Bureaucratic leadership and power
Hello,
I was not aware of this kind of power until recently. Where I work, it's the people who know the protocols who get their power from the established (hospital) protocols.
"But we have a protocol that says this (the opposite of what you're telling me)"
So, it's very important to know the protocols better than the people who were in the organization for a long time if we want to have any kind of power.
Yes, good observation, absolutely.
Protocols and laws also score high in "trump card-value", in the sense that they tend to be argument-enders.
If you keep pushing, you look like you're going against the established rules, and could be reported.
So, yes, knowing the protocols -and how people usually go around them- is important to acquire power -or to avoid losing power, as in when people remind you that you're going against the protocols-.
And that's another reason why when first stepping into a new workplace, learning is higher priority than power, since power will later be a consequence of that learning.
Also notice how people who use that line are breaking rapport and are (unwittingly) stuck in an uncollaborative frame (and potentially it's a power move).
If they wanted to be more tactful, keep rapport, or preserve your power, then one would say:
Yeah, what you ask make sense. We do have this protocol that says this, though. Maybe we can do this and that to reach the same goal?
Thanks for your answer!
It is my next priority: get my hands on the protocols! 🙂
On a larger note when it comes to bureacracy:
In short: Putin explains that presidents in democracies have limited power, since the bureaucracy around them is almost like having a rail system that strongly limits their freedom.
Probably lots of bureaucracy is good for governments since a despot like Trump will not be able to take over.
But in companies, if a CEO wants to make big changes, then he might have to dismantle some bureaucracy first.