301).
Even a casual observer of American politics over the last several years would recognize the theater to which Bolman and Deal refer as it applies to organizational processes. IN Congress, for example, elected representatives devote tremendous effort to the theatrical aspects of portraying themselves as open-minded, desirous of compromise with political opponents, consistency with their prior statements and campaign promises, and (especially) commitment to principles of good faith in general. Unfortunately, it seems that the theater of political processes have come to completely dominate the political processes through which elected representatives are supposed to represent the wishes of their constituents. In particular, the influence...
Constitution and political representatives, all while elected officials maintain the theater of the formal political process. They routinely rely on obfuscating language to hide the fact that their actions on Capital Hill contradict their promises to constituents; and they make a tremendous show of civility in public while resorting to intellectually dishonest attacks on political opponents. One question raised by the application of the authors' concept of theater in processes is: Is there a "tipping point" beyond which the reliance on theater over substance forces meaningful reform and change in organizations and political institutions?
