Understanding Organisational Culture, Power and Politics

Assignment Brief

You are required to write an online article of 2,000 words for a journal such as Management Today This article should be aimed at Managers and should cover the below learning outcomes

Your choice of organisation CHOOSE AN ORGANISATION OF YOUR CHOICE,

A CASE STUDY OF THIS ORGANISATION TO SHOW WHAT TYPE OF CULTURE, POWER AND POLITICS HAS BEEN USED

• Select an organisation and explain the organisational culture, politics and power (provide examples from your selected company).

• Secondly, show examples how culture politics and power can affect individual and team behaviour and performance. Finally critique the pros and cons of VROOM’S Theory, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs and Herzberg’s Two-factor Theory.

These are the questions: Please indicate the question before you start to write about it.

Sample Answer

Understanding Organisational Culture, Power and Politics

Introduction

In every organisation, the invisible forces of culture, power and politics shape how people behave and perform. These forces influence everything from employee motivation and teamwork to innovation and strategic success. Google is one of the most studied organisations in this context. Known for its open culture, innovative spirit and flat hierarchy, Google offers valuable insights into how power dynamics and organisational values affect human behaviour. This article explores Google’s culture, politics and power structures, their effects on individual and team performance, and finally critiques three major motivational theories: Vroom’s Expectancy Theory, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, and Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory.

Question 1: Explain the Organisational Culture, Politics and Power at Google (with examples)

Google’s culture is built on creativity, collaboration and employee empowerment. From its earliest days, Google has embraced what Schein (2017) calls a “learning culture”, one that values openness, innovation and experimentation. Its founders, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, believed in giving employees freedom to think, explore and take risks. This is reflected in the company’s famous “20 percent time” policy, which allowed employees to spend part of their working week on personal innovation projects. Products like Gmail and AdSense were born from this initiative, demonstrating how culture can directly fuel innovation.

Organisational Culture

Edgar Schein’s model of organisational culture identifies three layers: artefacts, espoused values, and underlying assumptions. At Google, artefacts include open-plan offices, relaxation areas, and informal meeting spaces, all designed to encourage communication and creativity. The company’s espoused values, such as “focus on the user and all else will follow,” and “you can be serious without a suit,” highlight its emphasis on accessibility and informality. The underlying assumption is that innovation thrives in an environment of trust, transparency and autonomy.

Organisational Politics

Politics in any organisation refers to how power and influence are used to achieve personal or group goals. While Google promotes openness, it is not free from internal politics. Its size and scale mean competition for leadership roles and high-profile projects can create informal power networks. For example, reports from former employees suggest that while Google’s structure is relatively flat, influence often depends on one’s connection to key decision-makers or product leads. Buchanan and Badham (2020) note that such “political games” are common even in collaborative organisations, as individuals seek visibility and career progression.

Power Dynamics

Google’s leadership style combines expert power and referent power as defined by French and Raven (1959). Expert power stems from technical mastery, while referent power is based on respect and admiration. Senior engineers or product managers often hold influence because of their expertise rather than formal authority. This reflects Google’s culture of meritocracy, where ideas are valued based on evidence and creativity rather than hierarchy. However, this decentralised power structure also has risks, it can make decision-making slow, as consensus is often required from multiple stakeholders.

Overall, Google’s culture and power dynamics demonstrate how innovation can be nurtured by autonomy and openness, but also how informal politics inevitably emerge even in transparent environments.

Continued...