How Should Salwa Handle an Unfair Job Transfer Decision Made Without Her Input?

A decision has been made by our Strategy Manager to transfer Salwa who is working in our division as a Head of Strategic Planning to Head of Project Management without even communicating this message to her.

My boss has convinced the General Manager that the Head of strategic planning has to deal with other government entities and that requires leadership qualities and communication which not found in Salwa. Furthermore, her attitude needs improvement

The above message conveyed was not true because his main intention was to destroy Salwa's image in front of senior management and he considered her as a threat to his position.


In this case, what Salwa suppose to do now because I really felt sorry to hear this bad news at the last day of 2009.

Your feedback and recommendation would be highly appreciated.

Regards,

Ramesh

Dear Ramesh,

The case that you have cited is a classic case of organizational politics. What is the cause of the decision of Salwa's boss (Strategy Manager)? It is because Salwa failed to demonstrate political behavior. Political behavior is defined as those activities that are not required as part of one's formal role in the organization, but that influence, or attempt to influence, the distribution of advantages and disadvantages within the organization.

So, how to demonstrate political behavior? Following are the methods of politicking:

a) Frame arguments in terms of organizational goals
b) Develop the right image
c) Gain control of the organization's resources
d) Make yourself appear indispensable
e) Be visible
f) Develop powerful allies
g) Avoid "tainted" members
h) Support your boss

The behavior of the Strategy Manager can be described as "Defensive Behavior." There are various ways through which defensive behavior is demonstrated. Two major methods are "Avoiding Action" and "Avoiding Blame." The former has six types and the latter five. Of these two, the Strategy Manager has shown the following that fall under the category of "Avoiding Blame":

a) Justifying
b) Scapegoating
c) Misrepresenting

Now, what is the solution? As far as my general knowledge is concerned, the role of strategic management is more dynamic than the role of project management. But then Salwa should swallow this bitter pill and accept this new role. She can try to defend herself, but the die is cast now, and I doubt whether she will be able to claw her way back.

Tell her that organizational politics is everyone's fait accompli (an irreversible fact). In her new role, she should exhibit the political behavior that I have mentioned in paragraph 2. Secondly, she can bring down the cost of the project by implementing scientific project management techniques like PERT and CPM. I am given to understand that PMP helps in a big way to reduce project costs. She can take training on PMP (either at the company's cost or on her own). She should recommend the training of her subordinates on PMP too. She should scientifically review the existing projects and bring down the project cost. Please remember - cost reduction is the best option for gaining visibility.

To know more about Organizational Politics, you can refer to Google or any book on "Organizational Behavior."

Lastly, but again most important point is that what you have mentioned is your perception. Perhaps your boss could be true also! May not be 100%, but to a larger extent. If that were the case, then Salwa should learn some leadership techniques and methods of organizational communication.

Decision and Organizational Conflict: When the Strategy Manager decided to transfer Salwa from strategic to project management, it shows how perceptions play a role in shaping organizational conflict. The decision has shown a "competing" response of the Strategy Manager. Now if Salwa retaliates with her "competing" response, the result will be dysfunctional conflict. Acceptance of this decision need not be construed as a "collaborative" response. It could be a tactical withdrawal or an "Avoiding" response also. Later, she may put in her papers.

Implications of this decision on the organization's culture: Your company's culture is bound to get affected because of this decision. There will be differing perceptions of everyone on one single question - "over here what is important/valued?" If all other employees perceive that yes, the decision of GM is quite correct in transferring Salwa from strategic management to project management, nothing much will happen. But if other managers and employees perceive this decision as unfair, either fully or partially, then it will change their opinions. Changed opinions will foster the demonstration of unhealthy political behavior, and it may culminate in plain sycophancy. Those who will be unable to bear with this race of sycophancy or employing competitively, informal means of gaining attention, will quit and increase the level of attrition.

Decision of GM and Team Building Efforts: If the decision leads to unwanted organizational politicking, it will also make team building efforts fruitless. An employee who nurses a grudge against her superior will show ephemeral camaraderie whenever some team-building games are conducted. Few days after the sheen of the training wears out, and the situation comes back to square one. This is what has happened with Salwa. In the organization, there could be many other Salvas too.

Lessons on Qualities of Leadership: If what you say is deemed to be true, then it shows that the GM has failed to demonstrate "critical thinking" and "fairness in decision-making." One more quality he has failed to demonstrate is "organizational communication." Organizational communication is far more important than personal communication. This is what I always cover in my training on communication skills. The former shapes the opinions of the employees. There is no justification for Salwa's transfer even without telling her that she is being transferred. Because of this non-communication, employees will start feeling that all are puppets at the hands of our boss. This will set in motion an unwritten but vicious rule that "the boss is always right." All these factors will have detrimental implications on the organizational culture and on the balance sheet at last!

Regards,

Dinesh V Divekar
Soft Skills &

Dinesh Diwakar,

Very nicely explained. A very good lesson I recently learned from the above line is the importance of organizational communication. Even though I had good personal communication skills, today I understand through experience in a more practical way compared to learning from others' mistakes.

Thanks for guiding me in the right direction and giving me the confidence that what I perceived is correct.

Bhat G

Dinesh,

I apologize for the late response.

Your reply is well-written. I couldn't have done it better.

Yes, "politics" is indeed the number one "killer disease" in organizational relationship management, even at the national level. Sometimes, it even creeps into family settings!

But, say what you want, it is dirty, filthy, and outright unprofessional. It's most unfortunate that it lurks under disguise and false fronts.

It is something everyone detests and loathes, yet, for some ironical reason, accommodates it out of hopelessness and helplessness.

Fait accompli or "raison d'etre," it is an unhealthy phenomenon that undermines motivation, harmony, the spirit of teamwork, and happiness at work. It is one of those unexplained and unwritten hypocritical features that somehow find its way into the very same leaders who hate its indulgence. Ask anyone if it's a healthy trend? Yet, why is it acknowledged? It shares the same paradox as money being the main motivator at work.

Some theorists and realists have given "political awareness" recognition as an essential competency for survival or getting through. It is more so the case for employees planning to grow or progress, either vertically or horizontally, and in dealing with workplace conflicts in relationships or performance, as it was with Salva.

Being an ex-soldier, I do not preach, practice, or condone the game of "politics." As a leader, it is incumbent upon me to facilitate a healthy and harmonious working climate of Teamwork, in the absolute sense of the meaning - to foster openness, proactiveness, empathy, forgiveness, learning, development, inclusiveness, and engagement.

I also believe it is geographically separated "cultural" thing. Asians, by their so-called power-distanced submissive nature, are more accommodative and vulnerable to politics.

Of course, there are very few exceptions, who go against the grain, without fear or favor to what others may think, say, or do. They call a spade a spade in articulating their points or arguments. And, I am one of them.

I would not agree with some of the points you mentioned regarding 'politicking' because I do follow them, such as "support the boss." How can that be read as "politics"? That calls for professionalism in conduct. As a responsible employee or subordinate one must state one's stand when it matters, e.g., a meeting. If the boss differs to decide, then one must rally behind the decision and give one's undivided support to make it a success. If it fails, take responsibility, learn, and try again. The next time, the boss may reconsider ignoring your points.

Life is all about understanding, learning, and moving forward. We should not waste time indulging in politics and the blame game syndrome.

I do agree, not everyone can think alike. Some people need more time and experience to mature into acquiring a higher and deeper level of emotional intelligence to think beyond the superficial flow of communication. That's why Daniel Goleman's (Primal Leadership) says EI has become more important than IQ for leadership performance.

Coming back to Salva's case, there are 2 very important issues at hand. One is at the personal level, Salva's case. Another, which has a contagion effect and more important, is at the organizational or "cultural" level.

Ramesh,

This is a great learning opportunity to redress dysfunctional behavior and put in place a system that reflects healthy communication in relationships. Salva should stand up for her right in knowing the reasons for her transfer. It should not be confrontational but rather inquiry and co-creative, with mutual development in mind (hers and the company's). If this does not occur, the inevitable will be turnover or, worse still, ROAD (retired on active duty).

This sort of thing should be handled with great care and confidentiality. But, in this case, it seems there is much water-cooler talk - everyone knows everything, including bad relationship news. "Gossip" is the resulting consequence of how "politics" impacts organizational communication.

It is important to see the problem at a deeper level beyond the inter and intra-personal level. The management must step in to address the situation before it decays further. Look beneath the hidden iceberg level to effect changes to the values system, communication flow, and cultural impediments. Teamwork, relationship, and workplace harmony must precede above individualistic ego-emotional status. Leadership respect cannot be earned from the authority of positions.

There is an interesting post at HBP on a somewhat similar issue - merits of raising sensitive "strategic" issues in public that could offend bosses. (When You Think the Strategy is Wrong - Best Practices - Harvard Business Review) Once again, I have commented strongly on our inhibitive Asian-culture biased communication.

If we are becoming borderless and globally connected, how can we continue to hang onto our "cultural" differences in support of international best workplace practices? The East is noted for its collective spirit, so why the sensitivity to more open and courageous communication. Perhaps we are not exactly the people we say we are and prefer to hide behind the mask of "office politics." We would rather not talk of the elephant in the room, but... I rest my case.