The shallowest form of commitment is political. It involves committing to ideas or actions when we have little or no drive to follow through because our motives have less to do with the object of our commitment, and more to do with what we might gain or avoid by offering the commitment itself. Political commitment appears in organizations when a person accepts an assignment, not out of any special feeling about its importance, nor because it seems a very good idea, but out of a desire to appear to be a ‘‘good soldier,’’ or to get a ‘‘ticket punched’’ for a better assignment, or out of fear of retribution should they refuse. For example, a man who was the marketing manager for a line of food items that were, by his own admission, vastly overpriced and contained no nutritional value, was doing his job well because success was a certain route to a promotion. His commitment was not to the work itself but to career advancement. Political commitment also appears in personal life when we avoid speech or behavior merely because they are considered ‘‘politically incorrect’’ or when we take on the trappings of the moment because ‘‘everyone is doing it.’’
Political commitment is the basic fuel of most organizations. People are generally attracted to working in organizations by such promises as ‘‘good pay,’’ ‘‘great benefits,’’ ‘‘opportunities for advancement,’’ and ‘‘a pleasant work environment.’’ These are all good things to have, and the nature of working for an organization involves employees pledging to perform an honest day’s work in return for them. A lot gets accomplished when those in leadership positions agree to such promises, and political commitment is usually enough to get the job done as long as everything is going smoothly.
Political commitment is usually enough when only lower-order change is needed: when people need to do more of something, or less; when only a small amount of new learning is needed; when an alternative way is sought for doing things that they already know how to do, or when adjustments are made to what already exists. Whenever a change is viewed as a necessary and normal part of the job, political commitment suffices.
A leader whose primary call is for political commitment can usually expect ‘‘an honest day’s work for an honest day’s pay,’’ but not much more than that, and sometimes less. This variety of commitment is frequently halfhearted and short-lived. It lacks the oomph, verve, and sheer stubbornness needed to achieve a challenging common purpose.