GAMES ORGANIZATION PEOPLE PLAY

HEINZ WEIHRICH

Superiors and subordinates, teachers and students, adults and children, in short, everybody plays
psychological games. Yet, many games are destructive; they consume valuable time, they waste psycho-
logical energy, they concentrate on self-gain; they create bad feelings, they cause organizational warfare;
and, above all, they prevent individuals from being authentic.

Games also inhibit the managerial process. In the organizational environment games tend to

• inhibit the setting of challenging objectives,

• impede sound decision making,
• restrain effective problem solving,
• hinder the proper functioning of the organization,
• hamper staffing decisions and selections based on qualifications for the job,
• result in incorrect appraisal of managers and nonmanagers,
• prevent people from being motivated and contributing to organizational aims,
• result in ineffective leadership,
• obstruct honest communication, and
• make control systems ineffective.

When we recognize the destructive aspects of psychological games, then we must find ways to stop or
prevent them. I suggest two ways: One is to apply Management by Objectives (MBO), and the other is to
utilize the techniques of Transactional Analysis (TA) to identify and forestall the games.

TA, fortunately, is a tool that is easy to learn. It uses a language that is relatively free of professional
jargon; it facilitates communication; it increases personal effectiveness; and it helps to solve organizational
and personal problems. But TA alone cannot solve all managerial problems. It is not a panacea. Rather is
must be integrated with other managerial processes such as MBO. However, many who write about MBO
ignore the intricate interrelationships between people, even though it is the people in the organization that
make MBO work.

The purpose of this article is to bridge the gap between MBO and TA. Specifically, we will use concepts
from both, integrate them, and thus help individuals and organizations to be more effective by providing
the tools to analyze human transactions and psychological games. Even more important, it will be shown
how transactions can be improved and how games can be circumvented.

The Basic Steps in Management by Objectives

Management by Objectives, popularized by Drucker, is a philosophy as well as a process. The early
application of MBO was rather limited and focused primarily on appraisal of individuals. Later, the
motivational aspects were also recognized; specifically, MBO was seen as a way to integrate personal
needs with organizational demands. More recently, some companies have also integrated MBO with
strategic planning. But I like to go one step further and suggest that to be effective, MBO must be viewed
as a system of managing that includes many-not just a selected few - key managerial activities (Weihrich,
1973).

The emphasis in this paper, however, is on those aspects of the MBO process that probably are the most
likely occasions for playing psychological games. More specifically, I refer to the essential steps of MBO
that include (1) setting objectives, (2) developing action plans, (3) implementing the action plans, and (4)
providing control of organizational performance and appraisal of individual as well as organizational
efforts toward common aims.

Management International Review  Heinz Weihrich 1

 An Introduction to TA
In the 1950's, Eric Berne introduced TA. Originally it was primarily a method of psychotherapy; later,
however, the general value of TA was recognized. More recently, it has also been used to improve
communication in organizations. Nevertheless, very little has been written showing how TA can be linked
directly to the managerial process. Although TA considers both the emotional and intellectual aspects, the
emphasis is on the rational and analytical process of understanding human behavior. Moreover, the focus is
on observable behavior rather than on the inner psyche. While the manager usually cannot deal with the
latter, he can learn to observe, interpret, and modify his own behavior and that of others.

To say that TA deals with the interactions of people is probably insufficient for the practicing manager.
Therefore, the more appropriate and useful approach for analyzing psychological games is to discuss TA
theory within the framework of (1) structural analysis with the focus on the individual, (2) the analysis of
transactions between people, and (3) the way time is structured.

Structural Analysis
Every person, according to TA theory, has three ego states: the Parent, the Adult, and the Child. These
terms have nothing to do with the actual age of a person; rather they refer to ego states. They are therefore
capitalized as shown in this diagramm:

Parent P

Adult A

Child C

It should be noted that each ego state is a distinct source of behavior. Usually, one does not constantly
remain in a particular ego state, rather one switches occasionally during the course of communication. Let
us examine the three ego states more closely.

The Parent ego state, is derived from a set of brain recordings of unquestioned events from external
sources, especially during a person's early life. It also represents the attitudes and behavior associated with
these influences. The Parent ego state may be inferred from words and phrases such as: always, never, do
as I say, let me help you, and so on. However, one should not only listen to words and phrases, but also
note the way they are said and the tone of voice which, if coming from the Parent ego state, may sound
condescending or punitive, but may also express support and sympathy. Other clues indicating the
particular ego state as a source of behavior are gestures, postures, and facial expressions. The combination
of these clues - if they are complementary - gives an indication of a person's ego state as a source of his or
her behavior.

The Adult ego state, is the rational part of our personality. It is characterized by objectivity, problem
solving, and decisions based on reality. Words and phrases that are indicative of this ego state are: what,
why, when, how, where, who, what are other alternatives, what are the facts, and so on.

The third ego state—the Child–contains mental recordings of internal events and pertains to the emotional
part of our personality. Verbal clues may include: wow! can't, I want, help me, and so on. The Child ego
state may be exhibited through illogical and stubborn behavior, as well as through laughter, happiness, and
creativity.

Is one ego state better than the others? No! All three are important for a well-rounded personality. But
problems usually occur when an ego state unsuitable for a particular situation determines behavior. It is,

Management International Review  Heinz Weihrich 2

therefore, the Adult that must decide which ego state is effective for various transactions, the next topic in
our discussion.

Transactions
Ego states do not exist in isolation; rather, they interact with those of other persons. Basically, there are
three kinds of transactions: complementary, crossed, and ulterior. A complementary transaction occurs
when the transactional stimulus gets the predicted transactional response. For example, the superior may
say: "John, this is the last time I will warn you about being late" (Parent injunction). The subordinate may
respond: "Yes, sir, it will never happen again." This complementary (or parellel) transaction can be
diagrammed as follows:

Superior Subordinate

P P
1
A A
2
C C

A crossed transaction would have occurred if the subordinate had answered: "You mind your own
business. Who do you think you are anyway?" This transaction can be shown as follows:

Superior Subordinate

P P
1 2
A A

C C

It is clear, then, that crossed transactions usually terminate communication - and in this case probably also
employment.

The third kind is the ulterior transaction, which has a hidden agenda. This transaction appears to be OK,
but has a double message. For example, the superior who says, "I will call up the customer for you", may,
in fact, mean: "You are so stupid, you would spoil the sale." Correspondingly, a subordinate saying "Thank
you" may mean "Yes, you are right, I am stupid; kick me."

Here the socially acceptable message appears to be Adult to Adult. But the disguised double message
(indicated by the broken lines in the next diagram) is between the Parent and the Child ego states of the
superior and subordinate, respectively. The diagram of this transaction looks like this:

Superior Subordinate

P 1 P
1
A A
2
C 2 C
Social level Psychological level

Management International Review  Heinz Weihrich 3

These transactions are the psychological games that consist of (a) a set of complementary transactions on
the social level, (b) an ulterior transaction on the psychological level, and (c) a psychological payoff. Later,
we will discuss other games organizational people tend to play.

Time Structuring
The last TA concept in this discussion pertains to the way time is structured. In a sense, time is a unique
resource; it cannot be hoarded nor is it retrievable. Also, everything we do takes time. Despite the
recognition of its obvious value, time is frequently used ineffectively. In fact, all too often it is wasted in
playing games.

Basically, there are six ways time can be spent within the organization. First, one can withdraw from
others, either physically or psychologically. The second way to spend time is through rituals. These are
socially accepted gestures, phrases, and responses such as "Hi, how are you?" The third way of using time
is through pastimes; this can be simply making conversation by talking, for example, about the weather or a
favorite football team. The fourth way to structure time is through activities; this includes work. A fifth
way to spend time is by engaging in authentic communications (called "intimacy" in TA). This involves
sharing, trusting, and caring. Finally, time is structured by playing psychological games. Although some
games may have some positive value, they are basically dishonest; they involve a sequence of transactions
that have a hidden motive. The next section will describe in greater detail some of the "bad" games
organization people play.

Games Organization People Play

Organizations, by their very nature, require cooperative effort to reach common aims. Unfortunately, this
interaction is often the occasion for psychological games. These games are played at all levels in the
organization, in all departments, in all kinds of organizations - business and nonbusiness - and by all
people, managers and nonmanagers. In our discussion, however, we will emphasize the delicate
relationships between the manager and employees.

Why Don't You - Yes, But

In this game, a very common one in organizations, the first player presents a problem and asks for advice
from another player. However, when advice is given, (Why don't you) it is discounted with "Yes, but"
giving superficial reasons why the suggestions will not work. This game may be played by superior and
subordinate, managers and consultants, line and staff. For example, a staff person who tries to recommend
changes to managers (Why don't you) may encounter many objections and reasons from line managers
(Yes, but) stating why the suggestion will not work. The reasons, then, clearly "show" that staff is much too
theoretical and cannot grasp the difficult problems of the line managers.

Similarly, a manager may appear to elicit suggestions from employees about improving effectiveness. The
superior then discards the suggestions with "Yes, but." This, in turn, "proves" that subordinates are not OK,
and are incapable of making practical recommendations.

On the surface (the social level) these transactions appear to be on the Adult-Adult level, involving data
collection, fact finding, and problem solving. However, the psychological transactions are between the
Parent and Child ego states. Before suggesting ways to stop games, let us look at some others played by
organization people.

See What You Made Me Do

If It Weren't For You/Them
These are two common games indulged in by players who try to blame others for their own problems or the
nonachievement of objectives. The players do not assume responsibility for their own actions, nor do they
feel accountable for results.

Management International Review  Heinz Weihrich 4

A subordinate, for example, may blame his boss, claiming that the objectives were inappropriate. At other
times he may follow blindly the boss's instructions. So, if something goes wrong, he can play the game of
"See What You Made Me Do."

But games are not only played between the superior and his subordinates. A manager may accuse other
managers on the same organizational level of not cooperating, resulting in poor performance of his
department. Or he may blame the "unskilled and uneducated" workforce for his failure (If It Weren't For
Them). To be sure, there may be forces that are beyond a person's control, and he should not be held
accountable for them. But too often employees play these "blaming" games instead of assuming
responsibility for their actions. The perceptive superior who is familiar with TA will distinguish between
valid reasons for deviations from plans and psychological games.

Blemish
Blemish is a game played by nitpickers. A manager, for example, may look for mistakes of subordinates -
and he is happy finding even minor ones. Major accomplishments by the employee, on the other hand, are
overlooked. That this is demotivating for the subordinate hardly needs elaboration. The employee knows
that the superior will find at least one minor fault in whatever he does.

What is needed is a clear statement of what is expected of subordinates. Moreover, objectives should be
ranked according to their importance. This way, minor, unimportant, and inconsequential things do not
distract from major accomplishments.

Now I've Got You

At times, a Blemish player may switch to the game "Now I've Got You." He sets up another person - let's
say the subordinate - to fall into a trap and to make a mistake.

For example, there is the superior who sets impossible objectives for his subordinates. When standards are
not met, the superior feels justified in getting angry at the subordinate. A somewhat more sophisticated
approach, but with similar results, is when the manager compels employees to set objectives for
themselves, but does not provide the required resources for the accomplishment of the aims. The manager
then waits until the subordinate fails.

It is clear that this creates a very unfavorable organizational environment. The employee knows that the
boss is out to get him. Consequently, employees will not take risks-not even calculated ones; they will not
take the initiative, and they will not attempt to develop better ways of doing things. Instead, they will play
it safe and protect themselves by documenting their actions, thus wasting valuable time.

These games are, of course, in sharp contrast to the MBO approach in which the superior is seen as a
helper, a resource person, and a coach. This will become evident in the next section, which provides
suggestions about how to stop game playing.

What to Do
Destructive games can and must be stopped. There are at least two alternative courses of action. One is to
apply MBO to prevent games from developing. The other approach is to utilize TA as a tool to uncover
games - our own and those of others - and stop them.

The MBO Solution

Let us begin with MBO. Its philosophy certainly is incongruent with game playing. MBO is forward
looking, not rehashing the past as game players like to do. It focuses on results, not activities and minor
mistakes as, for example, in the game of Blemish. It is a positive approach that builds on the strengths of

Management International Review  Heinz Weihrich 5

individuals, rather than focusing on weaknesses. It encourages selfcontrol, based on self-motivation, rather
than external control by the boss. Finally, it channels energy toward organization objectives, rather than
wasting energy in game playing. Let us see how this works.

Setting Objectives. In MBO, the superior is seen as a coach who establishes an environment favorable for
the growth of subordinates. Thus, he has open channels of communication that provide subordinates with
information about the direction of the company or a specific organizational unit. This information, then,
allows the subordinate to take the initiative. He thinks a great deal about his job and the contributions he
makes so that the aims of his boss and the organization can be achieved. It is the subordinate - assuming, of
course, that he is competent - who sets his own challenging, yet realistic, objectives. These aims are then
discussed with the superior and an agreement is reached.

The objectives, in general, are stated in verifiable terms so that at the end of the period performance can be
measured against these standards. This way, the subordinate measures his own performance; he knows
where he stands. This facilitates self-control and discourages psychological games.

In addition, objectives are also ranked in order of their importance. This process forces agreement between
superior and subordinate to distinguish the critical from less important objectives. It also reduces chances
for the game of Blemish where the focus is on minor mistakes rather than on major accomplishments. For
example, the achievement of the highest ranked objective pertaining to improved productivity will be
considered important. In contrast, the nonachievement of the lowest ranked objective may not be a matter
of great concern. In conclusion, then, MBO can not assure that games such as "Blemish" and "Now I've Got
You" will be completely eliminated, but it certainly can reduce them by establishing agreements between
superior and subordinate about the areas that are critical to the success of the organization.

Action Planning. The second step in the more detailed MBO process pertains to action planning. The
objectives set provide direction. Then the individual assumes primary responsibility for developing his own
action plans and he has considerable freedom to utilize his creativity to find new ways to achieve the aims.
The result is professional growth and personal satisfaction for the subordinate. The superior, operating in
his Nurturing Parent role - that is, the concerned and support-giving part of the Parent ego-state- will
provide assistance when needed. But the primary interactions between the superior and subordinate are on
the Adult-Adult level.

Implementation. The third step in the MBO process is the implementation of plans. It is a systematic effort
with frequent feedback on the effectiveness of the implementation. All members in the organization are
considered important and many Adult responses are elicited from them to improve organizational
effectiveness. The organization is considered an interlocking system. If conflicts occur, they are analyzed in
an objective manner. Because of the free flow of communication, honest interactions replace games with
hidden meanings. Managers and employees alike understand and practice the MBO philosophy that
emphasizes coordinated efforts toward common goals and full utilization of everyone's potential. In short, it
is an environment that is conducive for effective teamwork and for the achievement of organizational as
well as personal objectives.

Control and Appraisal. The fourth step in MBO concerns the control of organizational performance and the
appraisal of individual contributions with the emphasis here on the latter, because this is where most
interpersonal problems arise. MBO can prevent many of the frictions because it concentrates on results
rather than on personality factors. Further, standards of performance are set to the greatest extent possible
by the individual himself. Since these standards are verifiable, the employee knows where he stands in
respect to the achievement of these standards; he does not have to wait for the evaluation of his superior.
Appraisal, then, is based on the concept of self-control. In the appraisal meeting the manager and the
employee both analyze performance objectively from their Adult ego state. Both agree on plans to prevent
undesirable deviations from occurring in the future; and both learn from the past, but then focus their
attention on future opportunities. It is a positive and rational approach to appraisal that is free of
psychological games.

Management International Review  Heinz Weihrich 6

The TA Solution
MBO is certainly a right step to discourage games, but many organizations do not have an MBO program
and others do not practice it properly. In these cases, TA can be very valuable. The following
recommendations based on TA concepts tend to discourage psychological games:

First, one should recognize the ego states in oneself as well as in others. All ego states are important, but
they should be used to fit the situation. Often the Adult is, unfortunately, underutilized.

Second, transactions between individuals can decide if organizations become winners or losers. The
Parent-Child transactions may be appropriate in some instances, but they too often hinder effective
interaction and growth of individuals. In most modern organizations with a competent and highly educated
labor force, Adult-Adult transactions need to receive more emphasis.

Third, time, the unique and valuable resource, needs to be structured effectively. It can be used up through
pastimes and games, or it can be used effectively by focusing on results and authentic communication.
Games inhibit the management process while genuine cooperation and coordinated efforts bring results.

Conclusion
Most of us spend a substantial part of our lives in organizations; unfortunately, not all of this time is used
effectively. Rather, a great deal of time is wasted by playing psychological games, which not only keep us
from being successful, but also hinder the management process.

We have highlighted a number of common games and perhaps have even recognized some of our own.
This insight is the first step in stopping these games. Two recommendations were made. One is the
application of the generally successful MBO approach, which can prevent many of the typical games. The
other is the tool of Transactional Analysis. Both have proved quite successful, MBO in managing, TA in
improving communication and interpersonal relations.

References
1 Berne, Eric, Games People Play. New York: Grove Press, Inc., 1964.
2 Drucker, Peter F., The Practice of Management. New York: Harper & Brothers, Publishers, 1954.
3 Weihrich, Heinz, "A Study of the Integration of Management by Objectives with Key Managerial
Activities and the Realtionship to Selected Effectiveness Measures." Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of California, Los Angeles, 1973

Management International Review  Heinz Weihrich 7