In the political frame there is more going on than meets the eye. This refers to the way a situation is presented and the way it is perceived. By influencing how the situation is seen can alter the outcome. We often have personal beliefs and values with which we see the world. Changing that view can open up possibilities for alternative solutions.
1. Briefly restate your situation and your role.
In 2008 the housing market crashed. At that time, I was the Office Administrator and co-owner of the business BC Constructing LLC. The business was new with under ten employees, and we operated like a family. The business had been driven by public works projects that were in abundance because of rapid growth in the state and housing market. After the housing market crash, the number of jobs decreased and large companies who had never looked at smaller, low dollar jobs, were bidding on every job posted. Work was scarce and companies were scrambling to cover payroll to keep employees working. BC Constructing was also bidding on all jobs possible to keep its employees working. The company process was that all jobs were started after the contract was signed with the customer. The job involved in this situation was now the only job BC Constructing was working on and started on time. One of the subcontractors notified BC Constructing that the delivery for the main pump was not going to be on time. This created a situation with a domino effect on the schedule. The other trades that followed could not perform their part sequentially and in a timely manner causing the project to be in breach of contract with the city. BC Constructing was faced with having to determine whether to hold payment from the subcontractor and enter litigation or move forward and deal with penalties for breach of contract with the customer/city.
2. Describe how the politics of the organization influenced the situation.
“The political frame views organizations as roiling arenas that host ongoing contests arising from individual and group interests” (Bolman & Deal, 2017, p. 191). It is a little hard to visualize BC Constructing as an arena with contests, mostly because of the small size of the business, but our organization was a coalition. Internally we had estimators, operators, superintendents, laborers, and an office manager. Externally there were suppliers, sub-contractors, owners/city planners, and stakeholders. With the emerging scarcity of work, the external coalition conflict escalated and power was positional. This arena was shaped by the climate of the housing and construction markets and the organization was dependent on the environment to continue as it had been, which rapidly changed.
The politics of the organization were limited because personal power had no additional sources to use to sway decisions or form powerful influence. The control of the agenda was fixed by a contract with the owner of the project. (Bolman & Deal, 2017). I do believe that negotiating and forming alliances can certainly benefit the political climate and usually helps leverage power and advantage. Because the owner was the dominant authority there were no power struggles within the organization that contributed to the situation and the “organization was designed to maximize effectiveness” (Bolman & Deal, 2017, p. 229). There were no stockholders to consider.
3. Recommend how you would use organizational politics for an alternative course of action regarding your case.
I would use organizational politics for an alternative course of action by first creating an “agenda for change” (Bolman & Deal, 2017, p. 213). Creating a strategy to negotiate with the owner and the sub-contractor to discuss possibilities in the rapidly changing climate to renegotiate the payment structure and deadlines. In effect, asking to alter the contract requirements due to extenuating circumstances. Conferring with the owner/city planner as the primary power to make any change, I think the flow of information would have opened a line of communication to discuss reciprocation, perhaps giving them something additional at the end of the project in exchange for leniency on the deadlines in the present situation.
This is speculation and probably a long shot in the circumstances of this situation, but becoming more of a politician in business dealings will often reap benefits that just following the rules will not. There are always exceptions to rules and possessing political skills can be beneficial in negotiating and networking.
4. Reflect on what you would do or not do differently given what you have learned about this frame.
When I reflect on utilizing the political frame on the situation I would admit that there were opportunities that were lost due to not at the least, pursuing an agenda of change. Had the CEO of the company chose to look into mapping the political terrain early in the project, he would have been able to add more external players (Bolman & Deal, 2017). When the situation arose, there would have been more options to pursue asking and negotiating for leniency and exceptions. The organization had important relationships with pivitol people in the business but spreading out in different arenas would have strengthened the organizations position.
The housing market crash of 2008 played the most vital role in the situation and ultimately, even implementing the political frame might very well have not made a difference. Even after this job there would have been the possibility of not getting any new jobs to sustain the organization still in its infancy. It is something to reflect on but still may have likely produced similar results as the powers in play in the contract might still have declined to negotiate the contract regardless of the circumstances.
Reference
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership (7th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
In 2008 the housing market crashed. At that time, I was the Office Administrator and co-owner of the business BC Constructing LLC. The business was new with under ten employees, and we operated like a family. The business had been driven by public works projects that were in abundance because of rapid growth in the state and housing market. After the housing market crash, the number of jobs decreased and large companies who had never looked at smaller, low dollar jobs, were bidding on every job posted. Work was scarce and companies were scrambling to cover payroll to keep employees working. BC Constructing was also bidding on all jobs possible to keep its employees working. The company process was that all jobs were started after the contract was signed with the customer. The job involved in this situation was now the only job BC Constructing was working on and started on time. One of the subcontractors notified BC Constructing that the delivery for the main pump was not going to be on time. This created a situation with a domino effect on the schedule. The other trades that followed could not perform their part sequentially and in a timely manner causing the project to be in breach of contract with the city. BC Constructing was faced with having to determine whether to hold payment from the subcontractor and enter litigation or move forward and deal with penalties for breach of contract with the customer/city.
2. Describe how the politics of the organization influenced the situation.
“The political frame views organizations as roiling arenas that host ongoing contests arising from individual and group interests” (Bolman & Deal, 2017, p. 191). It is a little hard to visualize BC Constructing as an arena with contests, mostly because of the small size of the business, but our organization was a coalition. Internally we had estimators, operators, superintendents, laborers, and an office manager. Externally there were suppliers, sub-contractors, owners/city planners, and stakeholders. With the emerging scarcity of work, the external coalition conflict escalated and power was positional. This arena was shaped by the climate of the housing and construction markets and the organization was dependent on the environment to continue as it had been, which rapidly changed.
The politics of the organization were limited because personal power had no additional sources to use to sway decisions or form powerful influence. The control of the agenda was fixed by a contract with the owner of the project. (Bolman & Deal, 2017). I do believe that negotiating and forming alliances can certainly benefit the political climate and usually helps leverage power and advantage. Because the owner was the dominant authority there were no power struggles within the organization that contributed to the situation and the “organization was designed to maximize effectiveness” (Bolman & Deal, 2017, p. 229). There were no stockholders to consider.
3. Recommend how you would use organizational politics for an alternative course of action regarding your case.
I would use organizational politics for an alternative course of action by first creating an “agenda for change” (Bolman & Deal, 2017, p. 213). Creating a strategy to negotiate with the owner and the sub-contractor to discuss possibilities in the rapidly changing climate to renegotiate the payment structure and deadlines. In effect, asking to alter the contract requirements due to extenuating circumstances. Conferring with the owner/city planner as the primary power to make any change, I think the flow of information would have opened a line of communication to discuss reciprocation, perhaps giving them something additional at the end of the project in exchange for leniency on the deadlines in the present situation.
This is speculation and probably a long shot in the circumstances of this situation, but becoming more of a politician in business dealings will often reap benefits that just following the rules will not. There are always exceptions to rules and possessing political skills can be beneficial in negotiating and networking.
4. Reflect on what you would do or not do differently given what you have learned about this frame.
When I reflect on utilizing the political frame on the situation I would admit that there were opportunities that were lost due to not at the least, pursuing an agenda of change. Had the CEO of the company chose to look into mapping the political terrain early in the project, he would have been able to add more external players (Bolman & Deal, 2017). When the situation arose, there would have been more options to pursue asking and negotiating for leniency and exceptions. The organization had important relationships with pivitol people in the business but spreading out in different arenas would have strengthened the organizations position.
The housing market crash of 2008 played the most vital role in the situation and ultimately, even implementing the political frame might very well have not made a difference. Even after this job there would have been the possibility of not getting any new jobs to sustain the organization still in its infancy. It is something to reflect on but still may have likely produced similar results as the powers in play in the contract might still have declined to negotiate the contract regardless of the circumstances.
Reference
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership (7th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
Using the political frame lens when reviewing a company problem provides a more comprehensive understanding of the issue. By examining the problem through this perspective I have the opportunity identify underlying political issues or direct causes within our company and develop more effective solutions. Learning about the process of diverse perspectives improves my understanding and ability to evaluation situations better.