Lincoln Electric is a striking example of how several strategies can be implemented successfully within the organizational environment of a single company. Incorporating several theories of organizational behavior, the company managed to blaze its trail to success. Though the company obviously uses a mixture of several theories, one can still see the distinct traces of at least three theories applied to solve the company’s problems. One of the most obvious picks is the Theory X constructed by Sigmund Freud.
Claiming that all people are intrinsically lazy and that only a strong motivation can take them off the ground and start working, Freud made it clear that such value as security is the key to motivating the staff. Using this principle wisely, Lincoln Electric offered its staff motivation: “The concept of guaranteed employment is another brilliant cost-reducing idea of James F. Lincoln” (Borton).
The choices that the Lincoln electrics makes in its leadership strategies, however, also make it clear that the company managerial makes efficient use of the Theory Y, which claims that people have a “natural desire to learn” (Hartman), thus, spurring the rates of competition in the company.
As Borton says, there is a “quiet competition within each work group” (Borton). Finally, the company obviously resorts to the Hygiene/Motivation Theory, helping its employees not only compete against each other, but also acquiring new knowledge and skills for the sake of personal and professional development.
The choice of power tactics and the basis of power is not an easy task. Often determined by the specifics of one’s own character and personality, power tactics and the basis of power predetermine one’s further success in the company (Griffin and Moorehead).
Case in point, the Fast Company situation shows how diverse these tactics and bases can be. Cindy Cassleman (Warshaw) obviously uses the pressure tactics (Admin), seeing how she managed to make the company revenues rise after she expressed her viewpoint on how the work should be done in the company.
Chris Newell, in his turn, seems to use both the ingratiation tactics, since he prefers to encourage the employees rather than conflict with them; however, Newell evidently prefers the policy of introducing innovations to the company to boost its revenues rather than contact with his employees and persuade them to offer more fruitful work:
Last year, Newell became convinced that the emerging field of “knowledge management” represented a big market opportunity for Lotus and its parent company, IBM. So he became a major catalyst behind a series of knowledge-management products that Lotus and IBM began to roll out by the end of the year. (Warshaw)
Speaking of the video that shows graphically the way office politics is implemented in organizational environment and the way it affects the company members, one must admit that most of companies offer the behavioral guidelines that offer enough room for cheating, bullying and using other dishonest tactics to disarm a colleague. The article mentioned previously, on the contrary, offers the means to improve the company’s state of affairs, even though the chosen means might not always be considered appropriate.
That said, one must admit that the article and the video offer two completely different perspectives on business success. However, after watching the video (BNETvideo), one will come to the conclusion that the specifics of office politics does not necessarily concern solely establishing the company goals and assigning company members with their tasks. As it turns out, being a company leader also means being able to solve conflicts fast and efficiently.
Therefore, the use of office politics comes as especially important element of the leader’s policy in case conflicts emerge. Therefore, using political behavior helps not only make the company run smoother, but also allows to improve the moral code of the company’s staff, introducing a new system of values into the enterprise.
Works Cited
Power Tactics. 2010. Web.
BNET video. Playing Positive Office Politics. 2007. Web.
Borton, B. A Case Study of Lincoln Electric. Web.
Hartman, K. Organizational Behavior and Theories of Motivation. Web.
Griffin, Ricky W. and Gregory M. Organizational Behavior. Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.
Warshaw, M. The Good Guy’s (and Gal’s) Guide to Office Politics. 1998. Web.