| Course | PHL 736 Political Acumen and Ethics (PHL/736) |
|---|---|
| Week | 1 |
| Paper type | Doctoral political acumen analysis |
| Length | about 1,160 words, 4 double-spaced pages plus title page and references |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | University of Phoenix |
| Program | DBA |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for PHL 736 Week 1
Reading the Room and the Statehouse: Political Acumen for a Food Processing Executive
[Student Name]
University of Phoenix
PHL/736: Political Acumen and Ethics
Week 1 Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The learner, the company, its plants, the expansion and all people named by role are composites written for a model paper.
The learner, an invented corporate affairs vice president, works at Platte Valley Foods, a family-controlled poultry and prepared-foods company based in Grand Island, Nebraska, with three plants, 2,400 employees and exports to Mexico and Japan. The company plans a $140 million expansion: a new prepared-meals line at the Grand Island plant adding 380 jobs. The project needs three things the company does not control: a city vote on tax increment financing, a state permit for increased wastewater discharge and the cooperation of plant managers at the two other plants, who fear the expansion will absorb capital they were promised. The vice president was promoted from plant operations six months ago and has never managed a public decision of this size.
What Political Acumen Means
Mintzberg (1985) described the organization as a political arena in which individuals and groups pursue their own interests alongside or against formal goals, and argued that politics, while often divisive, can also serve useful functions, such as ensuring that strong members rise, that all sides of an issue are debated and that needed change is pushed through when legitimate systems resist it. Political acumen is the ability to see that arena clearly, understand who wants what and why and act within it effectively.
Sources of Power
Pfeffer (1992) argued that getting things done in organizations requires understanding and using power, and identified its sources: control over resources, formal authority, information, networks of allies, reputation and the ability to frame issues. Applied to the expansion:
The city council controls the incentive; the mayor shapes the agenda; the economic development director frames the project for the council.
The state environmental agency controls the permit and relies on technical evidence and public comment.
The other plant managers control the cooperation and information needed for capital planning and influence the family owners through long relationships.
The family board controls final capital decisions.
The vice president's power lies in information about the project, relationships from her operations career and the CEO's backing.
Political Skill: A Model and a Self-Assessment
Ferris et al. (2005) developed and validated the Political Skill Inventory, which measures four dimensions: social astuteness, skill at reading people and situations accurately; interpersonal influence, a convincing personal style that adapts to the audience; networking ability, building and using diverse relationships; and apparent sincerity, being seen as honest and genuine. Their studies found political skill distinct from related traits and associated with performance ratings.
The vice president rated herself on the inventory and asked two colleagues to rate her. All agreed on strong networking: she knows county commissioners, union stewards and feed suppliers from fifteen years in operations. Her apparent sincerity also scored well. Her weakest area was social astuteness inside headquarters: she had not anticipated that the other plant managers would see the expansion as a threat, and learned of their resistance secondhand from the CFO.
The vice president could read a county commission meeting, but she missed the politics in her own executive hallway.
Mapping the Stakeholders
The vice president mapped eleven stakeholders by interest, power and likely position. Supporters with high power: the CEO, the economic development director and the mayor. Uncertain with high power: two council members facing reelection who worry about traffic and housing pressure, and the state permit staff. Opposed or skeptical with moderate power: the other plant managers, a neighborhood association near the plant and a regional environmental group concerned about the Platte River. Supporters with low power: local contractors and a workforce training college.
Internal Politics First
The map showed that the internal problem could undermine the external effort: if plant managers complained to family board members, the board might delay the project while the city and state were deciding. The vice president met each plant manager privately, listened to their capital needs and proposed that the expansion business case include a firm schedule for their equipment upgrades. One accepted; the other remains wary.
Reading the Council
External politics require the same astuteness. The two uncertain council members are not opposed to the jobs; they worry about voters in neighborhoods near the plant, where truck traffic and rental housing costs have already risen. The vice president's mistake would be to treat them as votes to win with job numbers. A better reading is that they need a way to support the project that answers their constituents. She asked the economic development director what would help and learned that a commitment to route trucks away from a school zone and a contribution to a workforce housing fund already under discussion would address both concerns. Neither commitment buys a vote; both respond to legitimate public interests.
Timing and Sequence
Political acumen also means knowing when to act. The permit application must be filed before the council vote so council members can see that environmental review is under way, but public comment on the permit will open after the vote, which could make the environmental group feel ignored. The vice president plans to meet the group before filing, share the engineering summary and invite comments that the company can address in the application, so that opposition, if it comes, rests on the actual proposal rather than on surprise.
Building Social Astuteness
To address her weakest dimension, the vice president set three practices: a monthly one-on-one with each plant manager focused on their concerns rather than on the expansion; a habit of asking the CFO and the head of human resources, who see different parts of the company, what they are hearing; and a short written reflection after each major meeting on what each person wanted and what she might have missed. The second rater will reassess her in six months.
Ethical Limits
Political skill can be used to manipulate. The vice president wrote four rules: no information will be withheld from the council or regulators that they would reasonably want; no promises of jobs or investment will be made that the board has not approved; no campaign contributions or favors will be connected to votes; and opponents will be met and heard, not worked around. She shared the rules with the CEO, who endorsed them.
Why Political Skill Matters for Outcomes
The research behind the inventory linked political skill to performance ratings, and the expansion shows why. A technically sound project can still fail if a council member hears about it first from an angry neighbor, if a regulator feels rushed or if a plant manager quietly lobbies the board. Skill in reading and influencing people does not replace a sound business case; it gives the case a fair hearing.
Conclusion
Political acumen for this expansion means seeing both arenas, the city and state and the company itself, understanding where power lies and using networking, influence and sincerity honestly. A self-assessment revealed a gap in reading internal rivals, which the vice president is addressing. Week 2 turns to the regulatory and legal environment.
References
Ferris, G. R., Treadway, D. C., Kolodinsky, R. W., Hochwarter, W. A., Kacmar, C. J., Douglas, C., & Frink, D. D. (2005). Development and validation of the political skill inventory. Journal of Management, 31(1), 126-152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206304271386
Mintzberg, H. (1985). The organization as political arena. Journal of Management Studies, 22(2), 133-154. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1985.tb00069.x
Pfeffer, J. (1992). Managing with power: Politics and influence in organizations. Harvard Business School Press.
What the PHL 736 Week 1 instructions ask
The first PHL 736 assignment asks doctoral learners to explore political acumen in leadership. Prompts usually require defining organizational politics and political skill, assessing the learner's own strengths and gaps with a recognized model, mapping the stakeholders, interests and sources of power around a real decision and explaining how political skill can be used ethically. Some versions ask learners to reflect on a time politics helped or hurt a project they led, or to complete a political skill self-assessment. Ground the analysis in a specific organizational situation, cite research on power and political skill in APA and distinguish clearly between influence that serves shared goals and tactics that deceive or exploit others.
How this PHL 736 Week 1 example is built
Our sample paper follows a vice president at a Grand Island, Nebraska, food processor whose $140 million expansion depends on a city tax increment financing vote, a state wastewater permit and plant managers who fear losing capital to the new line. It draws on a classic view of the organization as a political arena where actors pursue competing goals, on a practical account of power sources such as resources, information and networks and on research validating a four-part model of political skill: social astuteness, interpersonal influence, networking ability and apparent sincerity. The vice president assesses herself as strong in networking and weak in reading internal rivals, maps eleven stakeholders and writes ethical rules for her influence before the public process begins.
PHL 736 Week 1 grading rubric: where the points go
Doctoral graders reward political acumen papers that are candid, specific and ethically grounded. Strong papers define organizational politics and political skill accurately, apply a validated model of political skill to the learner's own behavior and map stakeholders, interests and power around an actual decision. Credit goes to recognizing both internal and external politics, to an honest self-assessment and to clear standards that separate legitimate influence from manipulation. Graders also value connecting political skill to organizational outcomes and a concrete plan for strengthening the weakest dimension. Research on power and politics, cited in APA, supports a strong paper.
PHL 736 Week 1 help: mistakes to avoid
Political acumen papers often treat politics as either dirty or irrelevant. Organizations are political because people have different interests; the question is how to work within that honestly. Another frequent gap is a stakeholder list without interests or power; say what each party wants and what it controls. Learners also skip self-assessment or describe only strengths. Use a model and name a gap. Some papers confuse political skill with persuasion alone, ignoring the listening and reading of others that make persuasion work. Finally, set ethical limits in advance, before pressure arrives. Write down your ethical rules before the hard meetings start. A tutor can help you map the politics around a decision you face.
Related PHL 736 sample papers
Other PHL 736 week samples
- PHL 736 Week 2: Regulatory and Legal Environment
- PHL 736 Week 3: Influencing Public Policy
- PHL 736 Week 4: Corporate Social Responsibility
- PHL 736 Week 5: Community Involvement
- PHL 736 Week 6: Ethics Across Countries
- PHL 736 Week 7: Organizational Transformation
- PHL 736 Week 8: Ethics and Influence Strategy
More DBA sample papers
- ORG 726 Week 1: Technology and Structure
- ORG 727 Week 1: Organizational Diagnosis
- RES 709 Week 1: Research Paradigms
- RES 710 Week 1: Variables and Measurement
PHL 736 Week 1 questions, answered
What does PHL 736 Week 1 usually cover?
It usually covers political acumen for leaders: organizational politics, political skill, power, stakeholder mapping and ethical influence.
Where can I find a free PHL 736 Week 1 sample paper?
The PHL 736 Week 1 political acumen paper on a food processing expansion is above, free to read in full.
What is political skill?
The ability to understand others at work and use that knowledge to influence them in ways that advance personal and organizational goals, often described through social astuteness, interpersonal influence, networking ability and apparent sincerity.
Are organizational politics always unethical?
No; politics arise from differing interests, and influence can be ethical when it is honest, respects others' interests and serves legitimate goals.
What is stakeholder mapping?
Identifying the parties affected by or able to affect a decision, along with their interests, power and likely positions.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official University of Phoenix document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
Request this one custom, free · All PHL 736 week samples · All courses