Critical-Postmodern Framework of Organizational Power
Speaking up for accommodations isn't always easy. Social dynamics like group pressure, expectations, and structures of power are often not taken into account when organizations consider themselves accessible for employees with disabilities. The Critical-Postmodern Framework of Organizational Power can be applied to analyze these dynamics and open lines of communication between supervisors and junior employees who may have a disability.
Tool to Analyze Organizational Power
“Social dynamics like group pressure, expectations, and structures of power are often not taken into account when organizations consider themselves accessible for employees with disabilities.”
There are multiple levels of challenges in speaking up or using accommodations. In addition to any social dynamics involving both inter and intra personal aspects, organizational power also plays a role. The Critical-Postmodern Framework of Organizational Power (CFOP) provides a theoretical lens to analyze organizational power. This theory analyzes how power gets translated at a relational (person to person) level, structural (policies and systems) level, and cultural (underlying beliefs and assumptions) level. I apply this theory to unearth important organizational structures for employees with disabilities.
CFOP theory states that “power manifests itself in being able to define things” (Coleman et. al., p. 242, 2003). In CFOP, those creating meaning are the leaders of the organization. Those deciding what a reasonable accommodation is maintain power. This meaning gets transmitted relationally, structurally, and culturally. These three modes all relate - changing one impacts the rest. In order to make lasting change in a protracted conflict, each mode must be addressed. Therefore, to create lasting change, the way people relate to one another, the policies, and the culture within an organization must be addressed.
Avenues for Communicating Oppositional Views
According to CFOP, dismantling organizational power structures begins with providing formal and informal avenues for communication. One of the main findings of CFOP is the need for suppressed voices to have an avenue for speaking up. The CFOP Table is used as a diagnostic and analytical tool for measuring the quality/type of avenues for speaking up. The table distinguishes oppositional discourse avenues for the marginalized vs privileged, conscious vs automatic ways, and applies this to each mode (relational, structural, cultural).
CFOP states that out of the three modes, the cultural mode is one of the most unconscious and powerful. “Controlling another human being’s subjectivity is perhaps more abusive than direct coercion” (Coleman et. al., p. 242, 2003). Cultural modes are felt as undercurrents in the organization. How do the employees, middle managers, or executives experience the pressure to maintain the status quo?
Social Repercussions Impacting Motivation to Speak Up
“There are many subtle repercussions for speaking up that directly impact an employee with a disability’s need for community and belonging."
There are many subtle repercussions for speaking up that directly impact an employee with a disability’s need for community and belonging. For example, one who speaks up may be outcasted. Other employees may work collaboratively with each other and competitively with the one who spoke up. In this case, supervisors may favor the one who spoke up less and do things to make it difficult for the employee. When other employees group up with the supervisor they may be hypercritical to the employee, attempting to point out mistakes more so than to other employees who make just as many or more. This can significantly affect the mental health of the employee who spoke up. As Deutsch's Crude Law then illustrates, the employee will likely become more competitive as they feel that they’re in a competitive working environment. This sets up the ideological environment of the space, most of it is very difficult to describe directly. The tension can build until someone decidedly changes it, the employee leaves, or something more harmful happens (Coleman et. al., 2022).
In Conclusion,
In conclusion, to create an accessibility informed workplace, leadership must bring awareness to the way they are defining accessibility and accommodation. They must provide methods of speaking up with sensitivity to potential social repercussions. These avenues of communicating oppositional discourse would be built in at the relational, structural and cultural levels as well as applied to marginalized vs privilege and conscious vs automatic.
References
Coleman, P. T. & Voronov, M. (2003). Power in groups and organizations. In M. West, D. Tjosvold, & K. G. Smith (Eds.), The International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Working (pp. 229-254). John Wiley & Sons.
Deutsch, M. (2014). Cooperation and competition. In P. T. Coleman, M. Deutsch, & E. C. Marcus (Eds.), The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice (3rd Edition). Jossey-Bass.
Comentarios