OGL 481 Pro-Seminar I:

PCA-Politcal Frame Worksheet

Worksheet Objectives:
1. Describe the political frame
2. Apply the political frame to your personal case situation

Complete the following making sure to support your ideas and cite from the textbook and other
course materials per APA guidelines. After the peer review, you have a chance to update this and
format for your Electronic Portfolio due in Module 6.

1) Briefly restate your situation from Module 1 and your role.

StayStrong Nutrition and Smash Fitness are start-up organizations whose

missions are to help others achieve their health goals. They provide gym memberships,
meal prep, training, and supplementation to do so. Even though the environment is
somewhat small and meant to make others feel close-knit, there was an issue with high
turnover rates. My role at the organization was as the regional operations managers so my
main responsibilities surrounded team members and managing them, inventory, and
developing policies and procedures. I also trained any new team members, and
implemented, along with tested, the procedures I was creating.

2) Describe how the politics of the organization influenced the situation.

Political activity within organizations is inevitable, and the political frame argues
that it stems from interdependence, opposing interests, resource scarcity, and power
relations. Leaders need to learn to manage political dynamics and understand that there
will be competition among individual and group interests (Bolman & Deal, 2017, pp.
184-185). Different team members have differences in values, interests, and perceptions
of reality. This was evident at StayStrong Nutrition and Smash Fitness, but every member
still needed one another even if their interests and values did not align. These differences,
however, did emphasize the power relations because a combination of the
interdependence and differences led to a difference in the resources different people
could provide. There is a strong link between power and dependency because if one
person has something the other wants, that creates leverage and, therefore, power
(Bolman & Deal, 2017, p. 187). There were some people, for example, who had access to
more information on supplementation, which could boost sales and praise from
leadership.

1
 Others, who were less experienced, were not in a position of power compared to
those who had knowledge about the supplements and could get more sales. This lack of
shared knowledge, along with pressure to reach sales targets, created tension in the team
and led to many people leaving. There was a clear difference in power between the entry-
level team members and the few people, 6, who were in leadership. Sources of power at
the organization came from positional power due to authority from leaders, control of
rewards like leaders being the ones who determine who gets the job, information and
expertise because those that knew more were relied on and trusted more, and alliance and
networks through building connections with team members. This frame views conflict in
a different light than others in that conflict, which was extremely present at the
organization, is a positive thing. Conflict, from this perspective, arise because there is
some scarcity in resources that will not guarantee everyone gets what they want. At
StayStrong Nutrition and Smash Fitness, an example of this was that team members felt
overworked and that they did not have enough resources to meet management targets, but
management could not get others to understand that what was being done was a necessity
to keep the organization moving forward.

Management controlled the policy process, which made team members feel their
interests were being put to the side. This is a normal part of organizations, but conflict
must be managed properly to lead to more creativity, innovation, and ability to adapt
(Bolman & Deal, 2017, p. 197).

3) Recommend how you would use organizational politics for an alternative course of
action regarding your case.

The leadership team at the organization was not experienced enough with
organizational politics to handle any conflict that could arise from it effectively. The
leadership team needed to work on exercising the four key skills for managers as
politicians: agenda-setting, mapping the political terrain, and networking and building
coalitions. Politically, agenda-setting refers to a statement of interest and scenarios for
how to obtain resources (Bolman & Deal, 2017, p. 205). This was not existent at
StayStrong and Smash because there was a larger focus on the structural perspective of
the organization. To develop better policies and their implementation, channels of
informal communication should be determined, the main people with political influence
need to be identified, mobilizing internal and external players should be considered, and
counterstrategies should be analyzed. There were high turnover rates also because the
leadership team relied too much on reason and not enough on relationships. There first
should be an evaluation of relevant relationships to figure out who needs to be
influenced. Second, those who could resist influence and how much should be
determined.
Then, developing connections with the opposition to facilitate communication or
any negotiations will keep those who may oppose close. If all else fails, there are other

2
 more coercive methods to gain influence. Negotiation is a big part of decision making.
Two people with some similar interests try to reach an agreement by creating, inventive
and cooperative win-win solution, and claiming value, naively optimistic win-win
solution (Bolman & Deal, 2017, p. 214). Conditional openness would work best for
StayStrong and Smash because it promotes open and collaborative behavior where one
person responds in the same way as the other. It combines both claiming and creating
value. This strategy could help team members bargain rather than just leave because they
have a different format to discuss things with leadership. Having them be heard could
make them more willing to be influenced.

4) Reflect on what you would do or not do differently given what you have learned
about this frame.

One thing I would have done differently to gain more power at the organization is
to apply more influence tactics. I could have relied more on things like reciprocation to
get other team members to want to do more for the organization. That tactic along with
liking, getting more people to like me, could have helped me get more team members to
stay with the organization, despite a few ineffective leaders, and do more of what was
asked of them. I would also be more aware that organizations act as agents for achieving
the purpose of those who control them because they exist in ecosystems with other
competing organizations with similar interests (Bolman & Deal, 2017, p. 224). I am now
realizing how much control external organizations had over Smash and StayStrong, and
how important the skills managers have as politicians are for remaining viable.
Leaders were easily swayed by fitness influencers, bodybuilders, larger
supplement corporations, investors, and many more. Our organization was dependent on
the resources they could provide whether it be products, profits, etc., but everyone was
also in competition. This needed to be managed more effectively, rather than allowing
others to blindly influence decisions. The organization relied on top-down initiatives, but
it led to many failures. The risks that accompany proposing change and depending on
others to follow-through cannot be overlooked. Those who are the “bottom” are actually
those who could devise ways to resist, undermine, and overthrow plans. The team
members who were not committed were those causing the higher turnover rates and
decreased productivity. The “bottom” members need to be considered and prioritized
because they can have a huge impact on the success of organizations.

3
 Reference

Bolman, L.G., & Deal, T.E. (2017). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership
(6th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.