Seminar 1 – HRM

Understand straetgy and RBV in work setting

Having clear start for motivation, commitment involving employees in DM

75% projects fail – why? Human strat – need to be clear and not assu,e they know how
to do tih++hings
Communicate properly

To be unique and lead – clear start for positonig – be clear what u want to be known
for and focus of org

Resource-anythinh org uses for productive purposes, add value

Importance of external enviro – comp, tech, internt – role of top managers to assess
this
& then asses internal enviro – what competences does org have to be leader
Then make changes in resources for strategic HRM

RBV – internal – what maeks org unique is quality of resources and caoabilties (VRIO) –
determines whther org will lead

Valuebale – resources and capabilities adding value to buss strat

Rare – rare resources – unique skill and talent – only your company will have e-g-
Samsung tech
Imitable – how easy – how youre organizing resources is a social aspect very hard to
imitate making hR critical role in org. + whether org has substitutes (solves same issue)
Organized – how well org is able to bring the best of their resources, each employee

Analyzing IKEA
 Do firms resouces and capbilites enable it to respond to enviro threats and
opportunities (value) –

Business model very nique – low price, good quality, home delivery and self-instalment
– experience and control over customer base difficult to imitate business model

Buss model makes them unique, hard to imitate, rare (few direct competitiros, USP is
low price and good aulity which other don’t provide), like an experience go as a family
and eat there
Way they organize hr, spend a lot on training and development
R&d for innovative products
Reason they are still leading no outdates products with efficient hr
Supply chain, good don’t need to worry about raw materials, work nicely with
suppliers spread in 51 countries
Seminar 2 - strategic recruitment

Assessment

Put theory in practice, make own recommendations and judgements

e.g. what exactly does maslow theory say – applied models – be more critical –
understand why its happening, whats the reason for this behaviour in the org

3,000 word essay (40%) 11th March

18th seminar for the essay
The essay choices – about applying theory fro countres on a hypothetical future
Context already given – AI approaching our lives – robots e.g. making food from
scratch, serving food in restauratns, healthcare AI helping in making critical decions
regaring life threatning illnesses like cancer helping doctos making decions
Majority of tradional jobs out of market and new jobs are coming
 As an HR function should have understanding of other functions of the
business
 Why there is a need in HR if majority of work is done by machines and AI,
persuade her on how you can contirbue to org

Become familiar by reading description which is given of AI

Question 1
 Argue yes or no – HR theories covered will be relevant
Question 2
 Looking at ethical side
 Diversity – orgs with diverse workforce and skillset – talking about
globalization process of bringing all cultures together through trade, IT can
reach any part of works some orgs e.g. cars develop product in diff parts of
world and assembles in a diff country
 Minority issues – gender gap orgs trying to bridge

Want to see on what basis, which reading we came to a certain conclusion, what
theory is this argument based on
Analysis (pros and cons, strengths weakness, ad dis, compare diff sectors and diff
issues and give our own interpretation based on something) critical evaluation and
critical thinking very important

Its not about AI, it is about applying your understanding in novel/different scenarios to
test it – talk about diff issues e.g. diversity, ethical, selection and criteria – critical
evaluation

150-200 words to make reader aware of what is context and AI – AI different in

different sectors

Exam 2 hours (60%) weeks 25-27

2 parts (both essay questions)
1 – case given in advance, compulsory question about it
2- choose one out of three questions

Group activity - group management and selection

Context: Project manager

Unusual and undervalues attributes

 Forward thinking
 Innovative and creative – think outside the box when things don’t go to plan
 Confident
 Rational
 Honest
 Cultural awareness
 Self motivated
 Emotional maturity or emotional intelligence

We all learn – realize the need for attributes along the way – way in which orgs used to
work in terms of structure, culture different than now – role of HR changed from
personal management to more business partners, game changers – evolved
External enviro changed, working globally, so more skills needed to survive and mange
properly – so orgs should review alignment with job roles and responsibilities to buss
strategy constantly – difference to me more robust and selection process more valid
Hard to quantify these
Judgment of these different from person to person
Skills should have in selection process, important – how to make sure this is part of the
process, how to access it in candidate – informal setting without pressure – not in
assessment center
How to ensure consistency – marking, moderation – the more we standardize and
formalize it the better
Valid and reliable process by defining it clearly

e.g. article – Amazon recruiting tool showed bias against women

withdrew selection as it was biased against women
Amazon had mainly men working in IT dpt, analysis current traits in staff which
traditionally have been composed of men and biased against traits women tend to
have
How you make sure its not biased
Session 3 – pay, performance and reward

Financial rewards – base pay, KPI and performance-based pay

Competitive base pay – depending on what other companies offering – not offer too
much or employees will be demotivated to work hard
Org culture – how easy to interact with line managers and also informal social
interaction – how easy and how bureaucratic it is

Non-financial reward – flexible working, bonus holidays, gym membership

 see info on ppt on Moodle about report

Seminar 4 – ethics

e.g. diverse team – hiring diversity

Theories:
 Categorical imperatives – focus on act – everyone w equal opportunities – have
to obey any action which comes from rational reasoning – humanitarian VS
universalist – understand by using intellect
 Utilitarianism – focus on consequences (how if impacts society and individuals)
– benefits it will bring to firm – promotes happiness in society
 Divine command – have to obey no matter what

 when having diversity in hiring – underneath reason behind those factors is these
theories
 theories can be applied at same time just diff perspectives

Situation in PPT of manager falsifying expenses – definitely wrong but what would you
do as subordinate
 Number 1 is categorical imperative – take decision based on your judgment
of rightness of wrongness of the act they have encountered
 Number 2 utilitarianism – based on the possible consequences for the
pricing stakeholders

Employees sometimes confused with boundaries within an org – what is right or wrong
Take for granted what is allowed and not allowed – confused by corp culture
What ogrs should do to minimize such behaviour – lead by example – to do with
culture and lack of enforcement rules, ethics tests on employees, stricture
consequences – how you create enviro of high ethical standards (beings various
benefits) is how procesdures and consequneces are in place
Seminar 5 – essay

11th march

Assement essay and exam

Before reading week – topics for assessment

 An intro to HRM and Org Behavior
 Strategic HRM
 Strategic recruitment and selection
 Pay, performance and reward
 Ethics and HRM
 Making the buss case for diversity and intonational HRM
So far we have covered these topics, should it include all these topics? Use all the
throes and topics and authors we have covered so far, all of those above
(have good understanding of theories, how you will apply will they be relevant for
future)

After reading week  topics for exam ONLY these

Performance management
Org culture and decision making
Managing innovation and change
Power and politics
Leadership

The topic
Imagining a radically diff future job market
 Nobody knows for sure how future will be now
 However we can conjecture how it might be and prepare for different
scanrios (R&D happening in AI you can envision how t he work context will
be in next 10-15 years)
 One essential scenario is how automaotion will take over economies in
unprecedented ways

Buss enviro is already changing, orgs facing challenges to keep up withway changes
have been happening
One of the drivers of change is tech (covered in elc 1) particularly AI
Envision where the world will be

In specification very clear essay instructions are given, context given – inform yourself
of what AI we are talking about (key drivers and what research has been done) but
also do extra reading to create context

To summarize (video youtube)  listen to this

  Robot made by AI which helps in ware house – used inf actoires
 Doctos relying on AI to discover dieseas – used in healthcare
 Chefs used it for cooking – used in cooking

Autonomous robots using senros, mapping algorithms to navigate warehouses

If doing something that is fundamentally routine and predictable going to change with
AI and be threatened by it
Will work be the same or are we heading to jobless future?
Robts becoming part of wrkfroce -not about replacing people but using them to do
more intereting tasks – some don’t fire workers in fact they even hire more – become
more motivated
BUT half of jobs in high risk for automation – not just manual labour also white colar
jobs (e.g. lawyers)
Historically new tech created nrw productivity and enw jobs but this time might be diff
– mahcines doing things that used to be done by humas – this kind of unprecedented
disruption worrying worers and their future of work
e.g. where manu industry is heading - jobs are moving, jobs aren’t safe – 16mill dollar
investemnts for automation means there will be fewer jobs – automating jobs 
factories becoming almost entirely automated with very few jobs
what to do if mahcines take over our jobs – universal basic income – income given to
everyone regardless of hwat they do and where they work – unrealistic bt happens in
e.g. Alaska – crtics say will make people lazy BUT some say basic economic secutiry
would allow peple to do thigns thtye are acutally pationate about
or e.g. training or taxes on companies that work with robtos
cannot pretend it wont happen – challenge is to be able to adapt to his futue where
people might be working less

industrial rev, then automoation came – lots of jobs gone but new jobs also emerged
now scenario slightly different – jobs being taken by AI (not only low skilled)

AI could affect all kinds of jobs – so advanaced that they are creating very high
standard reports and buss olstutions for organizations (see narrative science website –
come up with AI where they feed all the big data and come up with cmopetitve stagy
in diff function within org, writing reports that you cant even tell if tis by AI or human –
factual, statritcs etc, come up with annual reports – where do we need people ift ey
can interpret data and come up w buss solutions  world we are going to work in
future)

When saying distopyian means new context where majority of jobs will be taken over
very high-yech AI – have to analyse and come up w solution in that context of how HR
throies will be relevant ? do they need to change, do we need to adaot? What know of
theories will still be relevant or not e.g. Maslows theory popular andsignificant but will
it be the same in this wold setting
Identigy these throies, do we need to merge theories?
First questions gives freedom to select theories and sub-theories to discuss within an
essay – all 5 topics covered  freedom to select
Second one gives a bit more structure - 3 key areas already given  more structured
What this is about and not about
 Not about your knowledge of AI – applying what you have learned in
hypothetical future – will be assessed which theories using and applications
analysis and relevant discussions – wont be assed on how goof knowledge is
on AI
 Only thing assessed and marked is HR and OB theories

Writing a good essay

What side do you want to take?
Approaches you can take:
 Helpful if selecting context e.g. AI in health sector (in paritulcat sector) –
understand that sector what is going on and use throies whicha re relvant VS
second approach take parituclat AI e.g. case sutfy od Amazon and disucss
around that hwta are the international, ethical issues etc with oen of 2 case
studies with examples of AI
 When you understand future – first think about what will be the HR challenges
and future issues orgs will face then try to answer how to sovle that – good
foundation to discuss and structure becase you will be disusssing those issues

Structure (even though its essay can have headings and sub-headings if it helps you)
 Intro
 What (what is it about – can write 1 or 2 sentences – in dystopian future
these throeis will be absent or relevant) why (what makes essay valuable
– why it is important for the future – supporing facts and fiures of how AI
is changing and how new challenges will emerge – supporting ref and
citations), how (thesis statemtne and how you plan trhought essay of how
you willd efned tsance – simple 3-4 sentees of how you will address – key
theroies using, key argyments addressing  e.g. what is your argyment
when you talk about RBV theory)  intro is where you create a context –
how interesting and significant the topic is by supporing facts and figures
 Decribting the future (descriptive section) - which future you are envisioning,
create a context here
 Analysis (analytical section) – start with postitive side, optimism and good picture
 Critical assement (limitations, counterargyments) – at same time looka t facts anf
figures which don’t agree with positive pic – see debate and dilemmas in what is
going on
 Conclusions

Introduction (see example handout)

Intro 1 - More broad and referencing a bit weak
Intro 2 - more specific with more references  she would select 2 because very
specific, shows good understanding, good references BUT talked about soft VS hard
HRM which we didn’t cover – use theories we covered in this module
Descriptive section

Begin by providing background. Summarize the question or topic, and any relevant
background

Shouldn’t be vey long, create a context, clear about what future you are envisioning
maybe in particular sector or not
Makes clear idea to reader in which context you will discuss the theories

 Use research to explain how future looks like – more descriptive providing
context for essay
 Set the scene
  divide the whole essay – intro 10% or word count, conc 5% and rest is
the main body od essay

e.g. in appendix – if using table very big can put in appendix if discussing it in essay (not
included in word count)

Analytical section – very important (see example handout)

Make sure that you support your agrguments with
 Theory from class
 Cases from classes
 References and authors from class
 Specific examples – many examples in PPt but all articles uploaded in
reading give examples from there rather than creating your own e.g.
example of self determination of RBV theory give example which is already
discussed in literature (see article’s uploaded on moodle)  supporting
argument with real example and credible sources

When evaluating in analysis section e,g. reward system (financial or total) there are 2
diff models talked about in total reward , if you find any other in relation to this can
use – because you are still analyzing within the topic but seeing how diff it is
When you make coutner argument might see something that doesn’t support
argument so don’t hesitate to include that in analysis part

Examples –
Did we cover Maslwos theory in the elctures?
She prefers the second one – context very clear – using theories in the context of
healthcare and then the best practices for HR they selected and discussed that – but
still room for improvement

Crtical assessment
 Think about weaknesses of essay
 Someone who would have argued completely against your thesis staemnet
– what would they say? Whay do you have to say about that?
Might see any statement covered in lec find something completely diff from what we
said e.g. limitation of RBV doesn’t cover instutional or enviro factors (these are the
weaknesses and RBV doesn’t explain or give complete picture because it ignores enivor
factors and how they impact orgs)

Conclusions
 Not about saying anythingnew
 Not about expressing your thedies

Should be the summary of your key argument, don’t introduce anything new
 Seminars relevant for exam
Seminar 5 Performance management
Taking stock – HRB
1. Intro to HRM
2. Strategic HRM
3. Strategic recruitment and selection
4. Performance and reward
5. Ethics and HRM
6. Making the buss case for diversity and international HRM

Lectures – covered basics and taken critical approach e.g. Is ethical behaviorism to do
with nature or nurture? Critical approaches
Seminar – idea of range of behaviors in organizations and what orgs should do to e.g.
increasing ethical behavior in org (training)
How the culture enviro can be linked with reward – only think about obvious reward
system – we saw detail of how we can use day to day enviro and psychological
contract as a reward system

Next part of the term

7. Performance management
8. Organizational culture and decision making
9. Managing innovation and change
10. Power and politics leadership
11. Leadership

Lecture – covered basics and taken critical approach

Seminar – range of activities focusing on exam
Only these topics will be in exam!!! (5 topics)
2 sections:
1 case study which will be from one of topics AND then answer question in exam
2 3 questions and have to select 1 question to answer in exam
In second part, out of 3, chances that it could be all from same topic of be from the 5
topics

For essay:

Bias
 Expectation is that automation would take out bias because it does not
have emotion and as humans we have subconscious bias and stereotypes
and can unconsciously be biased about something e.g. ib
 So machines can be used to take out this element but ask yourself will this
always be achievable
 Amazon proves not
  So humans and machines working together as humans will still need to
oversee a lot of what machines do

 Can connect the recruitment to e.g. diversity management and ethics when it
says it can take out bias
 Descriptive part imagining the future – might be in next 50 years or in next 10
years  future can be very advanced or not advanced- in next 10 years might
not see as such advance
 Predict how many jobs will be taken out or not, which types of workers they
will be
 Predicted to take over more low-skilled, routine jobs but with advances can
start taking up white-collar jobs as well – context and situation is this

 look at articles on moodle – talk about what would be the issues – problems with
talent management because it is one of the challenges for orgs, with automation, what
will be the issue – TM is process so in whole process which are the areas – select one
area and discuss this e.g. recruitment
Ethical process talking about fairness and unfairness, can we minimize the bias – will
be people who will be assessing you – psychological contract – we see in reward
system – if talking about reward system one of the non financial reward system is the
psychological contract and what ill happen when there is robot and human interaction
 PC is explicit expectation between employee and employer and how this will change
- in article already – can discuss around this
Take parts out of theories, don’t need to talk about everything
Ethics itself is huge but can talk about csR, gender gap
When you select these topics best is to read – level of analysis is key and have to show
good lit review
 do we need to define e.g. AI

Equal opp promoting inclusion between genders and fairness equality, diversity and
inclusion are interlleated topics

Seminar 7 – organizational culture and decision making

More marks – linking that particular topic or theory with other topics to understand
case study

Organizational culture – Google

 Diagram represents org culture – diff elements
 The paradigm – beliefs and assumptions shared across all employees in
organizations

Understanding of each component and identify examples:

 Power structures – e.g. hierarchies (centralized or decentralized authority
and DM)
Organizational culture Web

Control systems: Control systems: What mechanisms and process is established to

monitor what is going on within the organization, used to contort employees – e.g.
reward monitoring – appriasl processes, training and development

Organisation structures: The hierarchy (tall VS flat – what does this means in terms of
culture - more hierarchy means more beaurucratic but goes through more layers to
get final approval, longer process – impacts ability to make e.g. decisions ) - and
workflow (flow of information)
Power structure: the base of power, who makes what decisions and the spread of this
power – level of beaurcacy in company, management (centralized and decentralized
authority and decision making), unions (union power e.g. in India more powerful than
the top CEOS)

Symbols: Includes logos, unique designs, office locations, special parking spaces, and
washrooms, slogan, colours, e.g. Steve jobs being symbol of Apple (can be people as
well – more significant and powerful than a normal symbol can be)

Rituals and routines: these include management meetings, events, and board reports,

meetings, working hours - day-to-day actions – covers everything which is acceptable
by managers (routines) VS rituals e.g. religious reituals? Celebrating cultural diversity,
Christmas parties and meals

Stories and Myths: the values within the organization, stories about the company
history, legacy, events, and people. – might strategically use nice stories so people can
attach it to concept

Cannot ignore any of these parts to understand the organization

Any discussion doing in seminar from here forward – this is in connection with exam

Why the concept of culture is problematic when applied to organization?

Culture is a problematic concept because it is difficult to define in precise teams. It is

an easy term to recognise in that it is relatively obvious how organisations differ. When
visiting an organization, a ‘feeling’ becomes apparent which provides a general
indication of the culture. For example, one organization might feel busy with a buzz of
activity and a feeling of purpose; whilst another might feel relaxed with a feeling of
calmness in the approach to work. A number of models seek to define what culture is
and how it can be measured.

Questions:
1. It has been suggested that strong organizational culture are essential to the
achievement of success. It has also been suggested that strong cultures could
predispose an organization to failure. Can you find an argument that could
reconcile these two positions?

org culture essential to achievement of sucess

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320274646_Organizational_Culture_A_Glo
bal_Survey_of_Theory_and_Research --> sucess
In addition to their formal organizational structure and the rules and standard
operating procedures used to support and operate the structure, organizations also
rely heavily on their organizational culture as an important tool in controlling and
coordinating the activities of their members (e.g., executive, managers and
employees), formulating communications among those members, and providing
incentives and reasons for them to act in ways that the leaders of the organization
considers to be necessary in order to achieve and sustain organizational
effectiveness and comply with the requirements and expectations of the
organization’s external environment.

A number of definitions of organizational culture have been offered; however, if

managers and employees are consulted they may simply respond that culture is “how
we do things around here”. There is obviously truth to such a statement but it
would be a mistake to ignore the breadth and scope of the issues that are
influenced by an organization’s cultural norms and values—how activities within
the organization are carried out, how members communicate with one another,
who is accepted into the organization and who is ostracized, and what is the
organization’s overall morale. The culture of a particular organization is created and
maintained by its members, particularly the founders and senior managers, based
on a variety of influencing factors—both external and internal—and they are also
the ones who can change and transform the culture when they are convinced
that such actions are necessary in light of the then-current environment that the
organization is facing.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-company-culture-so-important-business-
success-peter-ashworth
Organizational culture consists of shared beliefs and values established by the
organization’s leaders and then communicated and reinforced through various
methods, ultimately shaping employee perceptions, behaviors and understanding.
Simply speaking, a company’s structure and design can be viewed as its body, and its
culture as its soul. The definition of organizational culture is a shared set of shared
values and norms that characterize a particular organization. A strong culture, in which
members agree upon and care intensely about organizational values, can improve
business performance by motivating employees and coordinating their behavior
towards a vision and specific performance goals that benefit the company.

strong cultures could predispose an organization to failure.

Relating to culture and leaders e.g. narcissistic leaders – notes

https://qz.com/work/1546621/company-culture-needs-a-risk-management-approach/

Culture is increasingly at the heart of today’s biggest corporate scandals. Harassment

at CBS? Fueled by a culture of sexism. Wells Fargo’s fake accounts? Driven by a
leadership team that believed in performance-at-all costs and led others to believe in
it, too. Toshiba’s accounting scandal? Determined by investigators to be the result of a
“corporate culture in which management decisions could not be challenged.”

Often described as a company’s most precious asset—the “X factor” that sets it apart–
culture can just as easily be an organization’s biggest liability. When unattended to, it
takes on a life of its own, often deviating further and further from its intended form
(strategic drift) until crisis strikes and inquiries proliferate. In today’s world of extreme
transparency, it’s only a matter of time before what’s broken on the inside is revealed
to the outside. Not only do unhealthy cultures demoralize employees; they alienate
customers, ruin reputation, and destroy value.

Despite this, few companies approach culture with the same vigilance they apply to
identifying and mitigating financial, operational, or market risk. Consequently, they fail
to account for the biggest risk of all—that introduced daily by the individual actions
and decisions of thousands of employees who may or may not have bought into the
company’s value system. We argue that a holistic approach to managing risk requires
diligent cultural stewardship and the same degree of urgency, attentiveness, and
investment that is applied to issues of cybersecurity, artificial intelligence, or any other
business threat.

Reconciling both positions-

LECTURE:
 In some orgs very bureaucratic (e.g. police departments, Amazon) and in other
culture can be very lenient and flexible (Google)
 Culture has diff elements as seen in the graph
 Popular company known for innovative culture is Google – LT investment in
people – free gym, food, music places, massages – keeps people happy and
inbuilding for longer hours – freedom given to employees to pursue own ideas
and treating everyone the same. BUT e.g. in manufacturing, or public orgs like
military would this culture work? Maybe not. Because Google need innovation
they want Creative ideas and this culture helps them to reach that – if trying to
implement same thing in other industries might not be successful – this idea of
 org culture should benefit org and take them to where they want to achieve, fit
to org strategy
 Hard for orgs to change culture because of cognitive systems etc. but very
useful when it matches and fits with org goals

2. What is the role of culture and counter-cultues in the formal organization and
how these are relevant in relation to managerial activities? Discuss.
 relating to political behavior

What is the role of culture in the formal organization and how these are relevant in
relation to managerial activities
https://bizfluent.com/info-8593312-difference-formal-informal-corporate-culture.html
“The thing I have learned at IBM is that culture is everything,” asserts Louis V.
Gerstner Jr., former CEO of IBM (1993-2002). Culture is the shared beliefs, rules,
regulations and behaviors of a group. Every organization develops its own distinct
culture – from the smallest business to the largest multinational corporation.
Importance of Corporate Culture

Management that ignores corporate culture risks leading the company down a path
of turmoil and troubles. It will not be successful at organizing and motivating
employees or producing stellar financial and production results. Management will
end up with a host of unresolved problems hindering company productivity,
damaging employee morale and impeding company growth.

Informal Vs Formal Culture Definition

Corporate culture, sometimes termed organizational culture, is a composite of the

common values, attitudes, standards, policies, performance and actions of
management and employees. Corporate culture is rooted in and is an outgrowth of a
company’s goals, strategies, structure and tactics.

Formal organizational culture is purposefully planned. Examples include the

corporate hierarchical structure, written company policies and basic operating
procedures.

https://allthingstalent.org/2018/03/27/formal-vs-informal-organizational-culture/
So let us understand what would be Formal Organization Culture. Most of the
organizations these days define their value systems and in turn, give a message to
an internal and external world that these are the basic ground rules the workplace
will be following day in and day out. They propagate these values through
different campaigns such that they (at least the name and their meaning) are
imbibed by each and every employee of the organization. This makes sense if
everyone in the organization is working on the same value system, then it will
definitely reflect on the product and services and will be felt by the customers too.
https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-
samples/toolkits/pages/understandinganddevelopingorganizationalculture.aspx
The key to a successful organization is to have a culture based on a strongly held and
widely shared set of beliefs that are supported by strategy and structure. When an
organization has a strong culture, three things happen: Employees know how top
management wants them to respond to any situation, employees believe that the
expected response is the proper one, and employees know that they will be rewarded
for demonstrating the organization's values.

HR has a vital role in perpetuating a strong culture, starting with recruiting and
selecting applicants who will share the organization's beliefs and thrive in that culture.
HR also develops orientation, training and performance management programs that
outline and reinforce the organization's core values and ensures that appropriate
rewards and recognition go to employees who truly embody the values. (power
Question)

A strong culture is a common denominator among the most successful companies. All
have consensus at the top regarding cultural priorities, and those values focus not on
individuals but on the organization and its goals. Leaders in successful companies live
their cultures every day and go out of their way to communicate their cultural
identities to employees as well as prospective new hires. They are clear about their
values and how those values define their organizations and determine how the
organizations run. (exam)

What is the role of counter-cultues in the formal organization and how these are
relevant in relation to managerial activities?

Countercultures
Counterculture is a sociopolitical term indicating a point of dissent between dominant
or mainstream ideologies and alternative value systems, so creating a collective voice
that can be considered a significant minority.

https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/publications/organizational-culture-
counter-culture-uneasy-symbiosis
Takes exception to a set of common assumptions that underlie recent work on
organizational culture: that the culture serves the objectives of a firm’s top
management team, that the primary function of culture is to unify the diverse
elements in an organization, and that culture is a monolithic phenomenon. Instead,
the authors claim that the core values of a firm’s dominant culture may be directly
challenged by the core values of an internal counterculture—that a dominant and a
counterculture exist in uneasy symbiosis, taking opposite positions on value issues
critically important to each of them. In exploring their ideas, the authors examine the
dominant culture of General Motors (GM) and the counterculture in J. DeLorean’s
division. DeLorean articulated countercultural values, both directly and indirectly, and
used rituals and stories to ridicule the values of the dominant culture. DeLorean left
GM under a cloud, making it clear that maintaining the uneasy symbiosis between the
dominant and the counterculture is a complex process.

 managers must promote culture and emoby it and take steps to reduce the power
of counter culture
3. Outline the cultural web and explain its significance in being able to articulate
the culture of an organization.

https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1P3-3124286981/the-use-of-johnson-s-
cultural-web-to-improve-understanding

Notions of culture, by which we mean the shared meanings, priorities and practices of
a group, have long been applied to organisations. Understanding organisational culture
is seen as important in several areas of the management literature including
organisational behaviour, change management and strategy implementation. Johnson
's Cultural Web (1992), is a theoretically diverse and inclusive framework for the study
of culture in organisations. In this model, six cultural elements (power structures,
organisational structures, control systems, stories, rituals & routines and symbols) are
depicted as contributing to, and perpetuating, an organisational cultural paradigm. The
power of this model lies in the fact that it is on the one hand, a simple, clear
presentation of cultural elements and on the other, a complex integration of several
approaches to the study of culture that are have often been segregated in the
management literature.´

https://www.businessballs.com/strategy-innovation/cultural-web-johnson-scholes/
Introduction
Strategy and development in an organisation are influenced heavily by the culture and
environment. This is often positive, but it can also act as a hinderance, or even a
barrier to growth and success. When trying to drive change, managers and other
figures of responsibility may find it difficult to break out of the systems, structures and
routines embedded in the company’s culture, and politics or individual relationships
often play a huge role in deciding strategy.

Published by authors and academics in the fields of business, leadership and

management, Kevan Scholes and Gerry Johnson in 1992, the Cultural Web is a useful
tool for analysing and altering assumptions surrounding the culture of a company. It
can be used to highlight specific practices and beliefs, and to subsequently align them
with your company’s preferred culture and strategy.

 when explaining the different elements link to Google

4. Explain why the concept of culture is problematic when applied to organisation.

 5. Culture is such an imprecise term as sub- and countercultures have minimum
or no role to play in the overall organisation and hence makes it irrelevant in
relation to managerial activities. Do you agree, discuss.

Myths
• Myths are powerful devices to convey messages and spread them throughout
organisations.
• Myths are stories that explain something we could not otherwise.
• Myths educate us in terms of key organisational phenomena.

Examples
 Carlos Slim
Mc Donald’s

• In your teams you have to search for two myths that you think are explaining
something about an organisation or that could have been originally a strategic
device.
• Once you have found these, write a short summary of the two myths to share
with the rest of the class.
• Also, write an analysis of how these myths are explaining something regarding
organisational phenomena

Exam

First part 1 broad question on case study – go through case study and highlight themes
so you will have to cover all the themes and the topics – best grades are if you link
things e.g. pay reward with diversity

ON CHANGE MANAGEMENT – first analyze on this and then pull in other things – in
change process many events happening and making key decisions - e.g. how that
reward system want affected and how it leads to motivation (acknowledging pay
reward and perf even though technically not assessed on this)

Second part
Will be on all topics
But might pick a concept within one of the topics with a statement but need to know
all of the topic – arguing the statement whether u agree or not and then take stance

Seminar 8 – change (and many other things)

“The world as we have created it is a process of our thinking. It cannot be changed
without changing our thinking.”
― Albert Einstein
Case (Change and many other things)
Think about two students applying to the University of Oxbridge (imaginary university,
any similarity to real life is pure coincidence). One student, Sam, was born in a wealthy
family, his parents went to an elite university. He has received all the education that
you could imagine at elite schools and has been indoctrinated with the most
sophisticated social skills. He knows how to be polite and elegant, how to handle
himself with authority figures, how to start an interesting chat, etc. Sam is invited for
an interview at the University of Oxbridge, and he excels at his interview and of course,
the university accepts him. Now, the second student, Mark, was born in a very poor
family, his mom died when he was born, and his dad never went to uni. In his world,
survival was the biggest pressure, so nobody really cared about his education. Yet, he
survived and finished his studies, although at non-elite schools. His marks are not as
good as Sam’s, but are good. In short, Mark came from nothing; yet, he made it, and
survived despite having no support system whatsoever. Mark is also invited for an
interview at the University of Oxbridge, yet he fails miserably at it. He didn’t feel
comfortable with the dynamics of the interview and could not relate in any way to the
interviewer. Also, Mark felt like the questions the interviewer was asking were not
related to his life and were not giving him an opportunity to express all his personal
achievements. Needless to say, he is rejected. The University of Oxbridge then gets a
complaint, regarding Mark’s rejection, from the government’s Office of Student
Mobility. They argue that the university was not capable to appreciate the value of
Mark’s personal achievements, and therefore, they need to reconsider their decision.
The Office of Student Mobility also says that the interviewing method is not working,
and that it only works for students from privileged backgrounds similar to those of
interviewers (academics) of the university. Finally, they also mention that the
university is not appreciating the relativity of different students’ achievements
depending on the context where they grew up. The university, by contrast, argues that
this is how they have been operating for a really long time and that academics like this
method, and thus, changing it would create massive resistance. Additionally, the
university has emphasized that it’s not their job to appreciate the relative
achievements of people depending on their backgrounds, but that it is the government
that needs to make sure everyone has had the same opportunities. Thus, the
university has insisted that they will continue emphasizing in their admissions process
the interviews and also the final/nominal outcomes of students in their previous
education, and that hence, those with better grades will have higher possibilities of
being accepted.

Activity
• In your teams you need to think about and provide an answer to the following:
1. Is there unfair discrimination happening as part of the decision the
university made to accept Sam but reject Mark? Explain.
2. Why would the university fear introducing a new method of
admissions?
3. What do you think that the government’s Office of Student Mobility
meant by saying that the university is not being capable to appreciate
‘the relativity of different students’ achievements depending on the
 context where they grew up’? How is this related to topics we discussed
on recruitment and selection?
4. How could the complaint from the government’s Office of Student
Mobility enable change in the university’s admissions process? What
would this teach us about change in organisations?
5. Think about a radically different and innovative way in which the
university could make admissions decisions, which does not include
looking into students’ grades or previous studies and does not require
an interview? How would that work? Which would be the biggest
cultural challenges in terms of introducing that new system in the
University of Oxbridge?
• Which would be the biggest cultural challenges in terms of introducing that
new system in an organisation? (change
• Changing org culture one of leadership most difficult challenges – elements of
culture (from web) fit together as a mutually reinforcing system and combine
to prevent attempts to change it.
• Even if for a while new system appears to make progress, eventually the
interlocking elements of org culture can take over and the change is revered
back into the existing org culture

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/07/23/how-do-you-change-an-
organizational-culture/
o Challenges of getting everyone on board with new system and most important
getting follower/employees to ACCEPT IT. If not, there are various resistance-
related challenge orgs need to face, which might slow down progress, make it
ineffective, or even end up losing valuable employees and knowledge. Culture
is so deep-rooted in a set of beliefs, assumptions and routines where basic
human instinct means individuals are generally risk-adverse and reluctant to
step out of their comfort zones, especially when ‘old’ way of doing thigs proves
to be effective
Principles to help org achieve higher performance, better customer focus and amore
coherent and ethical stance when implementing change on culture:
https://hbr.org/2012/07/cultural-change-that-sticks s
o Match strategy to culture – strategy effectiveness depends on cultural
alignment and needs to be supportive of it
o Focus on a few critical shifts in behavior
o Honor strengths of existing culture
o Integrate formal and informal interventions
o Measure and monitor cultural evolution  business performance, critical
behaviors, milestones, underlining mindsrts

Seminar 9 – power and politics

Can you think of any examples of office politics either that are in the news or that
you have seen at work?

Few examples of office politics in the news:

 In April 2015 Ferdinand Piech, the chairman of German car company
Volswagen, resigned after criticizing the company’s CEO, Martin Winterkorn, in
and interview with Der Spiegel. A statement from the board said: ‘The
members of the steering committee came to consensus that, in the light of the
past weeks, the mutual trust necessary for successful cooperation was no
longer there’ (BBC, 2015a). The 2011 Automobile Man of the Year had a long
history of political skirmishes and stated that all it takes to all out with him is ‘to
make the same mistake twice’ (Automobile, 2011). It was reported that the
board was concerned about his activites in corporate governance (for instance
installing his wife on the board) and that his ‘Machiavellian ways have spread
paranonia among those below him’ (Milne, 2015).
 Australian oil and gas company Tap Oil have been subject to continued
speculation about the relationship between the CEO and the principal Thai
shareholder (Macdonald-Smith, 2015), with rumours that the company may be
split and some of the directors with the Thai owners’s own directors (Tap Oil,
2015).

Which theory would be most appropriate and relevant to explain the above
examples of office politics in the news?

CASE STUDY: Management in Action

Based on the case study on VW and Porsche (uploaded on Moodle; week 23), answer
following questions:
1. ‘Management is a political process. Senior managers only fail when they get the
politics wrong’. To what extent does the VW/Porsche example above support
this statement? Justify your answer using material in the lecture.
From case study: The problems of the Porsche-Piech automobile dynasty clearly
demonstrate how business works, particularly in relation to money, power and intrigue
involving both business leaders and politicians. It would appear that the business world
contains many brilliant but unpredictable people (for example VW godfather
Ferdinand Piech); individuals who clearly overestimate their own abilities (for example
Porsche boss Wendelin Wiedeking); and politicians prepared to capitalise from the
mistakes of others (for example Lower Saxony’s premier Christian Wulff)- the state
owns a significant holding of VW shares.

 Wiedeking’s dream was to lead the world’s largest carmaker by taking over
Volkswagen even though it was 15 times bigger than Porsche- and without the cash to
do it being immediately available. He secretly bought VW shares but failed to acquire
the necessary 75 per cent to ensure total control. But he was tempted by ‘casino
capitalism’ and was consumed by the desire to create the greatest deal of his career-
plus the wealth and kudos that would result. However, he underestimated the 60
memebers of the Porsche-Piech family (owners of the business), who turned away
from the deal and slowly abandoned him.

 The family-run Porsche business might be listed on the stock market, but that
doesn’t make its management transparent or ensure effective control. The Piech and
Porsche families who ultimately own it, failed to stop the company’s executives from
engaging in financial acrobatics. It is also widely reported that the cousins Ferdinand
Piech (VW) and Wolfgang Porsche (Porsche) engaged in a family feud that affected
everyone from the VW and Porsche workers councils up to the highest levels of
German politics. Events that clearly demonstrate the darker side of Germany’s family-
run companies that are supposed to be models of sustainability and discretion.

The global financial crisis dealt a hammer blow to Porsche’s dealings in VW stock, with
the company being pushed almost to bankruptcy. Family feuds and alliances, along
with political pressure, all conspired to prevent the deal from being completed.

 Things are unlikely to calm down even though the feuding parties are now sitting
down together at the same board meetings. The state of Lower Saxonmy won’t be shy
about using its legally sanctioned veto power over VW plans and decisions. New
shareholders from Qatar (with a 17 per cent stake in VW ) will also want to have a
significant say in what happens. Wolfgang Porsche won’t quickly forget that his cousin
Ferdinand Piech helped prepare Wiedeking’s precipitous fall.

BUT other reasons for senior managers to fail

 Expecting employees to come to them when problems arise – account for

employees issues with engagement which leads to low productivity and reduced
bottom line productivity

 Setting a negative or non stimulating working environment, impede progress and

helpful discourse – employees reluctant to ask for help, admit mistakes, share ideas 
managers should nurture psychologically safe enviro to encourage meaningful
interactions

Conc: Management not just a political process and not only failing because of that, but
does account for big % of failure

2. To what extent and in what ways does this example also illustrate power and
influence behavior among the stakeholders?

Extent and way in which this illustrates power and influence behvaour among
stakeholders.

Case study:

The problems of the Porsche-Piech automobile dynasty clearly demonstrate how

business works, particularly in relation to money, power and intrigue involving both
business leaders and politicians.

It is also widely reported that the cousins Ferdinand Piech (VW) and Wolfgang Porsche
(Porsche) engaged in a family feud that affected everyone from the VW and Porsche
workers councils up to the highest levels of German politics.

On the other hand, for Porsche the profits from its VW share dealings were larger than
the company’s entire turnover!

They have spent the past year trying to manoeuvre a majority of shareholding family
members- as well as powerful politicians and union leaders – into one camp or the
other.

He had been one of the Germany’s highest-paid executives after tuning the company
around in the 1990s. He always thought he could do a better job of running VW than
the VW bosses could-

The state of Lower Saxonmy won’t be shy about using its legally sanctioned veto power
over VW plans and decisions. New shareholders from Qatar (with a 17 per cent stake
in VW ) will also want to have a significant say in what happens. Wolfgang Porsche
won’t quickly forget that his cousin Ferdinand Piech helped prepare Wiedeking’s
precipitous fall.

3. To what extent and in what ways does the family ownership aspect of this
example complicate the inevitable power, influence and political aspect of
management.

o Family ownership will complicate the inevitable power, influence and political
aspect of management especially relating to non-family members. These will
 typically have significantly less power and influence which might impact their
ability to manage their own departments
o Family members can work together through their shared bond, however,
conflicts are very common due to the difficulty of separating the family,
emotional side and business side of management – often letting emotions and
personal problems get in the way
o Also issues when power is given to lower members of family are patriarchs e.g.
resign
o Family members will often act on their own interest and expect lower levels to
follow them – expecting no consequences of unethical political behavior as
their boss is just a family member (expectation they would never be fired)

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/oct/10/volkswagen-executives-
martin-winterkorn-company-culture Volkswagen executives describe authoritarian
culture under former CEO
VW Group of America CEO calls on company ‘to bloody learn’ after Martin
Winterkorn’s exit in the wake of emissions scandal

Food for thought

Political behavior within an organization:
The management of political behavior within an organization is difficult as it involves
such a fundamental part of much management and interpersonal activity. For
example, managers are in competition with each other for resources and the ability to
influence organizational direction and functioning. That competition, if not
appropriately channeled and managed, can lead to political behavior being used in a
negative way in order to attempt to shape decisions. Consequently, the decision-
making processes in an organisation need to be clear and open so that hidden agendas
and behind the scenes activity are minimized and brought out into the open. In
essence the management of politics requires that its negative practice is not rewarded
and that when discovered, it is punished. Some of the approaches discussed in relation
to handling conflict and power within an organisatin are also relevant to the
management of political behavior.

1. what is ‘Power’, define it.

2. What is ‘Politics’, explain it.

https://opentextbc.ca/organizationalbehavioropenstax/chapter/political-behavior-in-
organizations/
“If power is a force (store of potential influence) politics involves those activities of
behaviour through which power is developed and use in org settings (study of power in
action)”
 Pfeffer’s definition of politics as involving “those activities taken within organizations
to acquire, develop, and use power and other resources to obtain one’s preferred
outcomes in a situation in which there is uncertainty or dissensus about choices.”

 An individual, subunit or department may have power within an organizational

context at some period of time; politics involves the exercise of power to get
something accomplished, as well as those activities which are undertaken to expand
the power already possessed or the scope over which it can be exercised.

Finally, we should note that politics, like power, is not inherently bad. In many
instances, the survival of the organization depends on the success of a department or
coalition of departments challenging a traditional but outdated policy or objective.
That is why an understanding of organizational politics, as well as power, is so essential
for managers.

Following from the above model, we can identify at least five conditions conducive to
political behavior in organizations.

1. Ambiguous goals. When the goals of a department or organization are

ambiguous, more room is available for politics. As a result, members may pursue
personal gain under the guise of pursuing organizational goals.
2. Limited resources. Politics surfaces when resources are scarce and allocation
decisions must be made. If resources were ample, there would be no need to use
politics to claim one’s “share.”
3. Changing technology and environment. In general, political behavior is
increased when the nature of the internal technology is nonroutine and when the
external environment is dynamic and complex. Under these conditions, ambiguity and
uncertainty are increased, thereby triggering political behavior by groups interested in
pursuing certain courses of action.
4. Nonprogrammed decisions. A distinction is made between programmed and
nonprogrammed decisions. When decisions are not programmed, conditions
surrounding the decision problem and the decision process are usually more
ambiguous, which leaves room for political maneuvering. Programmed decisions, on
the other hand, are typically specified in such detail that little room for maneuvering
exists. Hence, we are likely to see more political behavior on major questions, such as
long-range strategic planning decisions.
5. Organizational change. Periods of organizational change also present
opportunities for political rather than rational behavior. Efforts to restructure a
particular department, open a new division, introduce a new product line, and so
forth, are invitations to all to join the political process as different factions and
coalitions fight over territory.
 3. Which theory defines and explain power as structure: Marxit theory (karl
Marx’s) or Michel Faucault? Why

 Marcit theory
The definition of Marxism is the theory of Karl Marx which says that society's classes
are the cause of struggle and that society should have no classes. An example
of Marxism is replacing private ownership with co-operative ownership.
Marxism believes that capitalism can only thrive on the exploitation of the working
class. Marxism believes that there was a real contradiction between human nature
and the way that we must work in a capitalist society.
Marxism is a political and economic way of organizing society, where the workers own
the means of production. Socialism is a way of organizing a society in which the means
of production are owned and controlled by the proletariat. Marx proposed that this
was the next necessary step in the progress of history.
Marx does not give a clear definition of power, for him, power
means coercion. Marx views power to be held by a particular group in society at the
expense of the rest of the society.

Because Faucualt believes instead:

https://www.powercube.net/other-forms-of-power/foucault-power-is-everywhere/
Michel Foucault, the French postmodernist, has been hugely influential in shaping
understandings of power, leading away from the analysis of actors who use power as
an instrument of coercion, and even away from the discreet structures in which those
actors operate, toward the idea that ‘power is everywhere’, diffused and embodied in
discourse, knowledge and ‘regimes of truth’ (Foucault 1991; Rabinow 1991). Power for
Foucault is what makes us what we are, operating on a quite different level from other
theories:

‘His work marks a radical departure from previous modes of conceiving power and
cannot be easily integrated with previous ideas, as power is diffuse rather than
concentrated, embodied and enacted rather than possessed, discursive rather than
purely coercive, and constitutes agents rather than being deployed by them’ (Gaventa
2003: 1)
Foucault challenges the idea that power is wielded by people or groups by way of
‘episodic’ or ‘sovereign’ acts of domination or coercion, seeing it instead as dispersed
and pervasive. ‘Power is everywhere’ and ‘comes from everywhere’ so in this sense is
neither an agency nor a structure (Foucault 1998: 63). Instead it is a kind of
‘metapower’ or ‘regime of truth’ that pervades society, and which is in constant flux
and negotiation. Foucault uses the term ‘power/knowledge’ to signify that power is
constituted through accepted forms of knowledge, scientific understanding and ‘truth’:

A key point about Foucault’s approach to power is that it transcends politics and sees
power as an everyday, socialised and embodied phenomenon. This is why state-centric
power struggles, including revolutions, do not always lead to change in the social
order. For some, Foucault’s concept of power is so elusive and removed from agency
or structure that there seems to be little scope for practical action. But he has been
hugely influential in pointing to the ways that norms can be so embedded as to be
beyond our perception – causing us to discipline ourselves without any wilful coercion
from others.

4. What is Faucault’s key views on Power?

(2) (PDF) M. Foucault’s View on Power Relations. Available

from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321161337_M_Foucault
%27s_View_on_Power_Relations [accessed May 02 2020].

Foucault thinks that it is wrong to consider power as something that the institutions
possess and use oppressively against individuals and groups, so he tries to move
the analysis one step beyond viewing power as the plain oppression of the powerless
by the powerful, aiming to examine how it operates in day to day interactions
between people and institutions.

As opposed to most marxist thinkers, Foucault is concerned less with the oppressive
aspect of power, but more with the resistance of those the power is exerted
upon. For example, the marxist thinker Louis Althusser studied mainly how people
are oppressed by the state institutions and how they build themselves as
individuals through the mystifying action of the ideology8. While for Althusser
individuals are just puppets of the ideological and repressive apparatus and power
is seen as acting from top downwards, Foucault proposes an alternative model in
which power relations dissipate through all relational structures of the society.

Usually, power is understood as the capacity of an agent to impose his will over the
will of the powerless, or the ability to force them to do things they do not wish to do.
In this sense, power is understood as possession, as something owned by those
in power. But in Foucault's opinion, power is not something that can be owned,
but rather something that acts and manifests itself in a certain way; it is more a
strategy than a possession:
This way of understanding power hat two key features: a) power is a system, a
network of relations encompassing the whole society, rather than a relation between
the oppressed and the oppressor; b) individuals are not just the objects of
power, but they are the locus where the power and the resistance to it are
exerted10

5. Why does Faucault see power as productive rather than repressive?

https://www.powercube.net/other-forms-of-power/foucault-power-is-everywhere/

Foucault is one of the few writers on power who recognise that power is not just a
negative, coercive or repressive thing that forces us to do things against our wishes,
but can also be a necessary, productive and positive force in society (Gaventa 2003: 2):

‘We must cease once and for all to describe the effects of power in negative terms: it
‘excludes’, it ‘represses’, it ‘censors’, it ‘abstracts’, it ‘masks’, it ‘conceals’.  In fact
power produces; it produces reality; it produces domains of objects and rituals of
truth.  The individual and the knowledge that may be gained of him belong to this
production’ (Foucault 1991: 194).

Power is also a major source of social discipline and conformity. In shifting attention
away from the ‘sovereign’ and ‘episodic’ exercise of power, traditionally centred in
feudal states to coerce their subjects, Foucault pointed to a new kind of ‘disciplinary
power’ that could be observed in the administrative systems and social services that
were created in 18th century Europe, such as prisons, schools and mental hospitals.
Their systems of surveillance and assessment no longer required force or violence, as
people learned to discipline themselves and behave in expected ways.

A key point about Foucault’s approach to power is that it transcends politics and sees
power as an everyday, socialised and embodied phenomenon. This is why state-centric
power struggles, including revolutions, do not always lead to change in the social
order. For some, Foucault’s concept of power is so elusive and removed from agency
or structure that there seems to be little scope for practical action. But he has been
hugely influential in pointing to the ways that norms can be so embedded as to be
beyond our perception – causing us to discipline ourselves without any wilful coercion
from others.
 6. What are the major perspectives on Power as experienced with an
organisation? Explain

Episodic power: Force and coercion & Manipulation

Systematic power: ideology (in between both) and discourse

7. How political behaviour can be managed within an organisation? Explain.

 Define political behaviour in organizations – intentional but sometimes
informal or unofficial behaviour designed to enhance of protects an
individuals influence and self-interest. “if power is a force (store of potential
influence) politics involves those activities of behaviour through which
power is developed and use in org settings (study of power in action)”
 In other words, from this definition it is clear that political behavior is
activity that is initiated for the purpose of overcoming opposition or
resistance. In the absence of opposition, there is no need for political
activity.

What are political behviours in org - Organizational politics are self-

serving behaviors that employees use to increase the probability of obtaining positive
outcomes in organizations. Influence by individuals may serve personal interests
without regard to their effect on the organization itself.

Politics involves those activities taken within an organization to acquire, develop, and

use power and other resources to attain preferred outcomes in a situation in which
there is uncertainty and disagreement over choices.

Political behavior is more likely to occur when (1) there are ambiguous goals, (2) there
is a scarcity of resources, (3) nonroutine technology and a complex external
environment are involved, (4) nonprogrammed decisions are being considered, and (5)
organizational change is occurring.
https://opentextbc.ca/organizationalbehavioropenstax/chapter/political-
behavior-in-organizations/
 How it can be manged –
1. establishing flatter org structures which encourage employee participation,
involvement and collaboration  more networked or learning organization
2. More transparency and communication to avoid uncertainty
3. Adopt shared leadership with employees (increasingly common) – gaining
e.g. shares/stake for ownership motivation
4. Setting boundaries
5. Open office concept (no doors, transparent) – increased communication
and flow of ideas amongst employees
6. Developing strategy for performance appraisal – keeping out political bias
(companies such as e.g. Adobe thinking of ways to revamp the process to
eliminate potential biases and make evaluations fairer)
 Adobe developed the “Check-in” review process allowing for faster
feedback  process established new way of thinking allowing for two-way
 communication, eliminating a once-a-year cycle of review also eliminates
the issue of politics creeping into process. Managers able to think critically
about performance, working alongside employees to reach better outcome
 employees now show higher levels of engagement and satisfaction
https://opentextbc.ca/organizationalbehavioropenstax/chapter/political-
behavior-in-organizations/
 PB not always associated with negative connotations; some good aspects
of it if effectively managed: when e.g. conflicts/tensions amongst different
individuals can be a source of new ideas, creativity and innovation, pushing
orgs outside their traditional boundaries

8. What are the possible ways to minimise the harmful effects of political
behaviour? Particularly when we know that political behaviour can influence
decisions.  see santi answer

Food for thought

Political behavior within an organization:
The management of political behavior within an organization is difficult as it involves
such a fundamental part of much management and interpersonal activity. For
example, managers are in competition with each other for resources and the ability to
influence organizational direction and functioning. That competition, if not
appropriately channeled and managed, can lead to political behavior being used in a
negative way in order to attempt to shape decisions. Consequently, the decision-
making processes in an organisation need to be clear and open so that hidden agendas
and behind the scenes activity are minimized and brought out into the open. In
essence the management of politics requires that its negative practice is not rewarded
and that when discovered, it is punished. Some of the approaches discussed in relation
to handling conflict and power within an organisatin are also relevant to the
management of political behavior

For examination purposes: how can orgs can minimize the side effects and harmful
effects of political behaviour – define org politics and political behaviour, describe
what harmful side effects can be, and how they can be minimized to instead be
positive

From websites info

https://opentextbc.ca/organizationalbehavioropenstax/chapter/limiting-the-influence-
of-political-behavior/

4. How do you recognize and limit inappropriate or unethical political behavior

where it occurs?

The final topic we will examine concerns ways in which people and groups can attempt
to lessen the impact of political behavior. Clearly, politics in organizations cannot be
 eliminated. Yet to some extent, the negative aspects of it can be neutralized if
managers carefully monitor the work environment and take remedial action where
necessary. Part of this issue was discussed above, in the section on counterpower.
Beyond this, however, several strategies can be identified that can help manage
organizational politics. As shown in (Figure), four basic strategies can be used.

D. Beeman and T. Sharkey, “The Uses and Abuses of Corporate Politics,” Business

Horizons, March-April 1987, pp. 25–35.

First, efforts can be made to reduce the uncertainty in the organization through
clarifying job responsibilities, bases for evaluations and rewards, and so forth. The less
ambiguity in the system, the less room there is for dysfunctional political behavior.
Second, managers can try to reduce interpersonal or intergroup competition by using
impartial standards for resource allocation and by emphasizing the superordinate goals
of the entire organization—toward which all members of the organization should be
working. Third, managers can attempt to break up existing political fiefdoms through
personnel reassignment or transfer or by changing the reward system to encourage
interunit cooperation. Finally, managers can work to prevent the development of
future fiefdoms through training programs, selection and promotion, and reward
distribution.

To the extent that employees see the organization as a fair place to work and to the
extent that clear goals and resource allocation procedures are present, office politics
should subside, though not disappear. In organizations where politics prosper, in fact,
you are likely to find a reward system that encourages and promotes such behavior.
The choice is up to the organization.

Limiting the Effects of Political Behavior

To Reduce System Uncertainty

 Make clear what are the bases and processes for evaluation.
 Differentiate rewards among high and low performers.
 Make sure the rewards are as immediately and directly related to performance
as possible.

To Reduce Competition

 Try to minimize resource competition among managers.

 Replace resource competition with externally oriented goals and objectives

To Break Existing Political Fiefdoms

 Where highly cohesive political empires exist, break them apart by removing or
splitting the most dysfunctional subgroups.
 If you are an executive, be keenly sensitive to managers whose mode of
operation is the personalization of political patronage. First, approach these persons
with a directive to “stop the political maneuvering.” If it continues, remove them from
the positions and preferably from the company.

To Prevent Future Fiefdoms

Make one of the most important criteria for promotion an apolitical attitude that puts
organizational ends ahead of personal power ends.

1. How can managers limit inappropriate and unethical behavior in the

organization?

4. How do you recognize and limit inappropriate or unethical political behavior

where it occurs?

Political behavior can be reduced or minimized in organizations through four

techniques: (1) reducing organization uncertainty, (2) reducing interunit competition,
(3) breaking up political fiefdoms, and (4) preventing the development of future
fiefdoms.

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-orgbehavior/chapter/13-4-organizational-
politics/

Organizational politics is a natural part of organizational life. Organizations that are

driven by unhealthy levels of political behavior suffer from lowered employee
organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and performance as well as higher levels
of job anxiety and depression. Individual antecedents of political behavior include
political skill, internal locus of control, high investment in the organization, and
expectations of success. Organizational antecedents include scarcity of resources, role
ambiguity, frequent performance evaluations and promotions, and democratic
decision making.

Organizational politics are informal, unofficial, and sometimes behind-the-scenes

efforts to sell ideas, influence an organization, increase power, or achieve other
targeted objectives. Politics has been around for millennia. Aristotle wrote that politics
stems from a diversity of interests, and those competing interests must be resolved in
some way. “Rational” decision making alone may not work when interests are
fundamentally incongruent, so political behaviors and influence tactics arise.

Today, work in organizations requires skill in handling conflicting agendas and shifting
power bases. Effective politics isn’t about winning at all costs but about maintaining
relationships while achieving results. Although often portrayed negatively,
organizational politics are not inherently bad. Instead, it’s important to be aware of the
potentially destructive aspects of organizational politics in order to minimize their
negative effect. Of course, individuals within organizations can waste time overly
engaging in political behavior. Research reported in HR Magazine found that managers
waste 20% of their time managing politics. However, as John Kotter wrote in Power
and Influence, “Without political awareness and skill, we face the inevitable prospect
of becoming immersed in bureaucratic infighting, parochial politics and destructive
power struggles, which greatly retard organizational initiative, innovation, morale, and
performance.”

In our discussion about power, we saw that power issues often arise around scarce
resources. Organizations typically have limited resources that must be allocated in
some way. Individuals and groups within the organization may disagree about how
those resources should be allocated, so they may naturally seek to gain those
resources for themselves or for their interest groups, which gives rise to organizational
politics. Simply put, with organizational politics, individuals ally themselves with like-
minded others in an attempt to win the scarce resources. They’ll engage in behavior
typically seen in government organizations, such as bargaining, negotiating, alliance
building, and resolving conflicting interests.

Politics are a part of organizational life, because organizations are made up of different
interests that need to be aligned. In fact, 93% of managers surveyed reported that
workplace politics exist in their organization, and 70% felt that in order to be
successful, a person has to engage in politics. In the negative light, saying that
someone is “political” generally stirs up images of back-room dealing, manipulation, or
hidden agendas for personal gain. A person engaging in these types of political
behaviors is said to be engaging in self-serving behavior that is not sanctioned by the
organization.
Examples of these self-serving behaviors include bypassing the chain of command to
get approval for a special project, going through improper channels to obtain special
favors, or lobbying high-level managers just before they make a promotion decision.
These types of actions undermine fairness in the organization, because not everyone
engages in politicking to meet their own objectives. Those who follow proper
procedures often feel jealous and resentful because they perceive unfair distributions
of the organization’s resources, including rewards and recognition.
Researchers have found that if employees think their organization is overly driven by
politics, the employees are less committed to the organization, perform worse on the
job, have higher levels of job anxiety, and have a higher incidence of depressed mood.
The negative side of organizational politics is more likely to flare up in times of
organizational change or when there are difficult decisions to be made and a scarcity
of resources that breeds competition among organizational groups. To minimize overly
political behavior, company leaders can provide equal access to information, model
collaborative behavior, and demonstrate that political maneuvering will not be
rewarded or tolerated. Furthermore, leaders should encourage managers throughout
the organization to provide high levels of feedback to employees about their
performance. High levels of feedback reduce the perception of organizational politics
and improve employee morale and work performance.Remember that politics can be a
healthy way to get things done within organizations.
Author and consultant Patrick Lencioni recommends the following four steps for
overcoming ineffective politics due to turf wars. When members of the organization
are more concerned about their own area of operations than doing what’s best for the
entire organization, in the long run you may have a problem with turf wars. Taking
these four steps can help overcome this situation:
1. Create a thematic goal. The goal should be something that everyone in the
organization can believe in, such as, for a hospital, giving the best care to all
patients. This goal should be a single goal, qualitative, time-bound, and shared.
2. Create a set of defining objectives. This step should include objectives that
everyone agrees will help bring the thematic goal to fruition.
3. Create a set of ongoing standard operating objectives. This process should be
done within each area so that the best operating standards are developed.
These objectives should also be shared across the organization so everyone is
aware of them.
4. Create metrics to measure them. Measuring whether the standard operating
objectives get done is a vital step in the process. Rather than someone else
pointing out what isn’t working, all the people within the department will have
the information necessary to come to this conclusion and correct the problem,
because ultimately, everyone in the organization cares about achieving the
thematic goal.
Source: Adapted from information in Lencioni, P. M. (2006). Silos, politics and turf
wars: A leadership fable about destroying the barriers that turn colleagues into
competitors. New York: Jossey-Bass.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Karen_Cacciattolo/publication/271699950_Org
anisational_Politics_The_Positive_and_Negative_Sides/links/5602d7aa08ae460e2704a
e20/Organisational-Politics-The-Positive-and-Negative-Sides.pdf

There are two ways of viewing organisational politics: either as a symptom of social
influence processes that benefit the organisation, or a self serving effect that goes
against the organisational goals (Mintzberg, 1985: 148; Gotsis & Kortezi, 2010: 498).
Nevertheless, the concept of organisational politics is a key social influence process
that can be either functional or dysfunctional to employees and organisations (Allen et
al, 1979: 82). Organisational politics, as argued by various researchers, can be either
positive or negative (Othman, 2008: 44) and this paper delves into both sides of the
organisational politics by offering examples from literature and research carried out
throughout the years.
Organisational politics and their processes are often understood to be the
organisational defensive routines that alter and filter legitimate information (Seo,
2003: 11). However, organisational politics do not have to be about power
manipulation, trust issues and hidden agendas. Organisational politics can also be
functional in ways that are beneficial for more than just a politically-skilled and
politically motivated minority

https://www.ckju.net/en/blog/organizational-politics-curse-or-blessing/20912
 Organizational politics do indeed matter.
The aim of organizational politics is to sell ideas, influence others and to achieve
objectives; they are informal and unofficial and can sometimes occur ‘behind closed
doors.’ (Brandon & Seldman, 2004). Organizational politics has a long history with
Aristole commenting that the reason politics is present is due to diversity of interests,
which need to be resolved. When rational thought does not work, many executives use
political tactics to gain compliance. However, despite this negative perception of
organizational politics, there is evidence that organizational politics are not necessarily
evil but that political skill, if used effectively, can aid in gaining compromises in difficult
workplace situations (Hochwarter, Witt, & Kacmar, 2000).

https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newCDV_85.htm - steps to make org

politics effective

https://www.managementstudyguide.com/effect-of-politics.htm - effects on
employees

http://globalbizresearch.org/files/t644_ijraob_robert-c-schneider-378735.pdf - read
more on this

Astute and strong management is necessary if organizational politics is to be stifled, in

the interest of maximizing productivity. Insecure and weak managers will succumb to
the political persuasions of the more powerful employees. Therefore it is necessary
that leadership of the organization is proficient in establishing and implementing a
system of management that is transparent and based on performance based criteria. It
is equally important that managers who choose performance and outcome based
management over politics are supported from their supervisors

Search Google - what is political behviour in an organization

What are political behviours in org - Organizational politics are self-

serving behaviors that employees use to increase the probability of obtaining positive
outcomes in organizations. Influence by individuals may serve personal interests
without regard to their effect on the organization itself.

https://opentextbc.ca/organizationalbehavioropenstax/chapter/political-behavior-in-
organizations/ - more on this…

3. How do managers cope effectively with organizational politics?

Closely related to the concept of power is the equally important topic of politics. In any
discussion of the exercise of power
For our purposes here, we will adopt Pfeffer’s definition of politics as involving “those
activities taken within organizations to acquire, develop, and use power and other
resources to obtain one’s preferred outcomes in a situation in which there is
uncertainty or dissensus about choices.”

In comparing the concept of politics with the related concept of power, Pfeffer notes:

If power is a force, a store of potential influence through which events can be affected,
politics involves those activities or behaviors through which power is developed and
used in organizational settings. Power is a property of the system at rest; politics is the
study of power in action. An individual, subunit or department may have power within
an organizational context at some period of time; politics involves the exercise of
power to get something accomplished, as well as those activities which are undertaken
to expand the power already possessed or the scope over which it can be exercised.

Santi answer
1. How can org minimise the harmful effects of political behaviour? (power)
Answer: politics is the contrasting deployment of power (ref?). In orgs political
behaviour generally occurs when members act in a manner that places self-interests
above of org interests, which can be harmful and negatively influence an org. Thus,
politics is the integrated process of managing power that needs to be understood and
addressed effectively in order to minimise the harmful effects it can have on the org.
The main problem in politics is when two or more interdependent parties encounter
contrasting interpretations, creating differing interests that result, or potentially arise,
conflict amongst the parties (?). this doesn’t just relate to a national level between
political parties, but can also be witnessed daily between families, students and most
importantly employees. We all have different self-interests and that creates conflict
because people want to impose those interests on others, however, collaboration is
essential for success, so orgs need to manage the way they express that power for
operational success. Org that fail to manage political behaviour effectively are subject
to low productivity due to lower levels of employee commitment, engagement,
satisfaction, and performance in addition to higher levels of stress and anxiety.
Therefore, one of the ways orgs can minimize the negative effects of political
behaviour is by restricting the expression of episodic power through force, coercion
and manipulation. This can be done by for examples reducing competition within the
org…

 Connect the different ways to the four dimensions

 Foucault power the need for disciplinary functions emphasized the importance
of discourse (communication) in power
 Relate them to rewards systems + performance management+ leadership
(which support empowering employees equally to incentive collaboration)+
culture (how org can create a culture that manages political behaviour
effectively and encourages employee engagement (rewards) + change
management (training programs for managers to learn how to act)
Seminar 10 - leadership (leading and managing)
Individual activity:

 When answering this give reasons for this answer – can send answers to her to
what we think is right. All these contemporary, emerging concepts of leadership
showing importance of the follower in context of leadership. Three different case
studies on three different styles – application to real worlds, these orgs using
leadership style very effectively. Ask yourself the application part of real world –
application of theory how its used in real world.
 so When talking about Kim leadership style can link to one of these and talk about
the advantages and disadvantages of them. Very emerging types of leadership theories
so what are the common principles behind all these new approaches and leadership
styles, why are these importance in today’s world (link to organizational enviro,
external and individual level)

Read the case study on next slide (Vineet Nayar) and answer:
What type of leadership approach Mr Vineet Nayar had adopted?
1. Servant leadership
2. Environmental leadership – gratification from working in groups
3. Distributive leadership
Why have you chosen this option? What are the principles behind that leadership?

Real life case: Vineet Nayar (application side of theory- how they use policies and
decision-making, practices they use in organization and individual leadership
approach they are using- example of application side of theory)
Vineet Nayar is the former CEO of HCL technologies, one of India’s Largest IT
companies. During his time at HCLT, the company’s revenue almost tripled. But it was
also praised for being highly demoratice. Nayar argues that while traditional commond
and control structures might be the easiest, they are often not the most effective. The
aim should be to decentralized power, responsiblility, and accountability. This resulted
in HCLT being voted the Number One Employer in India and the Best Employer in Asia
and the United Kingdom.
At the heart of Nayar’s approach was a challenge to conventional business wisdom. He
called it ‘Employees Firs, Customers Second’. This is not designed to be nice to
employees, but rather a way of being more effective. Traditional hierarchy, Nayar
argued, often got in the way of teams that were trying to work together. ‘The senior
manager, sitting at their lofty remove from the real action, are the ones who can
exercise the Hand of God decision that often puts at risk everything that is happening
in the value zone’ (Nayar, 2010; 96). Nayar also reversed accountability, so that if an
issue came up or they wanted more information, an employee could open a ‘ticket’,
meaning that the managers become responsible for solving the problem. Managers
were also subject to 360-degree appraisal: they were appraised not only by their
managers but also by their employees. HCLT also had opinion polls on the company
strategy and online forums so that employees could talk direcly to Nayar.
(USA today , 2007; Nayar, 2010; Frauenheim, 2014)
Individual activity:
Read the case study on next slide (Ricardo Semler) and answer:
What type of leadership approach Ricardo Semler had adopted?
1. Servant leadership
2. Environmental leadership
3. Distributive leadership – use all employees in decision making, even selecting
the employees (involved in that as well) workers got distributed all power and
decision making even when selecting their own people
Why have you chosen this option? What are the principles behind that leadership?

Real life case: distributing the power and getting results

Ricardo Semler was Latin American Businessman of the Year in 1990. He is widely
heralded as leading one of the most innovative and democratic organizations in the
world. Semler argues he treats Semco’s 800 employees as responsible adults. Workers
can set their own hours, chose their won information technology, share all
information, and even set their own salary. Semco has three core values: democracy,
profit-sharing and information.
Twice a year subordinates evaluate their managers and they even interview their
future managers. Key decisions are made collectively via vote. Letting people
participate in decisions that affect their lives has positive effects on their motivation
and morale. (Semler, 1999)

Individual activity:
Read the case study on next slide (Springest) and answer:
What type of leadership approach Springest had adopted?
1. Servant leadership –
2. Environmental leadership – to do with structure and team working - pay
attention to lower level, and followers having big part to play. Leadership only
effective when people support and follow
3. Distributive leadership
Why have you chosen this option? What are the principles behind that leadership?
Real life case: Springest using holacracy
The Dutch-based independent comparison website company Springest announced in
2013 that they were using the holacracy system. Rather than having conventional top-
down management, they are seeking to us the self-management system (Robertson,
2015) in conjunction with the time-management system ‘Getting Things Done’ (Allen,
2015). Springest state that they feel holacracy helps develop learning, increases
responsibility, and increases motivation as it gives people more space for their own
development (Timmerman, 2014).

What is your interpretation of the below paragraph? What type of leadership would
be more relevant and effective in this new demanding work society?
Over the last 50 years there have been dramatic changes, particularly in the West, in
the nature of society and the economy, which challenge traditional leadership
theories. Firstly, since the 1960s there has been a gradual loss of faith in authority
figures to solve our problems. Secondly, the shift from manufacturing to the
information or knowledge economy has meant that the nature of jobs has changed.
Thirdly, these better-educated ‘knowledge workers’ desire more autonomy and use of
their skills. Fourthly, there is a change in organisational structure, with flatter
organizations based more around teamwork.
The ‘knowledge worker’ thus holds specialized skills, meaning their ideas and input are
essential for organisational success. They are employed to think rather than be told
what todo. As Niall FitzGerald, deputy chairman of Thomson Reuters, puts it: ‘the way
in which the world has developed means authority is no longer to be given. It must be
earned. People will only give their loyalty to those they respect-they will not give it to
the position…You have to engage people’ (Thomson and Lloyd, 2022:31).

 Flatter organizations based more around team work - environmental

 Changes in the external environment which meant traditional leadership theories
not very relevant anymore- why there is a need for alternative – we are changing as
buss and societies, nature of work changing – reasons why there is a need to change
leadership
 In this changing environment – emerging leadership styles becoming more relevant.
– case study tells us why these are applicable
 loads of changes in environment, environmental leadership may be important
(flatter org structures all based on teamwork) VS no creating more complexity and
distributive leadership more relevant and effective
 Can argue both sides and both types of leadership would be relevant. All are
contemporary, emerging , post-historic leadership categories still highlighting different
styles.
 Talk about advantages and disadvantages of each!!!!

Some Extra Questions:

1. What are the key principles behind alternative forms of leadership (also called
post-heroic leadership)?

https://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-
75902019000300209&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=en
Set the scene:
The present work context has undergone transformations that have substantially
changed labor relations and contributed to the emergence of less hierarchical and
more collaborative organizational arrangements. This new environment requires a
different approach to leadership. The "carrot and stick" approach no longer works
as it used to, particularly with the new generation of workers, who are more
interconnected and have easy access to information.

How it was before:

The dominant leadership paradigm of the industrial era views the leader as a hero:
an active subject, who visualizes the future, defines and communicates the
strategy, inspires and motivates those who are led, assigns roles, and evaluates
Fletcher, 2004
and rewards according to performance ( ). Followers, on the other hand,
are seen as reactive, malleable, and "moldable" individuals. It is not by chance that
the term "follower" is often used in the literature to indicate those who are passive
under the influence of a leader. The most prominent theories arising from this
paradigm include charismatic, transformational, transactional, and visionary
leadership. Although these theories have their specificities, they all consider
leadership as a unidirectional, top-down influencing process, and draw a clear line
of separation between leaders and followers. However, this "heroic" and
"romanticized" view of leadership does not seem to fit the complexity of current
organizational social life, increasingly knowledge-intensive and dependent on
Avolio, Walumbwa, & Weber, 2009
collaboration among people ( ).

Alternative approaches
Thus, several scholars have challenged the traditional paradigm of heroic leadership
and sought a new conception that shifts away from the unique focus on an
individual with exceptional attributes and characteristics. In this context, the
paradigm of "post-heroic" leadership emerges, highlighting the relational,
Day, 2013 Fletcher, 2004
collectivist, and participatory nature of leadership ( ;  ). As the
name suggests, these new theoretical currents shift away from the focus on the
individual attributes and characteristics of leaders. On the contrary, these theories
address leadership as a collective process, a product of interactions and
relationships established by groups of people. 
"leadership is not defined by the exercise of power, but by the capacity to increase
the sense of power among those led"
 In general, these perspectives challenge the traditional view of leadership as a
vertical, hierarchical phenomenon and monopoly of power or authority.

Key principles in new paradigm of post-heroic leadership

Perspectives:
o Leadership as a relational process – relationship of mutual influence between
leader and follower to drive change and org performance. Developing an
effective, high-quality relationship between leader and follower crucial for a
good working environment, leaders and followers committed and engaged with
the organization
o Leader-centric to follower-centric - s stated earlier, the traditional view of
leadership is dominated by approaches that basically attribute greatness,
power, and extraordinary characteristics to the leader. This view is especially
observed in the theories of charismatic and transformational leadership ( Yukl,
1998
). Although many authors do not explicitly define these leaders as ego-driven
or self-centric individuals, they portray leaders as heroic figures who can,
through their aspirations, judgments, and decisions, determine the fate and
luck of groups and organizations (Howell & Shamir, 2005). VS These studies now adopt a
leadership perspective called "other-centered leadership." This perspective
argues that other members of leadership relationships have an active role and
unique influence in the achievement of organizational results and therefore
need to be "seen, heard, and cared for." In this way, it is a perspective that
moves away from the top-down approach and points to a bottom-up view of
leadership. Within the other-centered approach, the theories of humble
leadership and servant leadership stand out. Both move away from the heroic
view of the leader and attach special importance to those who are led.
Specifically, according to the premises of humble leadership, leaders need to
recognize their limitations, give space for the free expression of others, and
 learn from interactions with their followers (Owens & Hekman, 2012). The literature on
servant leadership, in turn, suggests that leaders should act beyond self-
interest by avoiding selfish behavior or meaningless demonstrations of power.
The "servant leader" is guided by the desire to create opportunities in the
organizational environment to help those who are led to grow (Greenleaf & Spears, 2002).
Despite the differences between the two perspectives, there are many
similarities between them.
o Leadership as a collective process - The traditional view of leadership
emphasizes its hierarchical nature. However, there has been a movement to
explore the phenomenon more horizontally. Therefore, emphasizing the social
and collective process of leadership construction and development is to the
detriment of a view focused on the individuals who participate in it (Pearce & Sims,
2000
). In this sense, the investigations have explored several collective forms of
leadership, with emphasis on the so-called shared leadership theory. Pearce and
Conger (2003)
 define shared leadership as "a dynamic and interactive process of
influence between individuals in groups" (p. 1) to lead them to achieve the
objectives of the group and the organization. This perspective challenges the
traditional method of approaching leadership so that leadership is distributed
among a set of individuals, instead of being centralized in the hands of a single
individual who acts as a superior (Pearce & Conger, 2003). Shared leadership is
particularly suitable for knowledge-intensive environments in which complex
problem-solving is dependent on a collaborative effort among people with
distinct skills, not on the heroic actions of a small set of people at the top of the
organization. Thus, this paradigm shift, from leadership centered on a person's
action to one focused on a collective construction process, allows the exercise
of leadership by all members of the organization, positively affecting the
performance of groups and organizations.

2. There is too much emphasis on individual leader. Critically Discuss

Intro – e.g. define leadership
Agree with title:
From notes:
 All traditional leadership theories: trait, behaviour, contingency, contemporary
views  All the approaches they all focus so far either on hero leaders or some
mechanical form of leaders. So focus is completely on leaders.
 Issues and challenges
• All the above theories are leader-centric.
• They assume that leader is central to organisation’s success.
• Leader has all the powers. What about follower’s (employees)?
• Followers are simply passive –only responding to leaders
Is it really accurate? Is this the real picture? Or are we missing something here?
 Romanticism of Leadership
(Meindle et al., 1985)
 Studies e.g. Pillai and Meindle (1991):
 The changing nature of society
 Calling for alternative forms of leadership (post-heroic leadership)
Disagree with title:
Not too much emphasis – adequate amount because leaders in past have been“
extraordinary people that to extraordinary things” e.g. “Gandhi, Ceaser, Churchill,
Mandela, Mother Theresa, John Kennedy” – we all see them as visionaries, courageous
people, heroes, but most important individuals who lead their people to the better
futures
In business world can see the leaders having such extraordinary powers: e.g. Anne
Mulchay, Jim Sinegal (made the success of bussines) VS leaders can also have bad
reputations (BP example)
Conc
Link to other topics
Always give examples

3. Why do post-heroic leadership theories argue that it is important to focus

attention on followership(employees)?

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284514364_Shared_leadership_A_post-
heroic_perspective_on_leadership_as_a_collective_construction
 4. Why do post-heroic leadership theorists argue that shifting from command and
control to distributive leadership could increase productivity in the
organization?

Command and control

http://www.learningtobegreat.com/blog/2010/05/13/commandandcontrol-
leadership-vs-peoplecentered-leadership
Command-and-control leadership remains pervasive throughout business,government,
and nonprofit organizations. Bnet.com defines command-and-control as:

…a style of leadership that uses standards, procedures, and output statistics to

regulate the organization. A command and control approach to leadership is
authoritative in nature and uses a top-down approach, which fits well in
bureaucratic organizations in which privilege and power are vested in senior
management. It is founded on, and emphasizes a distinction between,
executives on the one hand and workers on the other. It stems from the
principles of Frederick Winslow Taylor, and the applications of Henry Ford and
Alfred P. Sloan, Jr. As more empowered, flat organizations have come to the
fore, command and control leaders have been increasingly criticized for stifling
creativity and limiting flexibility
https://www.inc.com/robert-glazer/command-control-leadership-is-dead-heres-
whats-taking-its-place.html 'Command and Control' Leadership Is Dead. Here's
Hierarchical organizations with no employee autonomy or input don't work anymore.
Time for a new game plan.

 Many disadvantages, mention few

Distributive leadership

From notes:
Distributive Leadership: Leadership can occur throughout the organization by a wide
variety of organizational members.
  so it is not a formal position in the hierarchy at the very top level but it can be
seen throughout the organization. This perspective emphasized that diff people
can take leadership responsibilities at diff positions and levels based on diff
knowledge and expertise. In such approach and organizations, teamworking,
empowerment, participatory approach are in practice – which leads to creating a
very inclusive, motivated and committed workforce as it is utilizing everyone’s skills
and abilities within the organization

 Thus productivity increased

5. What are the popular leadership theories or styles so far? Were they effective?
Do you think there is a need to change the ‘so called’ popular leadership styles
or approach? If no, Why? If yes, why and how?)

Useful book for leadership section of HR:

Organizational behavior – Daniel King, Scott Lawley