I noticed some interesting, practical notes regarding ‘organisational political dynamics’, from the new book, The Age of HR. Since this was relatable from past experiences and valuable to reflect on, I thought of sharing. Have you been able to observe dominant coalitions in your organisations?

These notes are from Chapter 59 – To Be or Not to Be Part of the Dominant Coalition as the CHRO: Understanding the Political Dynamics of Your Organisation and How to Deal with Them, written by Dirk Buyens, Koen Dewettinck, and Silke Van Gansbeke

—
* It is helpful to recognise that politics and political behaviour are an inherent part of organisational life.
* In Darwinian terms, ‘survival of the fittest’ in this context often means those who are able to adapt best to the political environment are often the winners. 
* In executive committees, we once again observe striking differences in who truly has influence and who does not.

* The dominant coalition can be defined as the group of individuals who, relative to their peers, exert a disproportionate level of influence over organisational decisions. Every company contains employees who, over time, gravitate towards the centre of decision-making in the organisation.
* In practice, dominant coalitions are rarely secretive. Most employees are aware of who belongs to them, and very often it is functionally driven.

* For a CHRO, it is crucial to understand what we refer to as the paradox of the right strategy. The ‘right’ strategy is typically one chosen that delivers quick wins soon. Even if an alternative strategy might have produced superior long-term outcomes, this can never be proven. Challenging the dominant coalition on this basis is therefore futile and politically suicidal.

* The fundamental question CHROs must ask is: “How important is it for me to be part of the dominant coalition, and what price am I willing to pay?”
* Being part of the dominant coalition as a CHRO ensures that HR processes and policies are taken seriously when key decisions are made. The downside is that HR may be perceived as less neutral, undermining the role of the credible activist.
* Remaining outside the dominant coalition enhances perceived neutrality but risks HR initiatives being dismissed as mere exercises that aren’t taken seriously when it truly matters. 
* Ultimately, successfully sensing and navigating dominant coalitions requires strong political skills from the CHRO. 
* There must be a balance between the degree to which an organisation tolerates political behaviour and one’s own personal tolerance for it.
* Some CHROs are dismissed for being too naïve; others for being overly political. In all cases, dominant coalitions – and how CHROs engage with them – profoundly shape their careers. Purposeful self-management is therefore indispensable.
* Until CHROs navigate the political nature of organisations, they will continue to be limited in their impact. 
—

The grass is not as green as it looks when it comes to corporate C-level leadership. Are C-suite jobs becoming more complex and short lived? If you are an aspiring C-suite leader, what does this mean for you?

These are selected notes from recent Korn Ferry Insight articles:

* According to recent updates from Korn Ferry, around 222 CEOs (US) left their roles in January, the highest number for the month in at least 23 years.  This comes after a record 2,221 top bosses – at US public, private, or government organizations – left their posts in 2024, a figure which itself topped the prior record of 1,914 set a year earlier.

* Disruption is a major cause of CEOs leaving, and then the CEO actually leaving is probably impacting that disruption further. Directors, themselves under pressure from a surge in activist investors, are showing less patience with CEOs who aren’t delivering positive results. At one point in 2024, nearly 40% of CEOs who left were forced out.

* When a CEO quits, it’s almost always a shock to the system. “All types of dynamics surface calling the success of the company’s future into question”.
As a result, experts say that firms need to make a special effort to develop promising talent. That may mean identifying potential successors who are currently working two or even three layers below the CEO job. 

* Firms also seem to be reducing C-suite roles by collapsing and combining positions. Some tech companies have merged the CFO/COO roles, for instance, while others have folded CCO duties into those of the CMO – a role that has added responsibilities for sales, customer experience, and more – or have rebranded them under titles like CRO. This may be because combining roles could enable firms to respond faster to changes involving markets and competitors. The role-merging has happened thus far only on a small but noticeable scale.

* Developing C-suite leaders with cross-functional experience also helps firms build a pipeline of ready successors. Still, experts caution that consolidation in the C-suite runs risks. The executive who’s taking on the additional responsibilities might not perform well in their new role. Burnout is a risk.
—

These are some of my reflections:
1. Companies have to increase focus on consciously developing and retaining leaders. Only focused efforts lead to positive outcomes at a systemic level.
2. A CEO change mostly leads to further leadership, talent and structural organizational changes. This can lead to major disruptions for talent, especially when uncertainty is high. Key talent engagement and retention should be on top of a leader’s agenda in such environments.
3. When a senior leader takes on multiple functions, time and attention tends to become a major challenge. Consciously or sub consciously, some teams and topics will get lesser leadership attention, leading to frustration for those members. This could lead to further disengagement. In such scenarios, it becomes critical for C-level leaders to ensure a strong second level of leaders, who can lead with high autonomy.
4. There seems to be increased chatter about broader job cuts in organizations in 2025 as well (which normally accompanies organization, work structure changes across all levels). eg. even when teams get consolidated, there are leadership and direction changes, which end up impacting even the junior levels.
5. Based on the trend of consolidation of leadership responsibilities, cross-functional/generalist experience could be back into serious leadership development focus.

Sources:
* The Shrinking C-Suite?; March 18, 2025; Korn Ferry Insights
* The Great CEO Exodus… Continues; March 12, 2025; Korn Ferry Insights