From Politically Naïve to Politically Mature: Conceptualizing Leaders’ Political Maturation Journey

Abstract

This paper contributes to the literature on organizational politics and leadership. Current studies of leaders’ engagement in politics neglect notions of learning and development. The current paper aims to overcome this shortcoming by providing a developmental perspective on leaders’ engagement in organizational politics. Using in‐depth qualitative interviews with leaders at different seniority levels, the study examines developmental patterns in leaders’ willingness and ability to engage in organizational politics. The inductive findings inform a three‐stage model of political maturation, providing insights into the developmental nature of political will and political skill. Drawing on leadership skill and adult development literature, the paper posits that political maturation entails not only changes in leaders’ observable skills and behaviours, but also deep‐structure changes in mindsets and cognitive scripts regarding engagement in organizational politics. Furthermore, findings demonstrate the roles of experience and significant others in facilitating learning about organizational politics. The paper discusses theoretical and practical implications of this dynamic, developmental perspective.

Statesmen or cheerleaders? Using topic modeling to examine gendered messages in narrative developmental feedback for leaders

“…Our findings (Aggregate Theoretical Dimension 2) extend this work by demonstrating how such attitudes could be shaped by developmental feedback that encourages male and female leaders to navigate organizational politics differently (proactively vs defensively). Yet, the importance of political skill in leadership roles is widely documented (Ammeter, Douglas, Gardner, Hochwarter & Ferris, 2002;Buchanan, 2016) and a more proactive approach to politics sets apart mid-level leaders from senior ones (Doldor, 2017). In sum, we demonstrate that developmental feedback is less likely to direct women towards nurturing visionary and political skills required for senior leadership roles (Day & Dragoni, 2015).…”

The political iceberg: the hidden side of leaders’ political behaviour

“…In this political arena they are likely to demonstrate different motivations for political behavior which may reveal a constructive but also a destructive aspect (Ellen et al , 2013). Similarly, Doldor (2017) has suggested that political leadership relies on political tactics ranging from the pro-social (coalitions, friendliness, networking, self-promotion) to anti-social (attacking, blaming or exploiting others, coercion, blackmail). With this in mind, we now introduce leaders’ political behaviors.…”

“…However, currently, there is little insight into what drives leaders to engage in organizational politics (Doldor et al, 2013). Until now, studies have mostly investigated what politics "does" in organizations, its implications and consequences (Lepisto and Pratt, 2012), rather than exploring the motivations for such action (Doldor, 2017;Doldor et al, 2013;Kapoutsis, 2016). This paper aims to address this research gap by exploring leaders' drives for political behavior, thereby investigating organizational politics at a micro-level.…”

“…The current study makes three contributions to the literature. First, while current studies of leaders' engagement in politics neglect notions of learning and development (Doldor, 2017) we suggest a developmental perspective on leaders' engagement in organizational politics by studying what drives them in the public sector to engage in workplace politics. Second, in response to Bass and Bass's (2008) call for a more balanced perspective on political leadership, we attempt to recognize leaders' wide range of motives to engage in political behaviors.…”

“…Political activity serves as a foundational element of most leadership behavior (Ferris and Hochwarter, 2011; Pfeffer, 1981). Recently, within the field of organizational politics, increasing attention has been dedicated to understanding politics in leadership roles (Doldor, 2017). Further, theories of political leadership have garnered increased attention, with greater empirical interest placed into the nature of leaders’ political behavior (Ellen et al , 2013; Silvester and Dykes, 2007; Yammarino and Mumford, 2012).…”