Search
 Search
* About
  + 
* Listen
  + Apple Podcasts
 Menu
advice/perspective on jobs, work and management
## I’m politically savvy
> *I know a lot of people complain about office politics, but not me. I see it as just another part of organizational life, probably unavoidable, and therefore something everyone just needs to figure out how to navigate for themselves. And actually, I consider myself to be pretty good at this. I’ve done quite well for myself over the years, and I attribute this in part to my political savvy. Frankly, I don’t see anything wrong with this… – Name withheld*
It’s true. Most people aren’t particularly fond of workplace politics. Nevertheless, we resign ourselves to its unfortunate existence, and do our best to navigate this seemingly unavoidable organizational reality.
And unfortunate it is.
In *It’s the Manager* (2019), Jim Clifton and Jim Harter argue that office politicking imposes an “inefficiency tax” on organizations:
“If employees are spending their time playing politics, they’re less productive. When these employees waste time and energy, they’re getting a lot less work done, so organizations have to hire more people just to accomplish the same amount of work.”
Consider too that when we refer to a particular organizational decision as being made for “political” reasons, it implies that the rationale or logic on which it was based had to do with something other than merit. The new executive who appears to have landed the job not because of their management potential, but because their alma mater just so happens to be the same as that of the CEO. Or the salesperson who is assigned a coveted account not because of their ability to close a deal, but because they’re “tight with the boss,” often seen taking lunch or out on the golf course together.
Politics of this sort inflicts further organizational damage in two important ways:
First, this is decision-making that by definition is suboptimal, and therefore represents a lost opportunity for the organization – one that a rival might easily take advantage of. Any business rife with political promotions, for instance, just isn’t going to perform as well over time as one committed to filling each and every organizational role with the person best suited for it.
Second, whenever a decision is made based on something other than its merits—but perhaps particularly those concerning promotions, or other organizational reward—it undermines employees’ sense of fairness. And that, as Sirota et. al. explain in *The Enthusiastic Employee* (2004), harms their motivational levels – which in turn hurts overall organizational performance. The desire to be treated equitably at work amounts to a bona fide *need* for most people, in Sirota’s estimation. Office politics gnaw away at this.
For me then, the issue is more fundamental: If politics in the workplace amounts to a competitive disadvantage for any organization actively engaged in it, why does the phenomena exist in the first place?
Shouldn’t market forces (or Adam Smith’s “invisible hand”) have done away with this long ago?
I’m afraid I don’t have a short answer for you on that one. Nor can I tell you how you personally might purge your place of employment of their unfortunate machinations even if you were interested, which you don’t appear to be. Suffice it to say that would require restructuring your organization in a way both you and its management would likely be unwilling to accept. However, were there an interest, I assure you it is possible.
So good for you for being so politically savvy. I certainly can’t blame you for behaving in the way that you have. If nothing else, capitalism is grounded in the understanding that acting in one’s own best interests is not only appropriate, but to be encouraged. Indeed, most economists consider this one motivation responsible for any and all efficiencies the market has to offer.
Why would you act any differently if, in the past, that’s what’s worked for you?
But again, your actions are good for you, and you only. The organization you work for, on the other hand, is paying a price.
What that cost might ultimately be, only time can tell.
**NOTES:**
 Clifton, J. & Harter, J. *It’s the Manager*. 2019 (Gallup Press), p. 87.
 Sirota, David, Louis A. Mischkind, Michael Irwin Meltzer. *The Enthusiastic Employee*. 2005 (Wharton School Publishing), p. 10.
 By this, I’m referring to what I call *management by loerarchy*. For more on this, .
### You may also be interested in...
## [ 1 Comment ]
1. !
   Bill
   on May 30, 2024 at 2:41 pm
   Playing politics in the workplace is not for everyone.
   In my own career, I observed many folks who considered themselves or were commonly viewed as “savvy and astute” workplace politicians crash and burn when a management shake-up occurred or the firm changed direction.
   It takes a very skilled politician to be able to quickly pivot to suit changing circumstances.
   But frankly: who wants to be that person? There are other ways to succeed in the work world that don’t involve compromising your values (to conform to the latest internal fad) and incurring the mockery and disdain of co-workers who contribute just as much, but without the frippery of office politics.
### Submit a Comment 
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked \*
Comment \*
Name \*
Email \*
 Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
Δ
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. .
Advertisement!
What is
[management by
loerarchy®?
### 
January 24, 2025
Dear (in)subordinate: I’m in sales and for the past few years I’ve been a “cold caller”; basically I reach out to potential clients and try
January 10, 2025
I have an ongoing medical condition for which I need to take daily medication, some of which makes me drowsy. My employer is aware of
December 6, 2024
This year, my employer will be open on Christmas Day for the first time in its ten-year history. Needless to say, I and the rest
Available through the iTunes Music Store
X
To comment on a specific post, scroll to the bottom of the post’s page and submit your comment there. To search the archive, .
## I’m ‘so over’ training new hires
> *I work for a company that does blood and other sample testing for area hospitals. I’m one of their senior lab techs, and as a result I’m often asked to help train new employees. The first time I did this it was as a favor for my manager, but it now it seems expected of me – and I hate it. These people are so annoying; they can’t seem to do anything right. Just the other day someone was shadowing me for like the fifth time, but it felt like their first! (To be fair, this individual did not have a lot of previous experience). And all that positive reinforcement stuff is a load of nonsense, in my opinion. I find I have to watch them like a hawk to make sure they don’t screw up – and when they do, I let them know in no uncertain terms. I don’t like having to play cop all the time, but that’s what works. Anyway, I’m so over it. Is there any way I can unload this responsibility..? – Name withheld*
I regret to inform you that you’ve fallen for a classic management ruse. I call it “**A favor done once quickly becomes the expectation**.”
Little did you know that when you agreed to train that new hire the first time, this would become one of your regular job responsibilities. But don’t be too hard on yourself; I assure you that many an employee (myself included) have been taken in by this managerial sleight of hand. Saying “yes” to a manager is always easier than turning them down. And in their defense, this likely wasn’t the calculation on your manager’s part. Your help is no doubt genuinely appreciated – and if they keep asking, you’re probably pretty good at it.
So take this as the compliment it almost certainly is.
That said, the mistake you made was not asking for more money (or some other form of compensation) in return once it became clear this wasn’t a one-time request. It’s not too late, however – so this is my advised course of action for you. Ask for a bump in pay for your time and trouble – or a better schedule, preferred work, or anything else that might improve your employment situation. And gently make it clear that without *any* sort of recompense forthcoming, the next time you’re asked to train some newbie you’ll be forced to politely decline, thank you very much.
And then, a word or two on positive vs. negative reinforcement.
In *Thinking, Fast and Slow* (2011), behavioral economist Daniel Kahneman describes an interaction with a senior flight instructor in the Israeli Air Force whose attitude was very similar to yours. That is, that negative, not positive reinforcement is more effective. As evidence, the instructor pointed out that whenever he upbraided a pilot for performing poorly in a particular training exercise, they inevitably did better the next time out. But no matter how much he might praise someone who’d flown exceptionally, rarely were they able to repeat that performance in their next attempt.
What this instructor had failed to take into account, Kahneman explains, is something economists refer to as *regression to the mean*. It works like this:
For any task—whether it’s flying jets, running diagnostic tests, or simply juggling oranges—there will inevitably be some variation in the performance of that task. This is not the result of error, but can be attributable to the inherent limitations of our capacity as human beings to do anything repeatedly. Random fluctuations are bound to occur no matter how determined we are to remain consistent. That’s just normal.
So the mistake this flight instructor had made was assigning causality to those variations. Pilots who’d screwed up in a previous exercise performed better the next time out not because this instructor yelled at them necessarily, but because they’d simply been having a bad day, and now they were having a better one. Similarly, no matter how much positive reinforcement the instructor might heap on those who’d done really well, they were unlikely to repeat that performance the next time because statistically they’d just been having a really exceptional day.
Consider that you might be experiencing something similar.
The new hires you train are just as susceptible to variations in performance as those pilots. Yes – you should still keep a close eye on them to make sure they’re not making any preventable mistakes; that’s still your responsibility. Nor should you relax your standards; given what you do, I suspect there is no room of negotiation in that regard. But the tone you’ve opted for? Not only is it unneeded—as well as contributing to your frustration—it’s apt to do more harm than good.
So ask your employer for something you want for your troubles. Or simply explain to your manager that this just isn’t for you anymore. In the meantime, go easy on those new hires.
They may still not get up to speed as fast as you’d like, but your current strategy of chastising them for every little mistake probably isn’t helping.
 Kahneman, Daniel. *Thinking, Fast and Slow*. 2011 (Farrar, Straus and Giroux), p. 175-176.
 Workers who don’t feel supported by their managers tend to perform more poorly, according to the best available evidence. Please see: Sirota, D., Mischkind, L. A. & Meltzer, M. I. *The Enthusiastic Employee*. 2005 (Wharton School Publishing); Pfeffer, J. *The Human Equation.* 1998. (HBS Press); Wagner, R. & Harter, J. *12, The Elements of Great Managing*. 2006 (Gallup Press); Hill, L. *Becoming a Manager*. 2003 (Harvard Business School Press); Google’s “Project Oxygen” Report (available as a free download at the company’s website).
## [ 3 Comments ]
   Tim Eiler
   on May 3, 2024 at 9:28 pm
   As a student of Industrial Engineering, you just described a whole section of that discipline. W. Edwards Deming – the guy who has a huge quality prize named after him in Japan – and Joe Juran – alumnus of your alma mater- preached the very same about variation. It does my heart good to see you talk about this here! If only more people understood variation, the world would be a better, more humane place.
   * !
     the subordinate
     on May 6, 2024 at 10:45 pm
     I recall first learning of the phenomena while reading Deming’s excellent text, “Out of the Crisis” (1982), which is still insightful today, in my humble opinion. Thanks for the reminder!
3. !
   on May 30, 2024 at 3:04 pm
   Great advice about asking for something in exchange for taking on a new responsibility.
   Ditto on suggestions about what that something might be – money, better schedule, preferred work. Prompts like these help people to think creatively about what would make them like their job more, which is itself empowering.
   I’m sure some managers would counter that acquiring a new skill \*is\* the compensation. But ideally, if the manager trusts the employee to train newbies on this important skill – that REQUIRES things be done a certain way – they will be open to a dialogue about what the employee wants / needs.