Internal Politics

HP’s Political Behavior
Name
Institution
HP’s Political Behavior
Politics are part of the organization and they cannot be avoided because every organization has different parties with different interests. These parties include the shareholders, whose main interests are high-profit margins and low financial risks. The different interests must be aligned for the success of the organization and as a result, politics arise. This paper aims to analyze the causes of intense political behavior at HP, the types of political behaviors displayed by HP’s top management, as well as the ethics of their behavior.
Individual and Organizational Factors of HP That caused the Intense Political Behavior
Several organizational and individual factors contribute to intense political behavior within an organization. Individual factors include internal locus of control, expectations of success, high self-monitors, and organizational investment, among others. Organizational factors include role ambiguity, self-serving senior managers, low trust, and reallocation of resources, among others (Robbins, 1997). Some of these factors were evident at HP.
Individual Factors
One of the individual factors that contributed to the intense political behavior at HP was internal locus of control. According to Robbins (1997), individuals with an internal locus of control believe that they are in control of their surroundings and as such, they can be manipulative to maintain control. Some of the leaders at HP displayed this trait. For instance, Carly Fiorina is said to have centralized six-mega divisions after the merger and placed all of them under her control (Harwell & Paquette, 2015). Also, she believed that she can solve any problem, which was one of the reasons why she never delegated. She actually said the company needed a more hands-on CEO rather than hiring a chief operating officer to assist her. Another individual factor that led to political behavior at HP was the perceived job alternatives. Perceived job alternatives are derived from a favorable job market, a prominent reputation, possession of scarce skills, and influential contacts beyond the organization (Robbins, 1997). Fiorina had perceived job alternatives because she was a prominent businesswoman. As revealed by Harwell and Paquette (2015), Fiorina was a celebrity CEO who often walked the red carpet with actors and musicians. This pushed her towards political actions. Another example of an individual within HP who had perceived job alternatives was Meg Whitman, who was appointed as CEO of HP at one point. Whitman’s perceived job alternatives were derived from her connections to influential people, especially after she lost the elections for the governor of California. She ended up being the only candidate for HP’s CEO, thanks to her connection to ray Lane who engineered the appointment, secretly (Pearlstein, 2011).
Organizational Factors
One of the main organizational factors that led to political behavior at HP was organizational change. According to Robbins (1997), when the existing processes and patterns of an organization change, political activity within the organization increases. HP has gone through major changes, most of which were experienced during Fiorina’s tenure. Fiorina spearheaded the acquisition of Compaq, a move that was fiercely opposed by some shareholders (Harwell & Paquette, 2015). Also, she was the first to execute a mass lay-off in the history of HP. These changes did not sit well with many employees as well as shareholders. Another factor was the self-serving nature of senior managers such as Lane, Whitman, and Fiorina. Robbins (1997) posits that a culture that constitutes self-serving leaders creates room for political behavior within the organization. Such was the nature of some leaders at HP. For instance, Lane engineered the appointment of Whitman as CEO and in return, she requested that Lane take up the position of executive chairman, as a condition for her appointment (Pearlstein, 2011). There see...