Local politics is often perceived as an inhibiting force—associated with intrigue, power struggles, vested interests, and decisions that deviate from professional judgment. But is this the full picture?
Could organizational politics within local authorities דווקא be a significant driver of high-quality planning and advanced urban development?
This question accompanied me for many years—both in my role as a senior executive within a local authority and through my work managing the Green Building Standard at the Standards Institution, where I served as its representative in the Forum of the 15. Alongside these roles, I chose to focus my doctoral research on a complex yet critical question: What is the relationship between organizational politics in local authorities and the outcomes of urban planning?
The findings, it must be said, were surprising and compelling.
Organizational Politics – Always Negative?
Most studies on organizational politics point to negative effects: declining employee performance, non-professional decision-making, organizational inefficiency, and burnout. A strong perception of organizational politics is often seen as a sign of a dysfunctional organization.
But local authorities are not typical organizations.
My research found that in local authorities, organizational politics is not necessarily an obstacle. In many cases, it serves as a lever for high-quality urban development and for the implementation of advanced planning policies—particularly principles of sustainable development.
Local Planning Culture: The Key to Understanding the System
To understand how planning decisions are made in a city, it is insufficient to examine master plans, regulations, or national policy alone. One must understand what I define as the “local planning culture”—the web of relationships, interests, power struggles, and organizational dynamics within the local authority.
The research examined this planning culture at the micro level, analyzing organizational and political characteristics and their direct impact on urban planning outcomes.
Internal Politics: Power Struggles that Advance Planning
The study distinguishes between two types of organizational politics: internal and external.
Internal politics occurs within the local authority—primarily between professional staff in the engineering and planning departments and the elected leadership, headed by the mayor. While professionals are bound by procedures, planning policy, and professional considerations, mayors often operate within political priorities, public pressures, or coalition constraints.
The key finding:
The clearer and stronger the balance of power between the professional echelon and the political leadership, the higher the rate of policy implementation within planning outcomes.
Professional power struggles are not inherently negative. They activate bureaucratic mechanisms, sharpen positions, and lead to deeper and more robust implementation of policy—particularly in areas of sustainable development.
External Politics: Pressures that Shape the City
External politics refers to the influence of outside urban coalitions—developers, interest groups, residents, and organizations—that engage with elected officials and affect decision-making processes.
When external politics is strong, the mayor must balance competing interests, market forces, and public expectations. As an elected official, the desire to maintain public support and secure re-election directly influences planning decisions.
Here too, the research found that this dynamic is not necessarily harmful. When properly managed, it can lead to more relevant planning—planning that is closely aligned with the real needs of the city and its residents.
Core Finding: Politics as a Catalytic Force
The central conclusion of my doctoral research is unequivocal:
In local authorities, a strong perception of organizational politics is positively associated with higher rates of implementation of planning principles in urban planning outcomes.
This finding contrasts with much of the literature on other types of organizations and demonstrates that local authorities constitute a unique arena—one in which outcomes are shaped not by organizational climate alone, but by the complex interaction of internal and external forces operating within the urban space.
What Does This Mean in Practice?
For developers, planners, and professionals working with local authorities, the implication is clear:
Advancing high-quality planning and complex projects requires understanding not only the plan itself, but also the human, organizational, and political system behind it.
A deep familiarity with local planning culture, the identification of power centers, and an understanding of urban dynamics are critical tools for the successful advancement of planning processes and urban development.
