columbia University

StrategyDriven Talent Management Article | Employee Retention | Management and Leadership

Your Bad Leaders Are Driving Away Good Employees

/0 Comments/in , /by

StrategyDriven Talent Management Article | Employee Retention | Management and LeadershipThese days, it’s hard to keep a good employee in your ranks. Messages across the web tell young workers that the only way to get ahead is to hop positions frequently, even as much as once per year. In the modern job market, frequent relocations seems to be how employees get the titles, responsibilities and perks they crave.

So, employees are already poised to leave — and they will flee your offices even faster if your leadership isn’t up to snuff. Here are a few ways bad leaders negatively impact your employee retention and what you can do to stop it.

Poor Communication

Good communication is the number-one requirement for a leader. After all, it’s impossible to lead if you don’t know how to use words to direct your workforce. Still, many poor communicators make it to leadership positions, and from there, they wreak all sorts of havoc. Poor communication can take many forms:

  • Over-inflated — using too much jargon, too many big words or overly convoluted sentence structure
  • Non-specific — failing to provide clear instructions or guidelines for a project or situation
  • Abrasive — communicating with aggressive language and/or with anger
  • Selfish — communicating only to seek personal benefits, ignoring others’ needs or desires
  • Wrong method — employing an inappropriate means of communication

Fortunately, communication is a skill like any other, which means it is possible to retrain these leaders to improve their performance. It might be wise to encourage leaders to develop their communication through advanced education, like an MBA program, or else through mentorship or coaching.

Criticism

There is a fine line between healthy feedback and destructive criticism — and many leaders stray to the wrong side too often. Leaders are meant to coach, helping employees improve their skills and thus develop their careers. Bad leaders will nit-pick, taking every chance to degrade employees and make them feel ineffective and worthless.

Many employees become so downtrodden by the constant criticism that they do not report the bad behavior to HR or higher bosses, which means it is often difficult to identify overly critical leaders. If you receive any reports of an unsympathetic, judgmental leader, you should take them seriously and take steps to effect change.

Unfortunately, it’s difficult to retrain leaders who develop this habit. Often, it is a clear and simple sign that someone is poorly suited to leadership and should be removed to a different role. However, you might also need to undo the damage of these leaders by being overly appreciative of employee contributions, perhaps even handing out employee awards to raise general self-esteem.

StrategyDriven Talent Management Article | Employee Retention | Your Bad Leaders Are Driving Away Good Employees | Office Politics | Business PoliticsOffice Politics

Office politics is an unavoidable power and social networking system that develops in any organization, big or small. The manipulation of office politics by some employees is inevitable — but that doesn’t mean it’s okay for leaders to take advantage of the political atmosphere of an office. An overly political office often breeds fear amongst the workforce; fear causes employees to resent their employer, which drives up staff turnover.

Leaders might try to leverage office politics to encourage employees to work harder — but there is a delicate balance between positive and negative outcomes from political maneuvering. Plus, office politics always comes with ethical concerns, which certainly won’t boost your brand perception. It’s much safer to discourage leaders from inciting a political atmosphere in your workplace.

Dirty Laundry

Work only amounts to so much of a person’s life, and while it’s fine (even encouraged!) to share a bit of your home life with your coworkers, no one should be divulging unseemly personal drama in the workplace. Dirty laundry, much like office politics, breeds discomfort amongst your workforce; a proliferation of dirty laundry encourages people to spread rumors, with can reduce interpersonal trust and send employees looking for less threatening work.

Leaders need to find a balance between humanizing themselves with personal details and airing dirty laundry. Human resources can help train leaders who struggle to set boundaries. It’s also wise to build a workplace culture that allows for personal bonds between workers, so information about anyone’s personal life doesn’t seem quite so salacious.

Fear, discomfort, distrust — these are things that bad leaders can breed amongst your workforce, virtually guaranteeing that no good employee stays for longer than a few months. Your business can’t grow unless your workforce is stable and capable, which means you might need to take steps to change your leadership, stat.

StrategyDriven Business Politics Impacts Article | Business Politics Impacts – Cost of Employee Productivity Loss

Business Politics Impacts – Cost of Employee Productivity Loss

/0 Comments/in , /by

StrategyDriven Business Politics Impacts Article | Business Politics Impacts – Cost of Employee Productivity LossUnseen millions are lost by companies every year; the result of employees withholding the full commitment of their physical, intellectual, and emotional contributions. Surveys conducted by the Gallup Organization identified an 18 percent difference in productivity between the best and worst performing companies.1 Yet, as we shall explain, even the best performing companies have room for improvement.[wcm_restrict plans=”50127, 25542, 25653″]

Cost of the Unproductive

Gallup Organization studies reveal a startling lack of employee engagement. These studies show that within the average organization 33 percent of employees are ‘engaged,’ 49 percent are ‘not engaged,’ and 18 percent are ‘actively disengaged.’2 Furthermore, employee productivity varied with the degree of employee engagement. Engaged employees apply the full measure of their abilities to the achievement of company goals, disengaged employees do just enough to satisfactorily get by, and actively disengaged employees may actually work against the achievement of corporate goals.

Applying some mathematical assumptions to the various employee engagement levels suggests that engaged employees are 100 percent productive (as productive as humanly possible), disengaged employees are 70 percent productive, and actively disengaged employees are 50 percent productive. Using these assumptions and Gallup’s finding that there exists an 18 percent productivity difference between top and bottom performing organizations suggests that top performers achieve an 88.7 percent overall productivity level, average performers 76.3 percent, and bottom performers 70.7 percent. Figure 1, Employee Engagement Levels Among Various Organizations, illustrates the Gallup Organization’s findings updated with StrategyDriven’s assumptions and analysis.

StrategyDriven Business Politics Impacts Article | Employee Engagement | Employee Productivity
Figure 1 – Employee Engagement Levels Among Various Organizations

The difference in physical labor productivity between top and bottom performing companies with 250 employees making an average of $43,000 per year is estimated to be $1.94M annually.

An Abusive Work Environment

The workplace environment does not need to be abusive to be demotivating. Considering The 12 Elements of Great Managing that Gallup found to be engaging3, the following could be said to disenfranchise employees and lower their productivity:

  1. Expectations are unclear*
  2. Needed tools and materials are unavailable*
  3. Employee strengths go unused*
  4. Recognition is infrequently provided*
  5. Employees feel isolated and uncared for at work*
  6. Employee development activities are unsupported*
  7. Employee input is seldom sought or acted on*
  8. The organization’s mission and goals are uninspiring
  9. Colleagues lack commitment to performing quality work
  10. Employees lack personal relationships at work
  11. Performance reviews occur very infrequently if at all
  12. Learning and growth opportunities are few or non-existent*

Note that 8 of these 12 disenfranchisers (marked with an *) are directly related to one or more political power exertion.

Other workplace demotivators are far worse; some being abusive. Surveys conducted by the Sp@rtacus Group, the Employee Law Alliance, and WBI/Zogby reveal that:

  • 61 percent of employees witnessed diversity related acts of incivility, disrespect, and/or discrimination at work4
  • 44 percent of employees indicate they have worked for an abusive supervisor5
  • 37 percent of employees reported being bullied at work6

…all representing a misuse or abuse of personal power on the part of the aggressor(s).

These surveys further identified resulting employee behaviors that reduce productivity including:

  • 28 percent lost work time avoiding the instigator(s)
  • 53 percent lost work time worrying about the incident or future interactions with the instigator(s)
  • 22 percent reduced their work effort
  • 10 percent decreased the amount of time spent at work7

In addition to the significant direct labor cost of a demotivating work environment, employees also reported withholding discretionary effort and creating insights. These too degrade the organization’s bottom line results, if in a less measurable way.

Calculating the Cost of Employee Productivity Loss

Business politics clearly contributes to employee disengagement and subsequently reduced productivity. Estimating the cost of employee productivity loss involves performing the following steps:

  1. Determine the current employee productivity rate of the organization – This rate can be calculated using surveys and resent culture assessments to determine the employee engagement level percentages combined with StrategyDriven’s productivity rate correlation assumptions. Calculate the organization’s overall employee productivity rate as the sum of 1.0 x Percent of Engaged Employees + 0.7 x Percent of Disengaged Employees + 0.5 x Percent of Activity Disengaged Employees.
  2. Determine the difference between current employee productivity and that of a high-performing organization (88.7 percent).
  3. Estimate the cost to the organization resulting from the currently diminished employee productivity rate using the StrategyDriven Calculating the Cost of Employee Productivity Loss Nomographs to determine the cost of the direct labor losses resulting from the lower employee productivity rate. Enter the nomograph using the difference between the organization’s current and target productivity rates as determined in Step 2.

Example Calculation for the Cost of Employee Productivity Loss

Background

  • Organization Size: 400 employees
  • Average Employee Salary: $43,000 / year

Calculation (Illustrative)

  1. Overall Average Employee Productivity: 76.3 percent (the average organization)
  2. Difference Between Current Employee Productivity and that of a Leading Organization: 12.4 percent
  3. Annual Cost of Employee Productivity Loss: $2,132,800 / year

Final Thoughts…

StrategyDriven’s Diversity and Inclusion – Return on Investment, part 3: Employee Productivity Enhancement reveals the available return on investment from improved workplace civility. It assumes, however, that leaders capable of making such improvements desire to do so.

Improvement initiatives reducing the prevalence of business politics within an organization are rarely pursued because those empowered to do so enable the political environment through complacency/indifference or benefit from its existence. Consequently, improvements are most likely achieved by newly appointed, strong leaders.

Sources

  1. “Employee Engagement: What’s Your Engagement Ratio?,” Gallup Consulting, Gallup, 2010, page 3 (http://www.gallup.com/consulting/52/Employee-Engagement.aspx?gclid=CKuO-_CDrqYCFYpN2god8CdvnQ)Note: The document link is located at the bottom of this webpage.
  2. ibid, page 1
  3. ibid, page 2
  4. “Linking Employee Commitment & Workplace Incivility to Corporate Earnings,” Craig B. Clayton, Sr., The Sp@rtacus Group, July 2004
  5. “The High Cost of the Bad Boss,” American Management Association, October 2, 2007 (http://www.amanet.org/training/articles/The-High-Cost-of-the-Bad-Boss.aspx)
  6. ibid
  7. “Assessing and Attacking Workplace Incivility, “ C.M. Pearson, L.M. Andersson, and C.L. Porath, Organizational Dynamics, Volume 26(2), Fall 2000

[/wcm_restrict][wcm_nonmember plans=”50127, 25542, 25653″]

Hi there! Gain access to this article with a StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription or buy access to the article itself.

Subscribe to the StrategyDriven Insights Library

Sign-up now for your StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription for as low as $15 / month (paid annually).

Subscribe Now!

Not sure? Click here to learn more.

 Buy the Article

Don’t need a subscription? Buy access to Business Politics Impacts – Cost of Employee Productivity Loss and gain access to it and the accompanying tool for just $2!

Access the Article and Tool Now!

[/wcm_nonmember]