Organizational Communication

Power structures and ideologies embedded in today’s organizational structure can significantly different forms of oppression that are often taken for granted. Even though humanists’ strategies aim to foster fair organizational practices, they majorly focus on eliminating blatant forms of oppression but fail to question the taken-for-granted ideologies in organizations (Tesi et al., 2020). Most organizations have fixed ideologies of how work should be done which in most cases privileges the dominant groups. For instance, performances are often assessed indirectly by measuring the amount of work done and willingness to work for longer hours and putting work over family. Nonetheless, employees, many employees have been penalized for maintaining the flexibility of work schedules to meet their obligations. Research shows that minority employees have been significantly oppressed by the prevailing power structures in organizations (Chapter One). Caught between pressures and contradictory demands, minority employees run the risk of dismissal, deployment, or salary cuts that may significantly affect them. Nonetheless, power has led to frequently hostile tone and inaccessible and abstract language by managers towards employees.

The way people communicate in organizations reveals essential sources of power and dominant ideologies. Powerful people tend to use a lot of jargon while talking to their colleagues. This shows how dominant they are and their positions within their organizations. They also tend to behave rationally, and because they have power, they occasionally say something inappropriate (Chapter One). The directness of communication from daily life can make it to the different contexts at the table. A powerful individual speaks with a variable voice. He has a range, and individuals can hear it. He may also use his power to belittle others, but in most cases, he is socially astute and is comfortable in every situation. There are only a few ways that individuals display dominance, including a show of physical force, using totemic symbols that display power, position using an “office of power” that commands attention like an elected official or judge, and behavioral patterns that indicate superiority. Of course, one individual must submit to another or fight for dominance. The way people dress, their holiday parties, and office spaces reveal how powerful they are (Tesi et al., 2018). Powerful individuals tend to dress elegantly, have expensive parties, and well-decorated office spaces with expensive furniture.

In several ways, people can willingly adopt and enforce the legitimate power of dominant structures and ideologies. First, most people do not choose but to abide by organizational rules to protect their jobs (Tesi et al., 2020). If they fail to enforce or adopt these ideologies, they might lose their jokes.  If employees work together and listen to the same supervisors, they will likely share or merge and individual ideas as they follow specific dominant ideologies. Sometimes there are distinct differences between groups. Those ideologies can divide employees. One ideology or set of ideas can emerge as the strongest (dominate), or they can run in parallel and be coexistent (as equal but different).

I tend to resist such practices along with institutional ideologies embedded in them using different strategies. If I pay attention to dominating people at work, I tend to become tenser with their presence or absence. It becomes a mental game that I cannot win. It all has to do with the allusion of control, power, and domination. We all can choose what to do regardless of our choices in life. No one forces us to do anything unless we give in to their demands if we lack self-control and self-discipline. The best way to deal with these types is to remain silent, calm, and in control of our responses (Chapter One). We often do not give up nor give in to their demands. We are also not quick to challenge them either, as this is a sign of undermining their intelligence and authority. A weak-minded and vulnerable individual cannot deal with this type of abnormal behavior, especially from domineering narcissists who are very good at manipulating anyone using guilt as a weapon. Most are very good at shifting blame and putting us down because they suffer from a superiority complex.

A strong-willed intelligent person can easily defeat anyone who has a dominating personality. Always stay confident and be assertive without resorting to guilt and remorse. The alternative is to walk away from someone who just wants to control (Tesi et al., 2018). The imposition of a rule, a request, or a command is asserting dominance. It means the individual’s emotional behavior is easily amenable to my wishes because asserting my dominance to a stronger individual will not be a successful dominance. Dominance structures and ideologies in organizations are dependent on the characters of employees that leaders wished to dominate (Chapter One). A strong person will never allow herself to be dominated, especially if their intellect is lower in status than the person they are with. Even a natural domineering person can never dominate everybody. They could, in a way but maintaining their dominant status for a long time may not be fruitful because the change influences things. There is always an opposite to anything.

References

Chapter One: Communication and the Changing- Class Reading

Tesi, A., Pratto, F., Pierro, A., & Aiello, A. (2020). Group dominance in hierarchy-attenuating and hierarchy-enhancing organizations: The role of social dominance orientation, need for cognitive closure, and power tactics in a person-environment (mis) fit perspective. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 24(2), 102.

Tesi, A., Aiello, A., Felicia, P., & Antonio, P. (2018). How willing are subordinates to comply with their supervisor? A Social Dominance Theory study of power tactics in work organizations. In 41th ISPP 2018 MEETING: Beyond Borders and Boundaries: Perspective from Political Psychology. International Society.