The new look of office politics.

Have you noticed the changes in political behavior in health care organizations in the last five years? We are amazed at the ways in which the rules of engagement have changed, especially among the medical staff.

One significant change is that the grapevine is not as effective as it once was. Non-participation includes ignoring the grapevine, both as listener and feeder. As one neo-isolationist physician said, "I wouldn't know what was going on here unless my boss told me. I have no time for, nor interest in, internal networking." Was he a Generation X type? No, a 40-something internist!

Even those willing to engage in office gossip find their sources have dried up. Employee socializing, once an important source of grapevine information, has withered. The traditional holiday party and summer outing are disappearing as employees beg off. This means managers who want people to know things must make a point of telling them directly, which is time-consuming, blunt, and lacks the subtlety of whispered gossip. Employees are quick to point out that if they're not informed about what's going on, it's management's problem, not theirs.

Honesty is no longer an organizational imperative. No, embezzlement is not de rigeur, but neither is giving one's honest opinion. In the old days, when asked for an opinion, you were obliged to have one. That's not true now. You can simply respond with "No opinion." Why? Because the employer/employee bond has weakened and so has the employee's obligation to even pretend that he or she's involved in the life of the organization.

Why have organizational politics have changed?

Power is no longer the ultimate prize. Physicians and other professionals compete for schedules, work assignments, money, and skills training, but rarely do they compete for power--especially power over others. For wanna-be medical directors with no prospects, recruiters once perfected a sell emphasizing the beauty of being an individual contributor. Now, they discover that a great many former chairs and directors are delighted at the thought of becoming individual contributors. These people, some highly successful in those roles, want to scale down. They shed crocodile tears when told they aren't going to manage people. They're ecstatic to hear they will be paid by the hour with overtime.

Instead of power, assignments that build transferable skills--skills highly valued by the market--are prizes. The worker who can use software that peers have never heard of considers him or herself powerful. To be instantly employable has replaced job security as ... job security! One physician said, "My fantasy is that I can walk out of here before noon on Monday and have half-dozen interviews set up by noon on Tuesday. By Friday, I'll have several offers. I'll take the weekend off to think, and start a new job the following Monday."

This is a common, generation-spanning fantasy now. To be hot in the market because you have all the right skills and experience is a prize worth seeking. It causes people to volunteer for every Around-the-World-in-80-Days project. Success or failure are not important; learning experiences that would impress a future employer are. Work exists in the eternal present.

What about titles and rank? With the ongoing overhaul of organization charts--Vice President today, bumped down to Director tomorrow, eliminated the next day--titles don't mean a thing unless it's CEO or CFO. They are the only remaining titles with a universally-recognized meaning. Even COO has fallen into ambiguity. A chief operating officer in one organization may be called general manager somewhere else and earn less than a physician who reports to him or her. People question the point of lion-versus-gladiator games if the ground keeps shifting during the contest. Better to refocus on something tangible, such as skills and money.

Money has acquired a different status

It's not how much money you make, but how hard--and what hours--you have to work to earn it, and whether you can decide how much money you want to earn. Pity the shlub who works 80 hours a week for six figures. His or her lifestyle is at risk and to what end? Even those with heavy family expenses are seeing money as relative, rather than absolute. Negotiating a specific number of hours for a specific number of dollars has become common on both coasts. It's just coming to the Midwest and causing such angst! Many managers are still not prepared to deal with people who see freedom as more important than money.

People define themselves by industry or tier, not by organization

What's happening at Company A may not captivate Company A employees one whit, but what's happening at the competitor, Managed Care, Inc., is fascinating. The latter's politics are not less messy or intrinsically more interesting, but the new focus says, "I've got to keep up with my preferred competitors." (Read: potential employers.) All smart workers think globally.

Organizations are not trusted

All favors are personal. If your boss works hard to get you a particular assignment, it's between you and the boss. The boss is acting personally, not institutionally. Nothing done in the name of the organization earns credit for the organization, only for the individual who did the good deed. Hospitals buying physician practices report this. The organization no longer seems greater than its parts. The corollary is that nothing said about the organization by its officers is considered true until proven. Annual reports might as well be the work of author Stephen King. The same skepticism that causes consumers to scrutinize every can and package label in search of undesirable ingredients, motivates workers to doubt all official pronouncements.

You may not embrace any of these concepts, but be aware that others have and will. It's not easy to manage, even in an organizational culture in which most values are shared. It's less so in one which has fragmented values. Ironically, in making downsizing decisions, no CEO seems to consider the role that metaphor and euphemism play in gluing the organization together. Once people begin to think and react literally, the glue thins. Look for a wave of senior management seminars and retreats on recreating organizational culture.

Don't be surprised if political participation becomes a virtue in a new context. Political activity--and all the gossip and maneuvering that goes with it--is evidence that employees care about what the hospital or HMO and their co-workers are doing. It's become clear to management that those paragons who eschew all political activity in the office do so, not from virtue or conviction, but because they don't care. They're either job hunting or working as if they were day laborers.

Involvement is becoming increasingly important to organizations who find that people with the day-laborer mentality are extremely difficult to manage and motivate. Professionalism is not compromised, nor is quality of care. Some of the finest medical people think like hod carriers and proudly so. They have, after who knows how much angst, detached emotionally. They've become autonomous. Imagine the implications for teamwork in every workplace. To be called a "team player" is now ironic.

It's also ironic that after years of telling employees that caring was risky, that loyalty was a one-way street, all give and no take, managers are beginning to note who participates emotionally and who doesn't. It's a baby step until the punishments once meted out to politicians--criticism and ostracism--are visited on non-politicians. Punishment will be very light though, since many employers would rather switch than fight. l

Marilyn Moats Kennedy is Managing Partner, Career Strategies, Inc., Wilmette, Illinois, and a long-time member of the ACPE faculty. She can be reached at 1150 Wilmette Avenue, Wilmette, Illinois 60091, 847/251-1661, or by fax at 847/251-5191.