The Power School

The Power School (Strategy formation as a process of negotiation)

The relationship between powers does not only exist around the organization but
they can also exist within the organization. Therefore the relationship between
power in the organization is divided into 2 parts, namely:

 Micro Power deals with the political games that exist within the
organization, especially in the strategic management process.

 Macro Power deals with how the organization uses that power. : macro
power focuses more on the interdependence relationship between an
organization and its environment. For example: suppliers and buyers,
unions and competitors, government investment and others.

MICRO POWER

This paper about the power school has developed strategic management into
actual organizational life, in which there are dreams of the individuals in it, hopes,
jealousies, interests and fears. We must consider how strategy making is a political
process and then consider that strategy as politics itself before we conclude the
positive benefits of micro power.

Strategy Making as a Political Process

If strategy making can carry out a process of planning and analysis, awareness and
learning, then this can be used as a form of negotiation and compromise (basis for
consideration) of conflicts that arise in individuals, groups and coalitions.
Bolman and Deal (1997) suggests matters relating to the world of organizational
politics, namely:

1. Organizations are coalitions (associations) of various kinds of individuals

and interest groups
2. There is an eternal difference (enduring differences) between coalition
members on values, beliefs, information, interests, and perceptions of
reality
3. Most of the important decisions involve the allocation of scarce resources
(scarce resources) - Who gets what
4. Scarce resources and lasting differences between coalition members create
conflicts as a major role in dynamic organizations and make power a very
important resource.
5. Goals and decisions that arise from negotiations, negotiations, struggles
for positions among different stakeholders.

In some organizations there is a strong political element, so any strategic decision

making can become a battlefield for them. This is because there are many interests
that must be fought for. This place then developed into a political arena for them.

As power advances in unpredictable directions, a political arena will emerge

within the organization. In these conditions, there will be many things to be fought
for, and people will feel very insecure. This will lead to political conflict in the
organization, especially in strategy making, where the risk is high.

The Benefits of Politics

Matters related to its legitimacy and benefits

1. Politics as a system of influence can act in a Darwinian way to ensure that

the strongest members of the organization are brought into positions of
leadership. That is, politics can help an organization in selecting (natural
selection "Charles Darwin") the best people in an organization (stars) and
eliminating its weak competitors.
 2. Politics can ensure that all sides of an issue are debated. So in the interests
of the organization there are various kinds of issues that arise based on the
interests of each party. Every interested party voices their opinion on an
issue. With the existence of politics in an organization, we can see these
issues from various sides which in the end a conclusion will be drawn
about a problem that arises.
3. Politics may be needed to stimulate important changes in organizations,
where those changes may be impeded by more legitimacy of the power
system. This can be found, for example, in pre-existing strategies,
organizational traditions, the power of the seniors. With the existence of
politics in an organization, important changes can occur along with the
development of the interests of its members, for example by juniors who
have newer skills and knowledge than their seniors.
4. Politics can facilitate the implementation of change. For example, a senior
manager who uses politics to gather support from his colleagues (alliance)
so that the decisions he makes can be approved.

USING POLITICS TO GET ACCEPTED STRATEGIES

A. Recognizing Political Realities and Managing Them

Since coalition processes exist within the organization, performing the
necessary functions, and influencing the outcome of decisions, general
management must recognize them, understand them, and learn to manage
them.
B. Recognizing the Nature of Midle Management Commitment
This is because knowledge technical and functional skills depend on midle
management
C. Learn to Use Classical Political Tools
The following tools for political management, used by politicians for
centuries, can assist general management in their own organizations
a. Equifinality
 In achieving goals it is possible to use a variety of different ways to
achieve the same result, for that general management should
realize that achieving successful results is more important than
methods of achieving these results.
b. Satisfying
Achieving satisfactory results is much better than failing to achieve
optimal results with an unpopular strategy
c. Generalization
Shifting more specific issues into more general issues can help
general management in choosing a more effective strategy to solve
problems related to these issues.

d. Focus on higher issues

By raising an issue to a higher level, short-term interests can be
postponed for more important long-term interests
e. Anticipating coalition behavior
Identify the coalition members who joined in connection with the
problems that arose and then analyze the reasons why they joined
the coalition
D. Regulating Coalition Behavior
What general management can do when dealing with opposition
coalitions;
a. Organize the coalition structure within the organization to reduce
the influence of the coalition of opposition (opponents) in the
organization
b. To revise related strategies and or policies so that they no longer
face coalition opposition

The main options available to general management [below first] are

discussed below.
 a. Sets the order in which these problems are handled
b. Increase the visibility of a specific issue
c. Separating the issues into similar sub issues
E. Taking Direct Action Against Coalition Opponents
a. Forming a preemtive coalition
b. Form a counter coalition to face the opposition coalition that has
emerged
c. Changing the position of the opposition leader in the organization
d. Blending (making one 'co-opt') of coalition members
e. Increase persuasion communication efforts with coalition members
f. Remove the coalition leader from the organization
Premises of the power school

 Strategy formation is shaped by power and politics, whether as a process

inside the organization or as a behavior of the organization itself in its
external environment.
 The strategies that may result from such a process tend to become
emergent, and take the form of positions and ploys more than perspectives

 Micro Power sees strategy making as an interplay and sometimes direct

confrontation, in the form of political games

 Macro Power sees the organization as promoting its own welfare by

controlling or cooperating with other organizations, through the use of
strategic maneuvering as well as collective strategies in various kinds of
networks and alliances

Critique of the power school

 While it is true that political dimension can have a positive role in
organizations, this can also be the source of a great deal of wastage and
distortion in organizations.

The following are major contributions to this field:

 Coalition
 Political games

 Collective strategy

 Importance of politics in promoting strategic change

5 Forcers Mikchael Porter is a rolling tool to map the extent to which the business you
are playing is quite competitive and quite attractive .:

1. rivalries within Industry.

2. Entry barrier.
3. Buyer Power.

4. Supplier Power.

5. Threat Substitute.

Cooperation strategy:

1. Network

2. Collective strategy

3. Alliance strategy

4. Sourcing strategy

The principle of collaborative advantage:

 Collaboration is competition in different forms.

 Harmony is not the most important measure of success.

 Cooperation has limits.

 Learn from partners who matter most.

Conclusion

1. The formation strategy is shaped by power and politics, whether as a

process within the organization or as organizational behavior itself in the
external environment.

2. The strategies that might result from such a process are likely to emerge and
take positions and ways from more perspective.

3. Micro-powers see strategies as creating mutual influence, persuasion,

bargaining and sometimes direct confrontation, in the form of political play
between interests and shifting coalitions, with neither dominant for a
significant period of time.

4. Macro organizations see organizations as promoting their own well-being by

controlling or collaborating with other organizations, through strategic
maneuvers as well as collective strategies in various kinds of networks and
alliances.