Truth 30. Successful Leaders Are Politically Adept
When people in organizations convert their power into action, we describe them as engaged in politics. Those with good political skills have the ability to use their power bases effectively. And effective leaders know how to be politically adept.
Politics refers to those activities that are not required as part of an individual’s formal role but that influence, or attempt to influence, the distribution of advantages and disadvantages within the organization. Politicking is outside your specified job requirements. And it includes a wide range of behaviors—including building relationships with people inside and outside the organization who can provide useful information or assistance, avoiding fights over issues that aren’t critical, withholding key information from decision makers, joining a coalition, spreading rumors, exchanging favors with others in the organization for mutual benefit, lobbying on behalf or against a particular individual or decision alternative, and promoting your contributions and accomplishments.
To many, playing organizational politics is seen negatively. They may even be proud of the fact that they don’t “play politics.” They think they can succeed in the organization on their job performance alone. But they’re naïve. Politics are part of organizational life. For leaders, it’s often necessary to play politics to get those things you want for your work team, department, or group. In fact, many leaders have failed, or seriously suboptimized their performance, because they either chose not to play politics or played it poorly.
Politics are part of organizational life.
There is a substantial amount of evidence demonstrating that political skill is a valid predictor of performance ratings. And it predicts both job performance and performance ratings in jobs that emphasize interpersonal and social requirements. So while good political skills might minimally enhance the performance of software programmers, they become incredibly important for the performance of sales jobs and project team leaders.
An excellent example of politics is the use of language by organization members. As we noted in Truth 25, “Effective Leaders Know How to Frame Issues,” words frame issues. So, for instance, one person’s demonstration of loyalty is another’s apple polishing. When an executive pushes a decision downward in the organization, is she delegating authority or passing the buck? Carefully documenting decisions might be seen by others as covering your rear. These examples illustrate how the language of politics can be used to frame the most basic parts of a manager’s job.
There is a substantial amount of evidence demonstrating that political skill is a valid predictor of performance ratings.
Are there any personality types that are better than others at developing their political skills? The answer is “yes.” Your political “talent” is likely to be enhanced if you rate high on emotional intelligence (EI) and self-monitoring. EI refers to the ability to read and understand one’s own and others’ emotions. So individuals with high EI are able to assess what emotions are appropriate in a given situation and then control those emotions. They are also able to interpret others’ emotions so as to exhibit the appropriate response. Bill Clinton, who undoubtedly has a high EI, demonstrated his skill in his famous “I feel your pain” statement.
People who are high self-monitors are able to adjust their behavior to changing situations, while low self-monitors tend to display their true feelings in every situation. High self-monitors are very sensitive to external cues and can behave differently in different situations, sometimes presenting striking contradictions between their public persona and their private self. Not surprising, this ability to conform to changing situations allows them to be social chameleons, adapting their behavior and attitudes to fit the people around them. One interesting study dramatically demonstrated the value of being a high self-monitor. It found that high self-monitors took an average of just 18 months to infiltrate the nucleus of their workplace network. In contrast, it took low self-monitors a staggering 13 years!