Introduction
Analyzing political behavior and interactions is challenging for several reasons. First, the object of analysis is the complex relationships of entire groups of influential persons. Second, their position makes it extremely difficult to obtain information about their lives and the reasons for their actions. Often, companies do not reveal internal problems, and the public can only learn about them through information leaks. In this context, Hewlett-Packard stands out as a company due to its widely publicized internal controversy. The purpose of this paper is to analyze political and organizational behavior, its causes, and ethics, using the example of political battles between directors of Hewlett-Packard or HP.
Main body
Considering any such political situation, it is necessary to understand its reasons, what exactly led to such behavior of the top management of the company. In general, these factors can be divided into individual, depending on a particular person, and organizational, reflecting the order of affairs in the entire structure. Personal reasons include a locus of control, high personal expectations, and a high degree of monitoring (Robbins, 1997). These qualities are characteristic of those people who more often enter into political relationships, one way or another actively manifesting their position.
Such individuals often can be found in high positions, for example, on the board of directors of an organization. Ambition helps move the company forward; however, with such individual qualities and a lack of teamwork skills, its work can become very chaotic. If a person does not put the company’s goals above his preferences, conflicts are possible. The manifestation of such qualities is seen in the example of one of the general directors, Carly Fiorina. During her tenure, there was a split in the board of directors, including the heirs of the founders of the company (Pearlstein, 2011). Their doubts that Fiorina’s management style was aligned with HP’s course and their attachment to the old method led to the CEO’s scandalous dismissal. To organize this dismissal, the council’s members even resorted to information leaks, thereby showing their willingness to use any method to achieve the goal.
On the other hand, this problem can be considered from an organizational point of view since we are talking about managing a large organization and the relationship of officials at the highest levels. In such a context, HP’s trouble is likely to be due to the board’s lack of trust in each other and, most importantly, in the CEOs being appointed. Over the decade, three directors have changed, one of the chairpersons left the board, and in parallel with all this, an espionage scandal unfolded (Veverka, 2011). The reason for such reshuffles and machinations is the apparent lack of trust among the senior councilors in newcomers and their independence. All these factors, combined, give rise to intense activity, which leads to scandalous decisions and various forms of political behavior.
Political behavior can be divided into several strategies. Each of which is used depending on the desired goals and personality traits. Speaking about the board of directors’ situation, one can note their aggressive rallying against the current CEO, whoever holds his post. Besides, the confrontation was conducted using various methods, including not entirely honest ones, such as information leaks. On the other hand, CEOs displayed safer, more relaxed behavior, negotiating with the existing board of directors, while often encountering mistrust and misunderstanding.
Thus, according to the types of political behavior, several essential elements can be distinguished in the situation at Hewlett-Packard. First, the presence of aggressive behavior or pressure tactics is obvious (Luthans et al., 2015). The board of directors, both as a whole and as individuals, for example, the company’s founders’ heirs, used their status as old members of the company to pressure the CEO. Information leaks can also be regarded as some threats that should have influenced the decision. Second, the board of directors certainly acted in concert, thus resorting to coalition tactics (Luthans et al., 2015). Using this approach enabled older board members to lobby for their ideas and cooperate against any changes. Since one of the reasons for Carly Fiorina’s resignation was inconsistent with her original course and company spirit, there was a coalition of old HP members in that situation.
On the part of CEOs, the most often noticeable attempts were made to negotiate and find a common language through the conclusion of any contracts. Thus, they displayed political behavior with elements of exchange tactics (Luthans et al., 2015). However, their proposals were not convincing enough or profitable for the board of directors, which led to a series of layoffs. Besides, one of the most scandalous investigations of information leakage was caused by the behavior of Carly Fiorina, which compromised her as a CEO, giving rise to more personal proceedings.
However, the scandal that has taken place is also a reason for analyzing board members’ behavior, primarily from the point of view of ethics. As stated above, companies usually keep information regarding internal proceedings hidden from prying eyes. Nevertheless, the board of directors used this tool to influence Carly Fiorina to force her to resign. Information leaks have seriously undermined her reputation and interfered with the workflow, causing the director to switch to their investigation. From one point of view, this political action was utterly unethical since it pursued personal interests rather than company policy (Robbins, 1997). Fiorina was attacked by several board members at once, primarily the heirs of the company’s founders. The reason for this behavior was her controversial policies, which, according to the heirs, did not coincide with the company’s original spirit.
However, on the other hand, Fiorina’s policy was indeed quite controversial. One of her actions was to merge HP and Compaq, partly made up of former HP employees, and this decision resulted in the layoff of tens of thousands of workers. Fiorina received a much higher salary than previous CEOs, which called into question her costs and competence. Therefore, it is possible that this action was aimed at the benefit of the company but contradicted the second point of the ethical framework, not taking into account the rights of a particular individual (Robbins, 1997). Leaks of important information exposed Fiorina under attack, actually forcing her to leave her post. The investigation that followed Fiorina’s resignation, led by Chairman Dunn, was far more ethical. First and foremost, it pursued the strict goal of identifying the source of the company’s leaks, as its presence threatened the further confidentiality of sensitive corporate information. Second, despite the use of pre-text, none of the board members were personally harmed. Finally, the activities carried out were honest and aimed at restoring justice.
Conclusion
Thus, the HP board of directors’ scandals were caused by a number of structural and individual factors. Board members used various tactics and political behaviors to coerce the CEO into an agreement and, if there was no agreement, to force them to leave. However, their actions were completely unethical as they violated the personal rights of the individuals in question. Nevertheless, the material and nature of the scandals made public by information leaks can serve as a fruitful basis for analyzing organizations’ political behavior and their members.
References
Luthans, F., Luthans, K. W., & Luthans, B. C. (2015). Organizational behavior: An evidence-based approach. Information Age Publishing.
Pearlstein, S. (2011). How HP, Silicon Valley’s darling, became a soap opera. The Washington Post.
Robbins, S. (1997). Chapter 11: Power and politics. Essentials of Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, New York, NY, pp. 869-901. Web.
Veverka, M. (2011). The soap opera at HP continues. Barron’s, 91(39), 25.