Power and Politics in Different Change Discourses

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this article is to examine how different views on power and politics manifest in organizational change, and how they can be integrated into a single model. Methods: Our research was based on an extensive literature review about power and politics and their relationship with organizational change. We used the systems model of organizational change developed by Maes and Van Hootegem to map the different views on power and politics in organizational change. This systems model integrated different change discourses and allowed us to post the various aspects of power and politics in organizational change. Results: Using the systems model as a reference to look at power and politics from different angles led to a better understanding of the role they play in organizational change so that actors can enter the political arena of change better prepared and play the game of change at a tactically higher level. Conclusions: The analysis contributes to the study of power and politics in three respects. First, using the metamodel of organizational change to map the different views on power and politics offers a more detailed and varied understanding of the use of power and politics in organizational change. Second, looking at power and politics from different discourses can accommodate greater complexity and nuance. Third, it shows that change projects rarely run smoothly but are constantly traversed by all kinds of obstacles and barriers that require specific political astuteness. Members of an organization, who have been introduced to political skills, will be better able to navigate the pitfalls of organizational change and its rhetoric and thus be better agents of change or better able to resist unreasonable change.

Power and politics of leading change in emergency departments: A qualitative study of Australasian emergency physicians

“…[21][22][23] Indeed, our findings, like those of Clarke and colleagues, 24 point towards the need for leadership development programmes that enable emergency physicians to develop and build their political skill. Consistent with the argument advanced by Maes 25 that understanding different views on power and politics can help actors better navigate the political arena of change, our findings provide rich insights into how emergency physicians view the power and politics of leading change.…”

The challenge of inclusivity, capability and change in complex, multi‐stakeholder problem situations—Practical insight from the application of participative systems methods, models and facilitation within an organisational setting

“…Drawing on published literature presenting different theories and ideas on power and politics in change, Maes and Van Hootegem (2022) developed a multidimensional model that maps political influence against the different phases of change. This model provides a basis for reflecting upon different perspectives on power and politics in change that must be considered to gain a more informed understanding of their impact.…”

“…Maes and Van Hootegem's research concluded that improving awareness amongst stakeholder groups about the impact of power and politics can help them gain their own power and influence, through their better understanding of its role in change. ‘This should make a more democratic approach to change possible in the sense that more members of the organization have the opportunity and the capacity to influence decision‐making processes in the organization’ (Maes & Van Hootegem, 2022). Providing the opportunity and capacity for democratising decision‐making in appropriate situations, through appropriate involvement and access to relevant knowledge, is consistent with the inclusive approaches we have aimed to adopt in complex situations and that have been reflected in the four cases presented here.…”

Going forward and beyond: on the track of a practice turn in supply chain sustainability studies

“…To this end, we use previous studies to support our arguments. This paper argues that a practice turn is essential to the progress of SCS studies since an exclusive performance-based approach hampers further developments in the field of management (Buchanan & Dawson, 2007; Maes & Van Hootegem, 2022; Schultze & Leidner, 2002; Keegan & Boselie, 2006). Therefore, we provide inputs on how SCS studies could integrate the practice turn and benefit from the understanding that practices shape reality and supply chains are formed by them.…”