Managing with Political Awareness

A summary review of the literature

Professor Jean Hartley and Layla Branicki
October 2006
In Partnership with

Copyright
Chartered Management Institute

First published 2006

Chartered Management Institute
2 Savoy Court, Strand
London WC2R 0EZ
All rights reserved. Except for quotation
of short passages for the purposes of criticism
and review, no part of this publication may
be reproduced, stored in any retrieval system,
or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording or otherwise,
without prior permission of the publisher.
This book is sold subject to the condition
that it shall not by way of trade or otherwise,
be lent, re-sold, hired out, or otherwise circulated
without the publishers prior consent in any form
of binding or cover other than that in which it is
published and without a similar condition being
imposed on the purchaser.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A CIP catalogue record for this report is available
from the British Library
ISBN - 0-85946-465-2
Foreword
3
The aims of this project are to build on the growing recognition of the vital contribution
that effective political leadership can make to delivering business results and to achieving
improved delivery of public services. We hope to add to the current body of knowledge
and to use the outcomes to develop practical tools for managers.
No organisation operates in a vacuum, and the impact of its business and the day-to-day
activities of its employees will have many ramications across a diverse set of stakeholders.
I believe that political skills cannot be viewed as the domain of the specialist, but as a
mainstream element of leadership needed across all sectors. Effective political leaders
are like the Roman god Janus: they wear two faces - one looking outward and the other
inward. They have a strong vision and sense of direction for their organisation, know
whats happening in the marketplace and anticipate whats ahead, and can balance this
against the internal capabilities required to operate in a competitive environment.
Lack of such political awareness can have lasting repercussions. Looking back, I joined
the board of Shell UK in 1992. The Board had decided to decommission one of our
large oil storage and loading bays stationed in the North Sea. It was called the Brent
Spar - and still serves a painful lesson in the need for political awareness.
Our mistake was that we were too arrogant. It wasnt exactly our actions that were
at fault - no, it was the fact that we had lost touch with our community and failed
to anticipate their concerns. Members of Greenpeace launched a protest that spread
around the world. Shell was boycotted and picketed by consumers, and ultimately we
had to reverse the decision to dump the rig, to the intense displeasure of the British
Government who had defended the disposal plan.
Many people have identied Brent Spar as a key moment in the UK environmental
debate, but for me personally, it was also a turning point. It forced me to think about
how corporations interact with their political environments.
The history books and newspapers are lled with stories of organisations that have made
mistakes and misjudged their communities. Often it is corporations who have been very
successful and then nd they're attacked for the wider impact of their success. But it is
not just those who participate in todays highly visible, global economy who are
vulnerable to such scrutiny, judgement and in some cases, attack.
If you really want an organisation to achieve success in todays complex environment, you
cannot afford to turn a blind eye to the political dimension of your business or service.
This literature review serves as a timely exposition of the deeply-seated and differing
views about the value of political skills. Alongside my colleagues on the research Steering
Board, I hope that this new research agenda will cause those responsible for developing
the leaders of the future to pause and reect, and to start to value the importance of
political awareness.
Sir David Varney, Senior Adviser to the Chancellor of the Exchequer
on Transformational Government
Chair of the Managing with Political Awareness Steering Board
Contents
1. Introduction 5
2. Methodology: the literature review 6
3. What is politics? 6
4. Redening political skills 8
5. Four-level model for the analysis of political awareness 9
I The external policy context
II Inuencing policy-makers
III Strategic partnerships
IV Interests within the organisation
6. Measuring the effectiveness of political skills 12
7. Emerging research issues 13
8. Recommendations 14
9. Appendices
Appendix A: References 15
Appendix B: Acknowledgements 19
4
The Chartered Management Institute, in partnership with the Institute of Governance
and Public Management at Warwick Business School, is leading a new research initiative
looking at how to develop leaders with the capability to manage the political dimension
of their businesses and services.
This paper provides the background for the research by summarising an extensive
review of the existing literature within the eld of management and organisational
behaviour. It considers work on the skills and circumstances of managers working in
both formal and informal political contexts across all sectors.
Such research is sorely needed. A previous survey by the Chartered Management
Institute found that many public sector managers feel that they lack the skills to
manage in a political context and argued that:
Greater priority needs to be given to developing leaders with the capacity to
manage the political dimension. They need an ability to see and communicate
the big picture, make connections, be credible with different groups and
broker relevant political and strategic relationships (Charlesworth, Cook
and Crozier 2003:7).
Such skills can also be important for private sector managers, who increasingly manage
their businesses in a complex and media-visible world. Yet, to date, there has been
too little conceptual and practical understanding of political skills in and around the
workplace. Many view political skills narrowly as self-interest rather than as a power-
based approach to inuence in the context of competing interests or in the context of
inter-organisational coalitions and partnerships.
There is a pressing need for managers to be able to work not only with the formal
institutions and representatives of the state, but also across and with a diverse range
of organisations. Some managers may have to work with stakeholders who advocate
or lobby on behalf of consumer, pressure and political groups. Others may have to
understand and work in a complex and dynamic environment of legislation, regulation and
policy advice. A globalising world creates a range of uncertainties about world governance,
national stability or local priorities which managers may need to take account of, and
which may have unexpected or substantial repercussions which have to be addressed.
This major new study explores the levels and types of political skills and behaviours
reported by UK managers from all sectors. It explores differences in skills and awareness
across different contexts and investigates how such skills are acquired, as well as the
degree to which they are seen as effective in achieving organisational outcomes. The
nal report will seek to make recommendations for leadership and management
development in relation to political awareness and inuencing skills.
The research builds on previous work by the Institute of Governance and Public
Management at Warwick Business School, including an examination of the competencies
which local government managers need to develop in order to work effectively in a more
networked way, in partnerships and with a stronger citizen-focus (e.g. Hartley 2002,
Hartley and Allison, 2000) and research which has identied the key skills of formal
political leaders in local government (Hartley et al, 2005; Leach et al, 2005).
This project goes further and extends the analysis to managers in the private, public
and voluntary sectors who increasingly need political awareness in order to be effective.
These are the soft skills of being able to read context, understand the interests and roles
of different stakeholders and act with political awareness.
1. Introduction
5
6
The literature search strategy was designed to look specically at four particular arenas
where political skills may be important, based on a framework developed by Warwick:
the external policy context; formal politics; organisational strategy; and internal politics.
The review examined key issues such as corporate political strategy, politics and
organisational learning, perceptions of politics and political skill. It also revealed some
clear gaps in existing work. The articles identied did not fully explore the importance of
differences related to the context of managing within, across and beyond organisational
boundaries. Neither was there a clear view within the literature about whether political
actions are or are not in the organisations or societys interests.
This review therefore highlights both the theoretical and empirical insights found within
the existing literature and the gaps which require further exploration in order to develop
a framework for understanding a set of political skills, or competencies, needed by
managers and leaders to help deliver business benets that are in their organisations or
societys interests.
The review was based on examining recent writings in the academic and policy
literatures about political skill, political inuence and political awareness, and the use of
both formal and informal politics in and around organisational settings.
2. Methodology: the literature review
3.1 Politics as the
pursuit of self-
interest: politicking
An understanding of policy and politics has been identied by both practitioners
and researchers as an increasingly important skill for all managers whether located
in the private, public or voluntary sectors. There have been widespread changes
in organisational structures with consequent effects on management in recent
years. Organisations must often operate within complex networks of interests and
opportunities, which has arguably made social and political skills vital to managerial
success (Douglas and Ammeter 2004:537).
However, within the management eld and perhaps more generally in society
politics is commonly thought of as a practice which ought to have no place within
rational or fair systems of management. Most studies on organisational behaviour or
leadership development make little or no reference to politics and political behaviour.
If mentioned, it is often seen as self-interested behaviour by individual managers, often
with the sole objective of advancing their own career interests. Any organisational
benets, in this view, may be coincidental or secondary (Allen et al 1979:77). Politics is
frequently conated with politicking (Mintzberg 1985) and in this sense is associated
with blaming, attacking, scapegoating, manipulation and exploitation (Allen et al
1979:78, Bower and Weinberg 1988:40, Eiring 1999:25).
3. What is politics?
7
This view of politics can be seen as underpinned by a rational choice model of politics
(Leftwich, 2004; Weale, 2004) whereby society, or the organisation, is seen in terms of
the metaphor of the marketplace. Individuals pursue their interests in order to maximise
their own benets and minimise their own costs. Politics may be viewed as a pervasive
reality of organisational life which is either managed or suppressed. Negotiation,
inuence and persuasion may be acceptable as rational activities, but politics is generally
seen as seedy and disreputable; this literature provides advice about how best to pursue
ones interests in a covert fashion. Power and politics is seen as being about winning
turf wars (e.g. Buchanan and Badham, 1999; Bacharach and Lawler, 1980) with the
focus on internal politics in the rm or organisation.
Other denitions offer a broader view of both formal and informal politics, within and
outside the organisation. A more pluralist view sees politics as a set of interactions
within and between public and private institutions, covering both formal and informal
activities. It may be considered to be all activities of conict, negotiation or co-operation
over the use and distribution of resources (Leftwich, 2004).
Bernard Cricks (1962, fourth edition 1993) inuential denition also takes a more
constructive view. Politics is dened as the mobilisation of support for a position,
decision or action whereby people act together through institutionalised procedures
to resolve differences, to conciliate different interests and values, and to make public
policies in the pursuit of common purposes (2004:67). The underlying purpose of
politics is thus identied as being about mobilising support for particular actions by
reconciling different interests and values. This approach is diametrically opposed to the
politics solely as self-interest perspective.
The Crick (1993) denition also introduces the idea that politics is reaching beyond
difference to nd ways of cooperating in order to achieve consensus about the wider
or broader purposes which are shared despite differences in emphasis, values or
specic goals.
The more pluralistic denitions of politics have signicant implications for managers.
It means that politics can be partially understood in more familiar terms such as
inuencing skills, partnership working, or social skills. It has been argued that political
competence may make the difference between someone who can get an idea off
the ground and accepted in an organisation and someone who cant (Bacharach
2005:93). Roffey Park research also suggests that constructive politics can play an
important part in achieving organisational outcomes (Holbeche 2004). Politics may or
may not result in positive outcomes it can be seen as an important social inuence
process with the potential of being functional or dysfunctional to organisations and
individuals (Allen et al 1979:82). Either way, the reality is that [t]hose wishing to
enhance their ability to inuence in their corporate role just cannot simply ignore the
political behaviour going on around them (Bancroft-Turner and Morley 2002:13).

3.2 Politics as a
means to gain
marketshare/turf war
3.3 Politics as public
mechanism for
distribution of resources
3.4 Politics in the pursuit
of common purposes:
reconciling differences
3.5 Politics to align
individual and
organisational objectives:
consensus building
8
The predominant, though limited view, of politics emerging from parts of this literature
review is that politics is seedy, based on self-interest and politicking. However,
recent literature also indicates the growing recognition of the role of constructive
politics, though it is still difcult to nd appropriate language to reect political skills in
managers. Political awareness, political astuteness, political nous, and being savvy
are all more or less satisfactory in reecting political skill without the connotations of
pure self-interest and which take account of the need for organisational leaders and
managers to be politically aware in a complex, dynamic world.
Political skill has been described as the missing discipline in management selection,
training and development (Butcher and Clarke 1999:12) and some studies have
presented it as a key factor in successful teams (Ahearn et al 2004, Ferris et al 2005c,
Peled 2000; Solace, 2005). Reecting the different understandings of politics, views in
the literature vary from managing the dysfunctional consequences of politics to realising
the potential benets of political behaviours.
Much of the literature has treated political skill as an individual attribute, sometimes
within a competency framework. However, based on research with formal political
leaders, it can be argued that there are at least three elements in political effectiveness:
The context of the organisation and the skill of being able to read the context
The challenges or tasks which the political work is intended to shape
The capabilities or competencies of political skill.
(Hartley, Fletcher, Morrell, and Benington, 2005).
A number of works have focused on the interpersonal or social inuencing aspects of
political skills (Ammeter et al 2002: 764, 765). Ferris has described it as an interpersonal
style... that combines social astuteness with the capacity to adjust to different and
changing situational demands in a manner that inspires trust and condence, conveys
sincerity, and inuences others to respond favourably (Ferris 2005c:45).
Politicking for self interest, political skills for managers and strategies for exerting
inuence on relevant external bodies may therefore be inter-related but distinct
concepts, as the following Warwick framework which is set within an organisational
and institutional context begins to unpick.
'Managing with political awareness' takes political skills to mean the skills, knowledge
and competencies to both understand and inuence politics. However, it is likely there
are two dimensions here. They are the ability to understand to 'read the politics' and
the ability to inuence. While there is evidence on this in relation to local politicians,
(Leach et al 2005), it needs to be further explained in relation to managers. It seems
likely that there are managers who are competent in one area but not the other, as well
as managers who are skilled in both.
4. Redening political skills
9
Since abilities to map the political terrain and build coalitions may be crucial in
getting ideas adopted, management training needs to focus upon supporting skills
that encourage effective collaboration and develop peoples ability to co-operate in
situations of high interactive complexity (Blackler and McDonald 2000:836/848). It may
be that there is scope for politics to become a formal management discipline in its own
right (Butcher and Clarke 1999:12). The potential benets of political action indicate
that the concept of political skill has implications for the selection, review, training and
development of individual managers and leaders, for the balance of skills required to
get the most out of teams, partnerships, alliances, networks and coalitions and for the
overall improvement of organisational goal attainment.

The impact of politics (both formal and informal) is likely to vary according to the sector
the organisation is in, the level of its public prole, the sensitivity of its activities and
its accountability and governance structures. All organisations need to take account
of politics, and senior and strategic managers in particular must be sensitive to the
interplay of politics with organisational purpose. Many operational managers may
benet if they have awareness of the key political forces acting on the organisation.
The following Warwick framework therefore captures four inter-related levels at which
political skills may be required.
1. An understanding of the external policy context of the organisation (including
aspects of competition, regulation and trade agreements, media interest and
public opinion)
2. An understanding of the formal political context: how politicians (whether
EU, national, devolved or local) may interact with the organisation in order to
achieve outcomes of public interest and/or commercial purpose.
3. An understanding of how those in corporate, public or civic leadership roles
(e.g. non-executive directors on private and public boards, those on partnership
boards) inuence the strategic direction of the organisation or network
through interactions with partners, alliances and others.
4. An understanding of how interests, both of individuals and power blocs, within
the organisation may operate to achieve outcomes through mechanisms of
power rather than solely through apparently rational plans and purposes.
This Warwick framework guided the literature review, focusing upon how managers
can manage with political awareness in order to face the inter-related challenges,
constraints and opportunities produced by both external and internal inter-dependence.
5. Four-level model for the analysis of
political awareness
10
Various factors have contributed to greater inter-organisational dependencies over the
last two decades. As organisations become more dependent upon relationships with
external partners and with different layers of government, the need for managers
and leaders to build networks, create coalitions and leverage social capital increases.
Throughout all sectors business is increasingly conducted through partnerships,
alliances, coalitions and joint ventures. As such, managers and leaders need to possess
skills of inuence in spheres which they cannot directly control. This brings modern
organisations into the domain of the political.
The skills needed to map the political terrain, scan the horizon for future opportunities
and constraints, be sensitive to changes in context, and to identify allies and detractors
across a range of actual and potential stakeholders, require managers and leaders
to possess, develop or buy in a range of political skills. The organisations reputation,
stakeholder interests, experts, the media and government positioning may all be
relevant to the strategy. Others have argued that statecraft is a critical component of
business leadership, dened as the use of persuasion and informal authority to mobilise
coalitions to accomplish goals (Bower and Weinberg 1988:39).
This may be particularly relevant where the aim is to affect the regulatory environment.
Such politics has two distinct facets. At the individual level, both specialists (e.g. public
affairs ofcers) and managers may need political skills, and at the organisational and
inter-organisational level, a tailored and contextualised political strategy will be required.
Managers and leaders in all sectors may need to engage with politicians at all levels and
understand how they interact with the organisation. This is of course particularly true of
the public sector: the Chartered Management Institutes 2003 report argued that public
sector managers need 'to develop the ability to build and manage effective relationships
both with politicians and across a diverse range of organisations' (Charlesworth et al
2003:5). Some of the lessons learned in the public sector can usefully be applied in the
private sector as well, and it has been argued that public sector managers and leaders
need greater political skill because of the 'highly visible nature of such environments,
and the decisions and actions that occur within them' (Ahearn et al 2004: 315).
Conversely, regulation has such an impact on the private and voluntary sectors that
lessons about managing in the context of a formal political system may be relevant
across all sectors. One piece of work has raised the idea of regulatory advantage, or
a favourable state of public policies for a given rm (Dahan 2005), which political
strategies may seek to achieve.
Indeed, sophisticated multi-level lobbying and corporate political strategy, seeking
to inuence public policy decision-making, has become commonplace in the private
sector both across the EU and in the USA (Coen 1999:29; Bonardi and Keim 2005:555).
There is currently very little in the literature which examines the interactions between
managers and policy-makers or how managers understand the role of public institutions
in public life. However, there is a literature about the interactions between politicians
and senior public servants e.g. senior civil servants, chief executives in local government
I The external
policy context

II Inuencing
policy-makers
11
(SOLACE, 2005) which is relevant and which may be valuable for the research on
managing with political awareness in other contexts.
Some work is emerging about managing in networks and in strategic partnerships,
in both the public and private sectors. Some of this literature describes the needs of
organisations to develop partnerships and some steps in developing consensus, but
either lacks a harder edge about surfacing and managing difference as well as shared
goals, or else does not set this in a context of the political skills to achieve outcomes.
Two elements of the literature are an exception. Huxham and Vangen (2005) examine
the micro-behaviours as well as the broad strategies used by leaders in creating and
building alliances and partnerships, and outline broad strategies of collaboration and
also of directly addressing difference. Benington (2001) examines the skills required
to build coalitions which describe a set of political skills including building a sense of
direction, negotiation of a common direction while recognising differences of interest,
and building and sustaining coalitions of support.
Other aspects of the literature are important. Hartley and Allison (2000) note that the
complexity of partnerships is taken for granted as part of the landscape for formal
political leaders but is new territory for many managers. Douglas and Ammeter (2004)
argue that the coalition or network may itself be analysed in terms of the possession of
political skill, casting this at a level of analysis beyond the individual or group.
Organisations with politically charged environments in terms of the pursuit of
personal success at any cost have been noted to experience negative consequences
including decreased job satisfaction, increased anxiety and stress, increased turnover
and reduced performance (Curtis 2003:293). The literature suggests that more
effective strategic decision makers take a negative view of such politicking 'that creates
unproductive conict and wastes time' (Eisenhardt 1999:71). Actions such as taking
credit for the ideas of others (Allen et al 1979:79) have given politics in the workplace a
bad press and yet just as there are good and bad politicians there equally may be good
and bad politics in organisational life (Butcher and Clarke 1999:10).
It is perhaps the idea that there is something inherently unfair and self-interested about
progression or reward via political means that has prevented political skill inside the
organisation receiving more adequate attention. If organisational politics are only about
personal objectives they are unlikely to create positive working environments. Yet, whilst
the aggressive manoeuvring for scarce resources may be frowned upon, there may be
circumstances where this also brings benets to an organisation as a whole or a specic
group or team.
The distinction between self-interested politicking which may not be aligned with
the goals of an organisation and the use of constructive political skills by managers is
therefore highly signicant. Some commentators have noted the inherently political
nature of organisations so that managers need to act to harness politics constructively
and with awareness (Baddeley and James, 1987).

III Strategic
partnerships
IV Interests within
the organisation
12
There is some evidence highlighting the negative impacts of self-interested politicking.
Organisational politics have been identied as a major source of work discontent
(Christiansen 1997:710, 715). But conversely there are also studies looking at how
individual managers political skills can be viewed as a type of interpersonal control that
allows people to differentially interpret workplace stressors enabling them to cope with
stress more effectively (Perrewe et al 2000: 115). However, such research has largely
focused on the effects of individuals behaviours and so makes only limited exploration
of the potential links between politics and overall positive organisational performance.
One political skills inventory for managers is available, focusing on four core dimensions
of political skill; social astuteness, interpersonal inuence, networking ability and
apparent sincerity (Ferris et al 2005c:128). However, it conceptualises political skill as an
interpersonal style and only as being able to inuence others within the workplace. This
is just one of the arenas of political awareness under consideration in this research.
Politics is linked to individual perception and as such misunderstanding the political
acts of others may be a common organisational occurrence (Bancroft-Turner and
Morley 2002). In existing research, the political acts of others have often been rated
negatively and attributed to self-interest which may reect the difculty in determining
others intentions.
One piece of work offers longitudinal case studies of two IT projects in the Israeli public
sector. It describes political skills as 'the secret weapon of winning leaders'. Contrasting
two different leadership styles one highly technical, one more politically aware the
study concludes that the politically astute leader overcame signicant organisational
hurdles to successfully complete the project. By comparison, the scientist, who had a
lack of experience in organisational politics succumbed to such hurdles, subsequently
recognising the political roots of his management failure. Essentially, he failed to build
support for the project within the organisation, in contrast to the successful leader who
had developed a suitable project strategy in the light of internal opposition (Peled 2000).
There have been few studies to explore the impact of political skills on organisational
performance. One study which assessed the impact of political skills and leadership
on team performance, and a number of studies have offered evidence of a positive
relationship (Ahearn et al 2004; Peled). However, they have not examined the link to
organisational success overall.
Bundles of political tactics may be needed depending upon both the context within
which a manager is operating and the objectives of the organisation (Coen 1999) and
different skills may be required at the individual, organisational and inter-organisational
level in order to both face challenges and capitalise upon opportunities. These may
have a potential impact upon areas such as innovation, organisational learning and
organisational structure.
6. Measuring the effectiveness of
political skills
6.1 Measurements
and modelling
political skill
inventories
6.2 Perceptions
of political
effectiveness
6.3 Political skill
and organisational
performance
13
Bacharach (2005) argues that the ability to build coalitions in order to improve the
chances of implementing a proposal requires a range of skills, such as inuencing
tactics, as well as an understanding of the internal power structures, organisational
design and the different types of resource that can be leveraged.
The existing literature would therefore suggest that organisational political strategies are
driven by three key pressures;
political action at the individual, organisational and inter-organisational level
procedural rules and external constraints
political resource or capital (know who and know how)
From a political perspective, strategy, operational activity and change are the result of
negotiation of managerial interests over time (Butcher and Clarke 2002: 483) and in
this denition all areas of decision making, negotiation and inter-dependence may be
inherently political domains whereby leaders must work continuously to preserve the
coalition of those ongoing constituencies whose activities maintain and enhance their
vision of the corporate purpose (Bower and Weinberg 1988:45).

The literature demonstrates that managing with political awareness is a complex area
which dees easy answers as political skills can be used for a wide range of purposes,
take different forms, work within and across organisations and be deployed for
reasons of self-interest, the interest of the organisation or for the common good of
society, and these ends need not be regarded as mutually exclusive.
While there are both functional and dysfunctional elements of political awareness
and behaviour, these can be hard to disentangle. Our focus in this research includes
an analysis of both the function and dysfunctional aspects of political awareness but
in terms of management development our interest is in a normative approach where
there is a concern to enhance political awareness and sensitivity skills in ways which
contribute positively to the economic and social fabric of society.
While most research has focused on individual skills, this research argues that context
is important, as well as the resources (material, reputational, organisational etc) which
are available to the manager, group or organisation.
The ability to read the context and understand the interests and values of a range of
stakeholders may be an important element of political awareness.
Most research has focused on inuence within the organisation, but some research
has identied the value of viewing politics within its wider context. The external
environment of the organisation is increasingly important, involving both formal
institutions and inter-organisational relationships more generally.
7. Emerging issues
6.4 Skills, contexts,
strategies and resources
14
As a result, this research will seek to develop a conceptualisation of managing with
political awareness. This includes a recognition that managers need to:
Work with both formal institutions and representatives of the state and across
and with a diverse range of organisations
Work with stakeholders who advocate or lobby on behalf of the consumer,
pressure and political groups
Understand and work in complex and dynamic environments of legislation,
regulation and policy advice
Understand, respond to and address a range of uncertainties about world
governance, national stability or local priorities created by a globalising world
which may have substantial or unexpected repercussions.
Further to this literature review, the research programme will set out to:
Achieve greater clarity in dening political skills including:
- what does this skillset include?
- in what contexts can these skills be applied?
- what are the outcomes of effective performance?
- what are the behaviours that underpin effective performance?
Make the business case for political skills: demonstrating how political skills
can be used to achieve both personal and organisational goals
Assess the current levels of political skills demonstrated by senior managers
across all sectors
Explore the perceptions of the most effective development routes
Create practically-focused outcomes that will help generate awareness and
demand among both managers and employers for those skills that will enable
them to better manage the political dimensions of their business.
8. Recommendations
15
A list of the references used in this literature review.
Ahearn, K. K. Ferris, G. R., Hochwater, W. A., Douglas, C. & Ammeter, A. P. (2004).
Leader Political Skill and Team Performance, Journal of Management, 30(3), 309-27.
Allen, R. W., Madison, D. L., Porter, L. W., Renwick, P. A., & Mayes, B. T. (1979).
Organizational Politics. Tactics and Characteristics of its Actors, California Management
Review, 22(1), 77- 83.
Ammeter, A.P., Douglas, C., Gardner, W. L., Hochwater, W. A., & Ferris, G. R. (2002).
Toward a political theory of leadership, The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 751-796.
Bacharach, S. B. (2005). Politically Proactive, Fast Company, 94, 93.
Bacharach, S. & Lawler E. (1980) Power and politics in organisations: The social
psychology of conict, coalitions and bargaining. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Baddeley, S. & James, K. (1987). Owl, Fox, Donkey or Sheep: Political Skills for
Managers, Management Education and Development, 18(1), 3-19.
Bancroft-Turner, D. & Morley, D. (2002). Psst! dont tell anyone but organisational
politics is about to go positive, Training Journal, August, 12-15.
Benington J (2001) Partnerships as networked governance? Legitimation, innovation
and problem-solving. In Geddes M and Benington J (eds) Local partnership and social
exclusion in the European Union. London: Routledge
Blackler, F., & McDonald, S. (2000). Power, Mastery and Organizational Learning,
Journal of Management Studies, 37(6), 833-851.
Bonaridi, J.-P., & Keim, G. D. (2005). Corporate Political strategies for Widely Salient
Issues. Academy of Management Review, 30 (3), 555-576.
Bower, J. L. & Weinberg, M. W. (1988). Statecraft, Strategy and Corporate Leadership,
California Management Review, 30(2), 39-56.
Buchanan, D. & Badham, R. (1999). Power, politics and organisational change: Winning
the turf game. London: Sage.
Butcher, D. & Clarke, M. (1999). Organisational Politics: the missing discipline of
management? Industrial and Commercial Training, 31(1), 9-12.
Butcher, D. & Clarke, M. (2003), Redening Managerial Work: smart politics,
Management Decision, 41(5), 477-487.
Charlesworth, K., Cook, P. & Crozier, G. (2003) Leading change in the Public Sector:
Making the difference. London: CMI. Advisory Panel chaired by Sir Michael Bichard.
Christiansen, N. Villanova, P. & Mikulay, S. (1997). Political Inuence Compatibility:
tting the person to the climate, Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 18, 709-730.
Appendix A: References
16
Coen, D. (1999). The impact of US lobbying practice on the European business-
government relationship, California Management Review, 41(4), 27-44.
Coopey, J. & Burgoyne, J. (2000). Politics and Organizational Learning, Journal of
Management Studies, 37(6), 869-885.
Crick, B. (1993). In Defence of Politics (4th Edition). Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Crick, B. (2004). Politics as a form of rule: Politics, citizenship and democracy.
In Leftwich A (ed) What is politics? Cambridge: Polity Press.
Curtis, S. (2003). Lies, Damned Lies and Organisational Politics, Industrial and
Commercial Training, 35(6/7), 293- 297.
Dahan, N. (2005). A contribution to the conceptualization of political resources utilized
in corporate political action, Journal of Public Affairs, 5, 43-54.
Douglas, C. & Ammeter, A. P. (2004). An Examination of Leader political Skill and its
Effect on Ratings of Leader Effectiveness, The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 537-550.
Drory, A. & Romm, T. (1990). The denition of organizational politics: A Review, Human
Relations, 43(11), 1133-1154.
Eiring, H. L. (1999). Dynamic Ofce Politics: Powering Up for Program Success! The
Information Management Journal, 33(1), 17-25.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1999). Strategy as Decision Making, Sloan Management Review,
40(3), 65-72.
Ferris, G. R., Perrewe, P. L. Anthony, W. P. & Gilmore, D. C. (2000). Political skill at work,
Organizational Dynamics, 28(4), 25-37.
Ferris, G., Davidson, S. & Perrewe, P. (2005a). Developing Political Skill at Work, Training,
42(11), 40-45.
Ferris, G., Davidson, S. & Perrewe, P. (2005b). Political skill at work Mountain View, CA:
Davies-Black.
Ferris, G. R., Treadway, D. C., Kolodinsky, R. W., Hochwater, W. A., Kacmar, C. J.,
Douglas, C. & Frink, D. D. (2005c). Development and Validation of the Political Skill
Inventory, Journal of Management, 31(1), 126-152.
Graham, J. H. (1996). Machiavellian project managers: do they perform better?
International Journal of Project Management, 14(2), 67-74.
Hartley, J. (2002). Leading communities: capabilities and cultures, Leadership and
Organization Development Journal, 23(8), 419- 429.
Hartley, J. & Allison, M. (2000). The Role of Leadership in Modernisation and
Improvement of Public Services, Public Money and Management, April, 35-40.

17
Hartley, J., Fletcher, C., Morrell, K. and Benington, J. (2005). Look at it from my angle:
The development and use of a 360 degree feedback instrument for political leaders.
Working paper University of Warwick.
Hillman, A. J. & Hitt, M. A. (1999). Corporate Political Strategy Formulation: a model
of approach, participation and strategy decisions, Academy of Management Review,
24(4), 825-842.
Holbeche, L. (2004). The Power of Constructive Politics. Roffey Park Institute
Huxham C and Vangen S (2005) Managing to collaborate: The theory and practice of
collaborative advantage London: Routledge
Kacmar, K. M. & Carlson, D. S. (1997). Further Validation of the Perception of Politics
Scale (POPS): A Multiple Sample Investigation, Journal of Management, 23(5), 627-658.
Kolbausk McGee, M. (2003). Political skills required, Information Week, 936, 62-64.
Kumar, K. & Thibodeaux, M. S. (1990). Organizational Politics and Planned
Organisational Change, Group and Organization Studies, 15(4), 357- 365.
Lawrence, T. B., Mauws, M. K., Dyck, B. & Kleysen, R. F. (2005) The Politics of
organizational Learning. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 180-191.
Leach, S., Hartley, J., Lowndes, V., Wilson, D. and Downe, J. (2005). Local Political
Leadership in England and Wales. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Leftwich, A. (2004). What is politics? Cambridge: Polity Press.
McMaster, M. (2002). When politics and management collide, Sales and Marketing
Management, 154(6), 22.
Mintzberg, H. (1985). The organization as political arena, Journal of Management
Studies, 22(2), 133-154.
Morrell, K. & Hartley, J. (2006). A Model of Political Leadership, Human Relations, 59(4),
483-504.
ODPM. (2005). Vibrant Local Leadership. London: ODPM.
Parker, C. P., Dipboye, R. L. and Jackson, S. L. (1995). Perceptions of Organizational
Politics: An Investigation of Antecedents and Consequences, Journal of Management,
21(5), 891-912.
Peled, A. (2000). Politicking for Success: The Missing Skill, Leadership and Organization
Development Journal, 21(1/2), 20-29.
Solace. (2005). Managing in a political environment. London: Society of Local Authority
Chief Executives and Senior Managers.
Treadway, D. C., Hochwater, W. A., Kacmar, C. J., & Ferris, G. R. (2005). Political will,
political skill and political behaviour, Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 26, 229-245.

18

Useem, M. (1985). The rise of the political manager, Sloan Management Review,
27(1), 15-26.
Weale, A. (2004). Politics as collective choice, in Leftwich, A. (ed). What is politics?
Cambridge Polity Press.
Yofe, D. B. & Bergenstein, S. (1985). Creating Political Advantage: The Rise of the
Corporate Political Entrepreneur, California Management Review, 1, 124- 139.
Zivnuska, S. Kacmar, K. M., Witt, L. A., Carlson, D. S. and Bratton, V. K. (2004).
Interactive effects of impression management and organizational politics on job
performance, Journal Organizational Behaviour, 25, 627-640.
19
This report has been prepared by Professor Jean Hartley, Professor of Organisational
Analysis at Warwick Business School, and Layla Branicki, research assistant at Warwick
Business School, with assistance from Petra Wilton and Patrick Woodman at the
Chartered Management Institute.
This report is part of a research programme that is being developed by the Managing
with Political Awareness Steering Group which is managed by the Chartered
Management Institute and chaired by Sir David Varney and supported by Warwick
Business School as the lead research partner.
Thanks for all contributions from the members of the Steering Board and research team:
Steering Board
Sir David Varney, Chair
Sir Michael Bichard, Rector, University of Arts, London
Richard Bowker, Chairman, National Express Group Plc
Professor Carol Black, Director, Workforce Health, NHS
Jo Causon, Director of Marketing and Public Affairs, Chartered Management Institute
Keith Clarke, Chief Executive, WS Atkins
Gareth Davis, Chief Executive, Imperial Tobacco Group
Lucy de Groot, Executive Director, Improvement and Development Agency
Christopher Garnett, former Chief Executive, GNER
Nigel Knowles, Managing Partner, DLA Piper
Patrick Macdonald, Chief Executive, John Menzies plc
Martin Narey, Chief Executive, Barnados
Sir Jon Shortridge, Permanent Secretary, National Assembly for Wales
Siobhan Soraghan, Director, Active Insight Consulting, Trustee, CMI Board
Tricia Williamson, Director, CMI Enterprises
Research team
Professor Jean Hartley, Warwick Business School, University of Warwick
Professor Clive Fletcher, Visiting Professor of Occupational Psychology at Goldsmiths
College, Managing Director, Personnel Assessment Limited
Layla Branicki, Doctoral Researcher, Warwick Business School
Petra Wilton, Head of Public Affairs, Chartered Management Institute
Patrick Woodman, Public Affairs Ofcer, Chartered Management Institute
Appendix B: Acknowledgements
Chartered Management Institute
2 Savoy Court, Strand,
London, WC2R 0EZ
Registered charity number 1091035
Incorporated by Royal Charter
ISBN 0-85946-465-2
Chartered Management Institute, October 2006
Reach 14005: 10/06
Chartered Management Institute
The leading organisation for
professional management
As the champion of management, the Chartered
Management Institute shapes and supports the managers
of tomorrow. By sharing the latest insights and setting
standards in management development, we help to deliver
results in a dynamic world.
Encouraging management development,
improving business performance
The Institute offers a wide range of development
programmes, qualications, information resources,
networking events and career guidance services to help
managers and organisations meet new challenges in
a fast-changing environment.
Shaping future management practice
With in-depth research and regular policy surveys of
its 71,000 individual members and 480 corporate
members, the Chartered Management Institute uses
its deep understanding of the key issues to improve
management performance.
For more information please contact:
The Public Affairs Department
Chartered Management Institute
2 Savoy Court, Strand,
London WC2R 0EZ
Tel: 020 7421 2721
Fax: 020 7497 0463
Email: research@managers.org.uk
website: www.managers.org.uk
Warwick Business School
WBS is now a leading and established international
business school, one of the largest in Europe, providing
undergraduate, specialist Masters, MBA, MPA and doctoral
research degrees, a growing executive short course
programme and specialist research centres covering the
major aspects of working life. It is the largest department
of the highly-rated University of Warwick.
WBS is research led, gaining the highest 5* accolade in
the most recent UK Governments Research Assessment
Exercise, one of only three business schools to achieve this.
It is the rst business school in the UK to gain accreditation
from the leading management education association in the
USA, Europe and the UK.
WBS has active links with over 800 organisations, many
international, across the spectrum of business activity, for
teaching, research and sponsorship purposes. Today WBS
has 7,539 students, from 111 countries across the worlds
continents. Its active Alumni Association has over 20,000
members around the globe.
For more information, please contact:
Tel: 024 7652 4306
Fax: 024 7652 3719
Email: enquiries@wbs.ac.uk
Web: www.wbs.ac.uk