Leveraging Power and Politics

This text addresses power as a motive (good or bad) and power competition. The text contrasts rational processes with political processes and which decisions are subject to one or both of those processes. Leading with power is described with tips on the specific tactics to use. The loss of power is also discussed. Note that the upcoming sections are about change and change management in organizations. If leaders cannot leverage their power in the organization's political environment, they will not be able to change the status quo.

How power is lost

In a general sense power is lost because organizations change and leaders don't. Organizational dynamics create complex conditions and different decision situations that require innovative and creative approaches, new skill sets and new dependent and interdependent relationships. Leaders who have learned to do things a specific way become committed to predictable choices and decision actions. They remain bonded and loyal to highly developed social networks and friendships, failing to recognize the need for change, let alone allocating the political will to accomplish it. Ultimately, power may be lost because of negative personal attributes that diminish a leader's capacity to lead with power effectively. The SLDI identifies a number of negative attributes that when linked to certain organizational dynamics will generate potential loss of power:

  • Technically Incompetent describes leaders who lack the conceptual skills needed to develop vision and be proactive in managing organizational change.
  • Self-Serving/Unethical leaders abuse power and use it for their own self aggrandizement, take special privileges, and exploit peers and subordinates by taking credit for contributions done by others. Self-serving leaders contaminate the ethical climate by modeling power-oriented behavior that influences others to replicate their behavior. Over the long run, these leaders engender divisiveness and are not trusted.
  • Micromanagement of subordinates destroys individual and team motivation. Leaders who over-supervise their subordinates have strong control needs, are generally risk averse and lack conceptual understanding of power sharing and subordinate development.
  • Arrogant leaders are impressed with their own self-importance, and talk down to both peers and subordinates thereby alienating them. If empowering others is about releasing purposeful and creative energy, arrogance produces a negative leadership climate that suppresses the power needs of others. Arrogant leaders make it almost impossible for subordinates to acquire power as a means to improve their own performance as well as to seek new ways to learn and grow.
  • Explosive and Abusive leaders are likely to be "hot reactors" who use profanity excessively, have inadequate control of temper, and abuse subordinates. They may also lack the self-control required to probe for in-depth understanding of complex problems and so may consistently solve them at a superficial level. Explosive and abusive leaders may self-destruct repeatedly in coalition building and negotiating situations.
  • Inaccessible leaders are out of touch with their subordinates particularly when they need access for assistance. Peers typically "write the individual off". Leaders are generally inaccessible because they don't place great value on building interpersonal relationships, they may have weak interpersonal skills or they may be self-centered.