Implementation of Strategic Political Power at Work - Literature review Example

Running head: Implementation of strategic political power at work Implementation of strategic political power at work Insert Insert Grade Insert Tutor’s Name 21 March 2011 Outline Introduction Argument for Argument against Conclusion Works Cited Implementation of strategic political power at work Introduction Strategy implementation is an operational area that zeros in on techniques that are often used by managers to undertake their activities. The activities involved in this area are centered in leadership styles that go hand in hand with the managers strategies (Bratton and Gold 42). Corporate politics has been viewed as both good and bad. In addition to this power and politics are defined as a means of attaining objectives of an organization. Corporate politics in one time or the other has been considered to lead to divisiveness, which is considered as bad for the organization. However, there are times when corporate politics needs to be rejuvenated for the sole purpose of enhancing changes. These changes are mainly incorporated in the process where the organization is rising from a stable phase to a phase where the fundamental changes are crucial. Strategy implementation on the other hand involves change management. This therefore installs corporate politics with a definite role to take part in strategy implementation. In case of creating political harmony or political tension it is advisable that strategists identify the particular moment where politics can be used to get the wheels of various operations rolling and at the same time know the moment of shunning politics and embrace harmony (Kozami 362). Argument for In an organization, power is said to be derived from five different sources namely; legitimate power, reward power, expert power, referent power, and coercive power. Reward power is attributed to the ability attributed to managers to appreciate positive results by rewarding them. Legitimate power is attributed to the ability of managers to use their status to affect an outcome. Referent on its case is attributed to the ability of managers to form a preference among working subordinates, which arises from ones personality. Expert power is attributed to the expertise the manager has and is identified by others while coercive power is deals mainly with the penalization act undertaken by the manager after a negative outcome has taken place. According to Kozami, strategists mainly use these powers to affect and influence the outcome behaviors of different organization members. Politics dwells mainly on how power is used and the relationship created by various management coalitions of consensus building for organizational purposes. Manifestation of corporate politics is vibrant due to the conditions created by the nature of an organization (Kozami 362). According to Smith in America, policymaking does not cease to exist once the bills become law. Instead, it continues as various executive agencies have the mandate to establish systems and rules of implementing these laws. These actions in return have a huge impact on the profit margins, strategic planning, and overall management of various industries and corporations. A good example is in the case of the Federal Communications Commission when it decides on which of the broadcasting stations are to be offered licenses (Smith 203). In the business environment, Bridge et al suggests that the strategic decision makers are supposed to embrace the competitive aspect of the industry they operate in. This is because the industrial structure mainly affects the competition in the industry as it offers strategic choices for corporations (Bridge et al 308). Human factor is one of the crucial factors that are considered in strategic management. Leadership in this case is considered at a strategic judgment perspective. One of the attribute that define strategic management is strategic choice. This therefore indicates that any executive judgment despite of it being good or bad is supposed to be made before strategic choices are made. It is important that one understands strategic judgment made by a leader as it is used to determine mental processes manifestation (Hitt et al xix). In an organization, power may be developed from one person and rise to different sources. Acquisition of power may arise due to access and control over information attained. In addition to this power may be attained by direct as well as rapid access to people with power as well as one’s ability to influence the outcome of their decisions. In order for an organization to succeed in implementing its strategy, there must be total support across the various departments incorporated in the organization. However, political action is one of the debilitating effects that can cause an organization not to attain its long-term objectives (Luffman et al 193). Argument against In complicated environment, it is difficult to achieve as well as sustain consistency. This hence puts a lot of pressure on the demands of various types of leadership styles that are urgently needed to be applied simultaneously. In the modern business surroundings, the demand in organizations and corporations is mainly limited to strategists that are knowledgeable and skillful thus limiting opportunities (Gollakota et al 484). According to Hitt et al, strategic alliances are used to lead organizations to new business ventures. However majority of the firms in develop countries prefer to reduce their operations’ scope by restructuring. The down scoping in restructuring is attributed to poor performance of firms that are diversified (Hitt et al xviii). One of the difficulties highlighted by Bernhagen is explanation of business political power. According to Bernhagen, the same business political power has made small business banking in Britain a hard nut to crack. This is because the values attributed to the various variables are unique and not favorable to informational account expectations of political power. In spite of having a structural position, a business in one way or the other can be forced to back down and undertake the burden brought about by the cost in policies. A business defeat may arise out of structural constraints that are attributed to compelling structural (Bernhagen 89). In business, one of the most vexing problems in strategic management is implementation. According to Amason, implementation is very complicated in the sense that it is not definitive in terms of explanation. Implementation is a broad issue that supersedes the common factors behind it but also the human component and the knowledge of ensuring it all works. This therefore indicates that specific type of people is needed together with the right training in order for it to work (Amason 64). Strategic control, which is one of the criteria used in implementation of proposed strategies, is normally faced with three main problems. One of the problem is short-term orientation which is attributed to budget systems that if not checked properly could turn managers to short-term thinkers. This caused by the turning the budget into focus as the managers opt the short term focus so as to meet the budget. The second primary problem is inflexibility. In this case, as the environment changes, the programmes, and strategies are supposed to change, In this case strategy is attributed more than a course of action. The third primary problem is Goal incongruence, where the objective of a defined control system is not only to align the goals of each manager but also to align the goals of employees to attain a consistence scenario in the organization. However, this does not occur due to control system elements that are inconsistence with the strategy. A similar strategy to this occurs when strategies are considered goals (Luffan, et al 209 & 2010). Conclusion For a chosen strategy to be fully implemented successfully, political features are to be considered and at the same time be understood. Corporate decisions on the other hand are one of the major concerns of the entire business as most of the strategic decisions are one way or the other likely to spark a reaction, which may have either positive or negative impact to the employees. In case of examination of the internal behavior in an organization, the political process should run parallel to the planning system. In considering politics in the context of people, interacting with a specific system one cannot help but to attribute politics to a means through which decisions are implemented. Politics is one of the issues that go hand in hand with power. The formal status of an organization normally provides power in terms of superiority as politics is mainly centered on power and how it is used. Leadership is one of the attributes used to determine successful implementation of the strategy at hand. A manager’s work in an organization is divided into three, which include organizing, planning and leadership. Works Cited Amason, Allen. Strategic Management: From Theory to Practice. NY: Routledge. 2011. Bernhagen, Patrick. The political power of business: structure and information in public Policymaking. NY: Routledge. Bratton, John and Gold, Jeffrey. Human resource management: theory and practice. London: MACMILLAN PRESS LTD. 1999. Bridge, Simon, et al. Understanding enterprise, entrepreneurship, and small business. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 2003. Gollakota, Gupta, et al. Business Policy and Strategic Management: Concepts and Applications. New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India Private Limited. 2007. Hitt, Micheal, et al. The Blackwell handbook of strategic management. MA: Blackwell Publishers Inc. 2001. Kozami, Azhar. Business policy and strategic management. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited. 2002. Luffman, George, et al. Strategic management: an analytical introduction. MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 1996. Smith, Alan M. American business and political power: public opinion, elections, and democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 2000. Read More