a

vi
NAVIGATING ORGANIZATIONAL

ed
POLITICS : THE CASE OF

ar
sh
KRISTEN PETERS

as
w
GROUP 13

m e
Ajith I (2019MBA046)

co rc
Esha Agrawal (2019MBA062)
o. ou Fiza Haya Sayeed (2019MBA063)
er res
Nandan Prakash (2019MBA072)
Rohit K Suhas (2019MBA091)
eH y
rs ud t
ss
hi

This study source was downloaded by 100000807737659 from CourseHero.com on 05-30-2021 07:58:02 GMT -05:00
 BEFORE INTERNSHIP PHASE
POLITICAL MAP -------------------- STRATEGY MAP

a
vi
ed
• Tried to access his EXPERT
Morris Tucker

ar
POWER he had, being a high
(PASSIVE)

sh
level partner at TR

as
w
• Used her to bypass the traditional interview

m e
procedure (LEGITIMATE POWER)
Susan Buckley

co rc
• Got the advice via email on how to improve her
performance (EXPERT POWER)
(ACTIVE) o. ou • Increased her networking with CBS Alums in the
New York Office
er res
eH y

• Obtained advice about each of the

rs ud

CBS Alumni firms to help her make decisions of

t

(PASSIVE) summer interning at one (EXPERT

ss

POWER)
hi

This study source was downloaded by 100000807737659 from CourseHero.com on 05-30-2021 07:58:02 GMT -05:00
 THE CLASSROOM PHASE
POLITICAL MAP --------------- STRATEGY MAP

a
vi
• Peters preferred talking to her advisors

ed
during free slots instead of her
colleagues

ar
PWM Advisors • Chose Williams for her first feedback
session

sh
(ACTIVE) • Believed in investing more time with
advisors as she was going to be assigned

as
to the New York Office only

w
m e
co rc
o. ou • As she had surpassed the traditional
recruitment procedure, she tried building
a rapport with the HR Executives
er res
• Complimented them on how they looked
HR (ACTIVE) and sent them thank you notes after
events
eH y

• Considered the role of HR’s as

rs ud

“Facilitators” only
t
ss
hi

This study source was downloaded by 100000807737659 from CourseHero.com on 05-30-2021 07:58:02 GMT -05:00
 THE PRACTICAL INTERNSHIP PHASE

a
vi
ed
ar
• Peters asked two columbia

sh
Mid-summer alumns and her mentor within
Feedback PWM NY whom she had meet

as
just two days earlier

w
m e
co rc
o. ou
er res
Five Advisors • Peters prompted her advisors to
eH y

on the senior give her updates on the project

rs ud

team works
t
ss
hi

This study source was downloaded by 100000807737659 from CourseHero.com on 05-30-2021 07:58:02 GMT -05:00
 Changing Political Dynamics

a
vi
ed
ar
sh
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

as
• Buckley was the • Peters’ was given
• Buckley was

w
director of TR’s PWM feedback by Malling
group replaced by and williams, with

m e
• Peters’ special Richard Wagman whom peters’ had not

co rc
relationship with • Couldn’t connect been interacting with
Buckley
• Helped her surpass o. ou with top executives • Buckley advised
peters on improving
er res
the traditional her perception in the
interview process minds of other
executives
eH y
rs ud t
ss
hi

This study source was downloaded by 100000807737659 from CourseHero.com on 05-30-2021 07:58:02 GMT -05:00
 CHANGING STRATEGIES
WITH THE CHANGING

a
vi
DYNAMICS

ed
PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3

ar
• Over preparing on • Peters reviewed her
• Contacted CBS feedback with Buckley &

sh
finance side but
alumni to gather focused on persuading
missed out on
their impression the important people

as
and advice camaraderie • Dougherty’s advice-
• Networked with took an extra project,

w
• Reached out to advisors in PWM NY also prepared briefs to
two personal • Sent Thank you notes

m e
win over Wagman
contacts during

co rc
to Malling, Crawfard • Updated Malling &
recruiting process Crawfard about her
and Kurtz
• Special
relationship with
o. ou • Asked CBS Alums and progress & set up a
meeting
er res
mentor to write her • Paid attention, took
Buckley to bypass review which was seen
interview process notes and participated
as mis-management of in presentations
eH y

relationships • Special project for

rs ud

Wagman
t
ss
hi

This study source was downloaded by 100000807737659 from CourseHero.com on 05-30-2021 07:58:02 GMT -05:00
 WHAT WENT WRONG?  OUR

a
vi
STRATEGY

ed
• She did not care to • After getting

ar
build a relationship recommendation by

sh
with her HR’s, rather Buckley, Peters should
considered them only have tried to improve her

as
as facilitator reputation in the company

w
• No effort was made through interactions with
HRs as well as Wagman

m e
to interact with her

co rc
colleagues as she
assumed that she
only required to build
o. ou • The strategies of taking
up projects for Wagman
er res
a rapport with New should have been her
York officials primary objective at the
eH y

start
rs ud

• She didn’t hold

meetings with • She should have
t
ss

Wagman regarding portrayed her true self

feedback
hi

This study source was downloaded by 100000807737659 from CourseHero.com on 05-30-2021 07:58:02 GMT -05:00
 a
vi
ed
ar
sh
THANK YOU

as
w
m e
co rc
o. ou
er res
eH y
rs ud t
ss
hi

This study source was downloaded by 100000807737659 from CourseHero.com on 05-30-2021 07:58:02 GMT -05:00
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)