Informal–Strategic Role Management (ISRM) Theory

Informal–Strategic Role Management (ISRM) Theory

Author: J. Jayanthi Chandran

Affiliation: LE MARX ENGINEERING SERVICESWebsite: www.lemarxeng-jsw.in

Tagline / One-Line Description:“A framework to segregate informal job holders, strategic manipulators, and core workers, ensuring fair appraisal, neutralization of hidden strategies, and collaborative participation through DRRM and SCCM.”

Abstract

In modern organizations, hidden informal roles and strategic behaviors often distort recognition, promotion, and collaboration. Employees who focus on actual work may be sidelined, while those who leverage informal networks or strategic behaviors gain disproportionate advantages. This paper introduces the Informal–Strategic Role Management (ISRM) Theory, developed through Conceptual-Experiential Analysis, categorizing employees into three types—Informal Job Holders, Strategic Platform Handlers, and Core Workers. It proposes an HR grading and appraisal system with three tracks: Management Executives (ME), Executives Plus (EX+), and Operational Executives (OE), ensuring fairness, foreign travel neutrality, and integration with DRRM and SCCM frameworks.

Keywords

ISRM Theory, informal roles, strategic behavior, HR grading, appraisal, SCCM, DRRM, organizational fairness, employee motivation.

1. Introduction

Organizations often encounter hidden layers of informal work and strategic behaviors that influence promotions, appraisals, and employee motivation. Traditional management frameworks fail to address these subtle dynamics, allowing individuals who manipulate informal channels to gain undue advantage, while employees who focus on genuine work are marginalized.

The ISRM Theory provides a structured approach to:

1. Segregate informal job holders from core operational employees.

2. Neutralize manipulative strategies within platforms.

3. Enhance collaboration and participative culture for genuine contributors using DRRM and SCCM.

4. Implement HR systems that reflect these segregated tracks through grading, appraisal, and recognition mechanisms, including foreign travel eligibility.

   
   

2. Conceptual-Experiential Basis

The ISRM Theory is developed through Conceptual-Experiential Analysis, combining:

• Conceptual Analysis: Defining categories, interventions, and principles for role management.

• Experiential Insights: Observations from real-world organizational practices, including HR dynamics, employee motivation, and strategic informal behaviors.

This ensures the framework is practical, actionable, and grounded in experience rather than purely theoretical constructs.

3. Employee Categories and Organizational Segregation

Type of Executor	Characteristics	HR Track
1. Informal Job Holders	Handle unofficial or extra tasks for superiors; department, rank, appraisal, and career progression are distinct; no competition with core workers	Management Executives (ME)
2. Strategic Platform Handlers	Leverage informal strategies, including social or gendered alliances; manipulative behaviors excluded from core KPIs	Executives Plus (EX+)
3. Core / Innocent Workers	Focus on formal deliverables; appraisals, grading, and recognition based purely on output	Operational Executives (OE)

4. HR Grading and Appraisal System

4.1 Proposed Grading Suffixes by Track

Employee Type	Base Grade	Track Suffix	Purpose
Core Worker	Project Engineer	OE	Standard KPI-based appraisal, core output-focused
Informal Job Holder	Project Engineer	ME+ / ME-S	Separate support unit; internal recognition only
Strategic Handler	Project Engineer	EX+-M / EX+-R	Strategic or platform alignment; ethical compliance tracked; separate from core appraisal

Legend for Suffixes:

• + / S → Support / Informal Job Holder (internal unit recognition)

• M → Management-aligned Strategic Handler

• R → Relationship / Platform Handler

  
  

4.2 HR Implementation Rules

1. Separate Appraisal Committees: OE (core) workers evaluated purely on KPIs; ME and EX+ tracks assessed internally.

2. Rotation & Transparency: Informal/support tasks rotated; tracked via HR task maps.

3. Neutralization of Manipulation: EX+ suffixes do not influence OE KPIs; independent panels oversee promotions.

4. Recognition & Promotion: Each track has its own criteria; no cross-track advantage.

5. Communication: Employees informed of track, grading, and appraisal rules; OE workers protected from informal politics.

   
   

5. Organizational Interventions and Mechanisms

Type	Separate Departmenting / Treatment (A)	HR Actions (B)	DRRM & SCCM Participation (C)
Informal Job Holders (ME)	Fully segregated; internal grading and appraisal; no impact on OE career path	Rotate tasks; track work internally; recognition limited to unit	SCCM: formalize support teams; DRRM: voluntary, mutual support; does not affect OE operations
Strategic Handlers (EX+)	Maintain in formal departments; manipulative behavior excluded from KPIs	Transparent, ethical promotion criteria; independent panel reviews	DRRM: ethical reciprocity training; SCCM: integrate into mixed teams with clear deliverables
Core / Innocent Workers (OE)	Floor/core operations with defined KPIs and career paths	Priority in skill development, fair appraisal; public recognition for output	SCCM: formal support teams; DRRM: collaborative, gratitude-based culture

6. Principles of ISRM Theory

1. Segregation of Roles: Clear departmental separation ensures fair appraisal for each type.

2. Neutralization of Manipulation: HR mechanisms prevent informal strategies from distorting promotions or rewards.

3. Collaboration & Motivation: DRRM and SCCM build ethical, participative culture for OE workers.

4. Visibility of Output: KPIs focus on measurable deliverables, reducing influence of hidden work or manipulation.

   
   

7. Foreign Travel Conflicts and Neutralization

7.1 Problem Context

• Foreign travel assignments are often prestige opportunities.

• Strategic handlers (EX+) or informal workers (ME) may manipulate selection, while OE workers are overlooked despite higher merit.

  
  

7.2 ISRM / HR Mechanisms

Track	Issue	Solution
OE (Core)	Often overlooked	Transparent KPI-based eligibility; independent committee review
ME (Informal)	May leverage support tasks	Eligibility restricted to internal unit; recognition internal
EX+ (Strategic)	Use alliances to secure travel	Independent panels verify ethical compliance and performance; eligibility conditional on output and ethics

7.3 HR Actions

1. Separate travel eligibility by track (OE prioritized for merit-based assignments).

2. Transparent criteria and independent review panels.

3. Integration with grading suffixes ensures fairness and prevents manipulation.

   
   

8. Traditional Theory References

Theory / Author	Relevance	Limitation in Context of ISRM
Herzberg – Two-Factor Theory (1959)	Employee motivation factors	Ignores informal/strategic manipulation
McGregor – Theory X & Y (1960)	Assumptions about worker behavior	Ignores role segregation / strategic actors
Mintzberg – Organizational Politics (1983)	Explains informal networks	Lacks structured intervention for core worker protection
Pfeffer – Managing with Power (1992)	Influence & informal politics	No practical grading/appraisal mechanism
Blau – Social Exchange Theory (1964)	Reciprocity in organizations	Does not integrate role-based HR structure

9. Literature Gap

1. No systematic framework segregates employees by informal, strategic, and core roles.

2. HR mechanisms rarely neutralize manipulative behaviors while maintaining motivation.

3. Core workers’ protection from politics is largely unaddressed.

4. Foreign travel conflicts and ethical assignment eligibility are missing in traditional literature.

   
   

10. Contributions to Literature

1. Role Segregation Framework: Classifies employees as ME, EX+, and OE tracks.

2. HR Grading/Appraisal System: Uses suffixes (+, M, R) to operationalize separate appraisal tracks.

3. Integration with Motivation Models: Combines DRRM and SCCM for collaboration and ethical reciprocity.

4. Neutralization of Manipulation: Mechanisms for preventing strategic exploitation without penalizing voluntary support work.

5. Foreign Travel Conflict Resolution: Transparent, merit-based, track-specific eligibility.

6. Conceptual-Experiential Methodology: Bridges observational insights with theoretical analysis, providing a novel approach.

   
   

11. Discussion and Implications

• ISRM ensures core workers’ recognition and motivation while managing informal and strategic behaviors.

• Tracks ME, EX+, and OE allow structured appraisal, promotion, and foreign travel assignment management.

• Framework is adaptable across sectors where informal influence historically distorts organizational fairness.

  
  

  Manual Note: Preventing Gender-Based Grouping and Covert Pressure Groups

  Context & Justification

• Any practice — explicit or implicit — of grouping women under a single manager, mentor, or influencer for the purpose of marginalizing, cornering, or suppressing a capable female employee constitutes an unethical organizational behavior. Whether such grouping is done with or without management’s knowledge, it:

  
  

  • Provokes labor conflict by creating an “us vs. her” environment.

  • Breaks organizational ethics by violating principles of equality, respect, and fairness.

  • Fuels covert pressure groups which operate as informal power centers, undermining official policies.

  • Trains individuals in manipulative “behavioral weapons” (harassment, ostracism, rumor-mongering), which destabilize work culture.

    
    

  Organizational Risks

  • Decline in trust and morale among employees.

  • Legal and compliance exposure under anti-discrimination and anti-harassment laws.

  • Loss of high-performing female talent and reputational damage.

  • Creation of toxic micro-cultures that resist management directives and block merit-based advancement.

    
    

  Policy Direction under ISRM

  1. Ban on Covert Grouping: No employee (male or female) may be assigned, grouped, or managed in a way that intentionally suppresses another employee’s performance or reputation.

  2. Independent Oversight: HR must monitor team compositions, transfer patterns, and grievance data to detect such groupings.

  3. Neutralization Protocol: If a covert grouping is detected, employees involved are moved to ME or EX+ tracks and removed from influence over the targeted employee.

  4. Transparent Appraisal: Appraisals, promotions, and foreign travel eligibility for the targeted employee are managed by an independent panel to ensure fairness.

  5. Training for Leaders: Managers receive training in ethical team formation, unconscious bias, and group-dynamics risk.

     
     

  Outcome ExpectedBy implementing this policy, organizations can:

  • Prevent manipulation disguised as “mentoring” or “support”.

  • Protect high-performing women and men from informal suppression tactics.

  • Align with ISRM’s principles of fairness, segregation of informal roles, and DRRM/SCCM-based collaboration.

12. Conclusion

The ISRM Theory, combined with the HR grading and appraisal system, provides a practical framework to manage informal and strategic behaviors while safeguarding core workers’ motivation and productivity. Integration with DRRM and SCCM ensures fairness, neutralizes manipulation, and promotes ethical, participative collaboration. The framework fills critical gaps in traditional organizational and motivation literature, offering a novel, actionable methodology for modern workplaces.

Informal–Strategic Role Management (ISRM) Theory

Author: J. Jayanthi Chandran

Affiliation: LE MARX ENGINEERING SERVICES

Website: www.lemarxeng-jsw.in

Tagline / One-Line Description:

“A framework to segregate informal job holders, strategic manipulators, and core workers, ensuring fair appraisal, neutralization of hidden strategies, and collaborative participation through DRRM and SCCM.”

---

Abstract

In modern organizations, hidden informal roles and strategic behaviors often distort recognition, promotion, and collaboration. Employees who focus on actual work may be sidelined, while those who leverage informal networks or strategic behaviors gain disproportionate advantages. This paper introduces the Informal–Strategic Role Management (ISRM) Theory, developed through Conceptual-Experiential Analysis, categorizing employees into three types—Informal Job Holders, Strategic Platform Handlers, and Core Workers. It proposes an HR grading and appraisal system with three tracks: Management Executives (ME), Executives Plus (EX+), and Operational Executives (OE), ensuring fairness, foreign travel neutrality, and integration with DRRM and SCCM frameworks.

---

Keywords

ISRM Theory, informal roles, strategic behavior, HR grading, appraisal, SCCM, DRRM, organizational fairness, employee motivation.

---

1. Introduction

Organizations often encounter hidden layers of informal work and strategic behaviors that influence promotions, appraisals, and employee motivation. Traditional management frameworks fail to address these subtle dynamics, allowing individuals who manipulate informal channels to gain undue advantage, while employees who focus on genuine work are marginalized.

The ISRM Theory provides a structured approach to:

1. Segregate informal job holders from core operational employees.

2. Neutralize manipulative strategies within platforms.

3. Enhance collaboration and participative culture for genuine contributors using DRRM and SCCM.

4. Implement HR systems that reflect these segregated tracks through grading, appraisal, and recognition mechanisms, including foreign travel eligibility.

---

2. Conceptual-Experiential Basis

The ISRM Theory is developed through Conceptual-Experiential Analysis, combining:

Conceptual Analysis: Defining categories, interventions, and principles for role management.

Experiential Insights: Observations from real-world organizational practices, including HR dynamics, employee motivation, and strategic informal behaviors.

This ensures the framework is practical, actionable, and grounded in experience rather than purely theoretical constructs.

---

3. Employee Categories and Organizational Segregation

Type of Executor Characteristics HR Track

1. Informal Job Holders Handle unofficial or extra tasks for superiors; department, rank, appraisal, and career progression are distinct; no competition with core workers Management Executives (ME)

2. Strategic Platform Handlers Leverage informal strategies, including social or gendered alliances; manipulative behaviors excluded from core KPIs Executives Plus (EX+)

3. Core / Innocent Workers Focus on formal deliverables; appraisals, grading, and recognition based purely on output Operational Executives (OE)

---

4. HR Grading and Appraisal System

4.1 Proposed Grading Suffixes by Track

Employee Type Base Grade Track Suffix Purpose

Core Worker Project Engineer OE Standard KPI-based appraisal, core output-focused

Informal Job Holder Project Engineer ME+ / ME-S Separate support unit; internal recognition only

Strategic Handler Project Engineer EX+-M / EX+-R Strategic or platform alignment; ethical compliance tracked; separate from core appraisal

Legend for Suffixes:

+ / S → Support / Informal Job Holder (internal unit recognition)

M → Management-aligned Strategic Handler

R → Relationship / Platform Handler

---

4.2 HR Implementation Rules

1. Separate Appraisal Committees: OE (core) workers evaluated purely on KPIs; ME and EX+ tracks assessed internally.

2. Rotation & Transparency: Informal/support tasks rotated; tracked via HR task maps.

3. Neutralization of Manipulation: EX+ suffixes do not influence OE KPIs; independent panels oversee promotions.

4. Recognition & Promotion: Each track has its own criteria; no cross-track advantage.

5. Communication: Employees informed of track, grading, and appraisal rules; OE workers protected from informal politics.

---

5. Organizational Interventions and Mechanisms

Type Separate Departmenting / Treatment (A) HR Actions (B) DRRM & SCCM Participation (C)

Informal Job Holders (ME) Fully segregated; internal grading and appraisal; no impact on OE career path Rotate tasks; track work internally; recognition limited to unit SCCM: formalize support teams; DRRM: voluntary, mutual support; does not affect OE operations

Strategic Handlers (EX+) Maintain in formal departments; manipulative behavior excluded from KPIs Transparent, ethical promotion criteria; independent panel reviews DRRM: ethical reciprocity training; SCCM: integrate into mixed teams with clear deliverables

Core / Innocent Workers (OE) Floor/core operations with defined KPIs and career paths Priority in skill development, fair appraisal; public recognition for output SCCM: formal support teams; DRRM: collaborative, gratitude-based culture

---

6. Principles of ISRM Theory

1. Segregation of Roles: Clear departmental separation ensures fair appraisal for each type.

2. Neutralization of Manipulation: HR mechanisms prevent informal strategies from distorting promotions or rewards.

3. Collaboration & Motivation: DRRM and SCCM build ethical, participative culture for OE workers.

4. Visibility of Output: KPIs focus on measurable deliverables, reducing influence of hidden work or manipulation.

---

7. Foreign Travel Conflicts and Neutralization

7.1 Problem Context

Foreign travel assignments are often prestige opportunities.

Strategic handlers (EX+) or informal workers (ME) may manipulate selection, while OE workers are overlooked despite higher merit.

7.2 ISRM / HR Mechanisms

Track Issue Solution

OE (Core) Often overlooked Transparent KPI-based eligibility; independent committee review

ME (Informal) May leverage support tasks Eligibility restricted to internal unit; recognition internal

EX+ (Strategic) Use alliances to secure travel Independent panels verify ethical compliance and performance; eligibility conditional on output and ethics

7.3 HR Actions

1. Separate travel eligibility by track (OE prioritized for merit-based assignments).

2. Transparent criteria and independent review panels.

3. Integration with grading suffixes ensures fairness and prevents manipulation.

---

8. Traditional Theory References

Theory / Author Relevance Limitation in Context of ISRM

Herzberg – Two-Factor Theory (1959) Employee motivation factors Ignores informal/strategic manipulation

McGregor – Theory X & Y (1960) Assumptions about worker behavior Ignores role segregation / strategic actors

Mintzberg – Organizational Politics (1983) Explains informal networks Lacks structured intervention for core worker protection

Pfeffer – Managing with Power (1992) Influence & informal politics No practical grading/appraisal mechanism

Blau – Social Exchange Theory (1964) Reciprocity in organizations Does not integrate role-based HR structure

---

9. Literature Gap

1. No systematic framework segregates employees by informal, strategic, and core roles.

2. HR mechanisms rarely neutralize manipulative behaviors while maintaining motivation.

3. Core workers’ protection from politics is largely unaddressed.

4. Foreign travel conflicts and ethical assignment eligibility are missing in traditional literature.

---

10. Contributions to Literature

1. Role Segregation Framework: Classifies employees as ME, EX+, and OE tracks.

2. HR Grading/Appraisal System: Uses suffixes (+, M, R) to operationalize separate appraisal tracks.

3. Integration with Motivation Models: Combines DRRM and SCCM for collaboration and ethical reciprocity.

4. Neutralization of Manipulation: Mechanisms for preventing strategic exploitation without penalizing voluntary support work.

5. Foreign Travel Conflict Resolution: Transparent, merit-based, track-specific eligibility.

6. Conceptual-Experiential Methodology: Bridges observational insights with theoretical analysis, providing a novel approach.

---

11. Discussion and Implications

ISRM ensures core workers’ recognition and motivation while managing informal and strategic behaviors.

Tracks ME, EX+, and OE allow structured appraisal, promotion, and foreign travel assignment management.

Framework is adaptable across sectors where informal influence historically distorts organizational fairness.

---

12. Conclusion

The ISRM Theory, integrated with **HR grading and