Political Frame

POLITICAL FRAME 6

PoliticalFrame

PoliticalFrame

Thepolitical frame is a term used to describe the competition betweenthe members of an organization for limited resources and time. Thestructure is composed of various individualities with opposinginterests, beliefs, and perceptions of the organization and itscurrent position. The varied opinions of the individuals result in adesire for power as a way to satisfy the conflict. Consequently, theteam members in an organization begin to work behind others backs.Specifically, the members pride guides them into negotiations withcompeting parties to achieve their interests by getting what theywant (Hussain,2008).

Theconflict results in a group of individuals with hidden agendas. Thepolitical frame zooms into the team member’s desire for power toachieve their goals. The political structure is an important tool formanagers to control the level of conflict within an organization. Itprovides the ability for the managers to identify the existingconflicts and enhances their choice of decisions to solve theconflicts between the team members while maintaining the desiredlevel of organizational cohesiveness (Hussain, 2008).

Thestrength of social affiliations affects an individual’s identityframe. First, whenever individuals view themselves as a part of aninfluential group, they tend to behave in a manner that protectstheir markers of identity. Consequently, their perception of identitywithin the group influences their perception of the availableoptions. For example, an employee’s affiliation with the topmanagement of an organization dictates the actions that he maysupport at any given time. Such an employee may fail to support aboycott activity proposed by another employee due to the consequencesthat may befall the organization (Hussain, 2008).

Whenthe social affiliation is great, the employee feels responsible forthe actions of the teammates. Besides, the employee may not engage inactivities aimed to defraud the owners of the organization and ismore likely to behave responsibly like the top management. Incontrast, where the social affiliation is insignificant, employeestend to feel irresponsible and begin to seek their gains against theorganization’s top management. Consequently, the level of socialmembership in a group determines the level of conflict and themethods chosen by the members to resolve the issues (Asratie, 2012).

Predispositionaffects the political frame by guiding people’s consistency ofchoices. Specifically, it serves as a sieve to the various argumentscommunicated to an individual. An individual’s opinion towards anargument is based on the beliefs as well as their ideology that formsthe foundation of the person’s predisposition. Therefore, wheneveran individual is faced with an argument, they use their beliefs toevaluate the effectiveness or the non-effectiveness of the argument.Consequently, they can make the decision whether to support or actagainst the argument based on the extent to which it appeals to theirbeliefs (Asratie,2012).

Theconsistency of people’s views in turn results in the consistency oftheir opinions towards various arguments. In organizations, managersshould understand the beliefs held by each team member as afoundation towards understanding their ideas and consequently, theycan handle the conflict of opinions in the organization. People’spredisposition determines their attitude towards various items. Forexample, when employees believe that organizational change is athreat towards their jobs, they exhibit a negative attitude towardsthe management efforts to effect the change. Consequently, it leadsto a slow implementation process of the required change due to thelow employee motivation (Asratie, 2012).

Itis imperative for the management to understand people’spredisposition to deal with the consequences of such beliefs on theexecution of duties and the overall performance of the organization.For example, in the case where the employees are against effectingchange due to their negative attitude, the manager can control theeffect of attitude on the implementation process. The knowledge ofemployee’s predisposition calls for the manager to assure theemployees that the changes will have a positive impact on theiremployment. It is necessary to provide the appropriate assurance tothe employees as a way to erase the negative attitude (Asratie,2012).

Similarly,the predisposition of the management dictates how they deal with theissues like conflict whenever they happen within the organization. Amanager who believes in motivation is likely to seek to understandthe reason for the low production. Such a manager places efforts toreveal the reason for the low production of the employees byestablishing the level of employee’s motivation at the workplace.In contrast, a manager who believes in coercion will force people towork in similar positions of low motivation. Such a manager is morelikely to worsen the situation by the application of force in theworkplace. Consequently, there is an increase in conflict and fearthat may impact on the performance of the organization (Asratie,2012).

Prejudiceis an assumption made by an individual without adequate informationand accurate facts. It affects a person’s wellbeing in a negativemanner. It is the single cause of discrimination towards anindividual. Discrimination creates feelings of anger, shame andsadness to the victim. In an organization setting, team members whofeel that they are judged negatively experience difficulties in theexecution of their duties. Consequently, the victims may sufferphysical or mental problems. Prejudice in an organization createsstereotypes. These are widely held beliefs about a certain group ofindividuals. When stereotyping is oversimplified, it results inprejudice and discrimination (Asratie, 2012).

Prejudicehas an adverse impact on an organization by affecting the performanceof the victims. Besides, it affects negatively on the coherence of ateam since the victims cannot work comfortably with their oppressors.It is imperative for managers to identify levels of prejudice anddiscrimination in their organizations to improve performance as wellas teamwork (Asratie, 2012).

Identitypolitics are arguments that emphasize on the interest and theperspective of groups that people identify. They dictate the waypeople’s politics are shaped by loosely correlated socialorganizations. Such groups may include race, religion, gender, socialclass, ideology, ethnicity sexual orientation, history, informationpreference, musical preference, profession, hobbies as well asmedical conditions (Asratie, 2012).

Inorganizations, identity politics dictate decisions made by differentparties. Management should work to maintain healthy levels ofidentity politics to enhance organizational performance. High levelsof identity politics may result in conflict due to discrimination ofpeople that do not conform to a given group. For example, it may leadto the discrimination of employees based on their race or medicalcondition that humiliates and reduces their willingness to work.Discrimination affects teamwork in the organization and hampersproductivity. However, there is a positive effect of identitypolitics. Specifically, such politics when properly managed to createemployee competition may increase productivity. For example in themarketing department, identity politics can work out to motivate lazymarketers to pull their socks. Such competition is beneficial byincreasing sales and the profits of the organization. It is the dutyof the management to ensure that there are healthy levels of identitypolitics within their organizations (Hussain,2008).

References

Asratie,D. (2012). Organizationbehaviour.S.l.: Lap Lambert Academic Publ.

Hussain,S. (2008). Understandinghuman behaviour.Agra: H. P. Bhargava Book House.