Re-frame ‘navigate politics’ as a positive leadership competency
Politics. Political games. Manipulation. Insincerity. False promises. Superficial interactions.
Those are yucky words, but they are ones associated – often unfairly – with workplace politics.
Some under-political leaders try to avoid politics. In doing so, they risk their ability to get things done and their own careers.
The idea of ‘politics’ has a negative connotation for most people – and for good reason. We live in a world in which government-related politics has become contentious and unpleasant – regardless of your political leanings.
Even so, any group with at least two people – including the workplace – involves politics. We need to re-frame the concept of politics away from the negative connotation and consider what it really means.
Ignoring workplace politics can harm your work and career
Thriving in a leadership role requires understanding of and participation in workplace politics.
Working with leaders over the years, I often heard versions of this statement: “I want to progress in my career, but I don’t want to play political games.” These leaders let the negative connotation of politics block their career progression.
Good news – workplace politics does not need to be a bad thing. You can develop your political savvy and stay ethical at the same time!
Going deep on being under-political
In this article, I’ll share a perspective on workplace politics that I have used extensively with coaching clients over the years. This article highlights the dangers of being under-political and why ‘politics’ does not have to be a bad word.
This perspective comes from Rick Brandon and Marty Seldman in their book Survival of the Savvy. Their work introduces a continuum of political behavior and explains how how leaders can navigate politics and maintain integrity at the same time.
If you want a theoretical perspective on workplace politics, check out the article ‘What is Political Skill?‘. Workplace politics ties directly to the the Magnify Impact Coaching (MIC) model which includes ‘Navigate Politics’ as one of the six key competencies for a senior leader.
Politics are neutral and can be constructive
Brandon and Seldman define workplace politics as “…informal, unofficial, and sometimes behind-the-scenes efforts to sell their ideas, influence and organization, increase power, or achieve other targeted objectives.” (page 2)
They emphasize that this definition is neutral – neither good or bad. The politics can become destructive or constructive based on the intentions of the leader.
If the targeted objectives benefit the leader instead of the company, the politics can be destructive. Similarly, if the influence efforts lack integrity then politics are destructive. But the politics can just as easily be constructive – for the benefit of the company and executed with integrity.
But the politics can just as easily be constructive – for the benefit of the company and executed with integrity.
It is a matter of finding balance on an organizational savvy continuum.
The Organizational Savvy Continuum (OSC)
Brandon and Seldman introduce the Organizational Savvy Continuum (OSC) as a view that balances the need to be political with the desire to maintain integrity.
The Organizational Savvy Continuum (OSC) describes two opposite political styles that both have their strengths and risk factors. The Power of Ideas style anchors one end of the continuum and Power of Person style anchors the other end.
The Power of Person style tends to make people more political. The Power of Ideas style is less politically driven.
As with most styles, the OSC shows that balance is more effective than extremes. Being too far to either end of the continuum can create issues in your professional life.
The OSC can help you identify your political type and determine how to modify it, so you can be as effective as possible.
Power of Person Style
At the far right side of the continuum, there is the Power of Person style. These folks tend to be political by nature.
At the extreme, they focus on position power, image and perception, private agendas, relationships and self-promotion.
An exaggerated description of these people would be that they are manipulative sharks who will do anything to accomplish their personal goals.
A future article covers the dangers of being overly-political.
People who ‘avoid workplace politics’
On the other end of the continuum is the Power of Ideas folks who are low in political savvy. These people tend to believe in substance over form, focus on feedback and learning, want to do the right thing and have an open agenda.
They often believe that decisions should be based on merit and that results and ideas should speak for themselves. In other words, the smartest idea should win.
Merit alone is not enough for success – ideas also need to be shared and promoted to be accepted.
Merit alone is not enough
The less political, power of ideas people believe that power resides in facts, logic and innovation. They are usually technically strong people who love to learn and have intellectual curiosity.
With less focus on personal needs, they focus more on the needs of the organization with a strong emphasis on ethical behavior and integrity. They focus on doing an outstanding job and expect the results to gain them recognition.
As such, they resist “playing politics”, because the results should be the proof.
At the extreme end of the continuum, Power of Ideas people can be described as under-political – which can create issues.
Under-Political Risk 1: Lose out in competition for resources
Workplace politics help determine how resources are allocated and projects are approved. Leaders advocate for their teams and priorities and build business cases to set strategic direction.
Using influence to advocate for important goals that benefit the company highlights a constructive use of workplace politics. Leaders who naively shy away from politics and do not want to advocate will find themselves, and their teams, sidelined.
As Brandon and Seldman explain, being under-political makes you vulnerable to more politically savvy people every time there is a competition over power, credit for results, blame, promotions and resources.
Under-Political Risk 2: Limited career growth
Under-political leaders show naive understanding in organizational interactions. They get work done but face limitations in their own career growth.
Because they often focus on doing the work instead of on getting credit for it, colleagues and more senior leaders can underestimate them. Underestimating can translate into the under-political leaders being perceived as having less executive presence and leadership potential.
Since they see relationship building as “schmoozing”, under-political leaders veer away from it and often end up with an insufficient network.
They could also sacrifice themselves for “the greater good” in a way that harms their own career and standing.
Under-political leaders form blind spots about their own image. They don’t worry about promoting themselves as strong leaders and forget that others are always watching and forming opinions.
Under-Political Risk 3: Suffer unnecessarily by speaking too bluntly
With a focus on facts over relationships, under-political people tend to lack verbal discipline. They feel they should be free to speak the truth without considering reaction and the impact of the words.
But blunt talk can hurt egos and get others upset, which usually means that the truth gets lost in the emotional reaction.
Under-political people are also described as tending toward “false comfort, easily deceived.” This means that they tend to ignore the seamier side of workplace politics, therefore they are more likely to fall prey to it.
Under-Political Risk 4: Stubbornly enforce processes
Under-political people can also fall in to the trap of becoming “holier-than-thou” – becoming judgmental and refusing to see alternative perspectives or compromise.
This sometimes results in refusing to consider nuances – such as appropriate times to make exceptions to rules. This relates to the concept of ‘managerial judgment‘ that requires leaders to make tough decisions in ambiguous situations.
Finally, UP folks can miss important opportunities. They try to follow the rules and follow the stated process without realizing that many deals happen outside of that structure.
Apply Organizational Savvy to your own career
- Read the book ‘Survival of the Savvy‘ By Rick Brandon and Marty Seldman.
- Determine where you fall on the organizational savvy continuum. Are you balanced? Under-political? Over-political?
- If you are under-political: Do you try to avoid politics at all cost? If yes, think about how that effects your effectiveness and career.
- If you are over-political, check out the related article on those risks.
- What components of political skill can you improve on? Consider the four dimensions presented in the earlier article: social astuteness, interpersonal influence, networking ability, sincerity.
References
Brandon, R. & Seldman, M. (2004). Survival of the Savvy.
Find an overview of the research behind workplace politics and political skill in the Science of Working article ‘What is political skill?‘
