Devious Political Tactics:A Field Manual
by Rick Brenner
Some practitioners of workplace politics use an assortment of devious tactics to accomplish their ends. Since most of us operate in a fairly straightforward manner, the devious among us gain unfair advantage. Here are some of their techniques, and some suggestions for effective responses.
hen political operators uses toxic tactics at work, we need not respond by descending into the pit right alongside them. Responding ethically and with integrity is almost always possible, if we can detect the devious tactics early enough. Here's a collection of fairly widely used political tactics, with some suggestions for ethical, but politically savvy, responses.
Hit and Run

Former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, while he was Secretary of State. One incident in his career serves to illustrate the full complexity of the "Hit and Run" model of career decisions. Shortly after the 2004 U.S. Presidential election, when the administration of George W. Bush was still near its zenith in popularity and confidence, Secretary Powell resigned his position. Not all resignations are examples of "Hit and Run," but some are motivated by knowledge of trouble looming in the near future. We cannot know whether Secretary Powell's decision was so motivated, but in retrospect, it is consistent with a closely related variant of "Hit and Run" that one might call "It's Your Ball," (or "Be My Guest" or "Knock Yourself Out") in its positive form, or "Jumping Ship" in a more disreputable form. Secretary Powell's well-established record of integrity suggests that if anything, his decision might best fit "It's Your Ball." Photo courtesy US Department of State.When someone moves on from one high profile activity to another while the current effort is still underway, he or she might have knowledge (or suspect) that the current effort is at risk or doomed. Soon afterward, the project implodes, but the operator isn't charged, and often claims that the then-current owners of the activity are at fault.
If a project in your organization implodes dramatically, just after the departure of its leader or champion, investigate carefully before calling on her or him to rescue the project. Rule out "Hit and Run" before you get hit again.
The proxy target
Sometimes an attacker's true target isn't the person who's attacked. Rather, it could be the supervisor or mentor of the person attacked. By attacking the proxy target, the attacker diverts the attention of the true target, and might even harm the true target's reputation.
When attacked by someone much more powerful than you, don't assume that you're the true target. You could be a proxy. The harm done to you might be just as real, but knowing what's actually happening can be extremely helpful in formulating a response.
Confidential disinformation
When we confide in one another, the confider usually believes what is confided. That's one reason why we tend to believe what others tell us in confidence. Enhanced credibility explains, in part, why political operators sometimes tell lies — or partial truths — in confidence. And they also gain the protection of secrecy and deniability.
Don't assume that confiders believe everything they tell you in confidence. Verify and validate when you can.
The favored subordinate When someone moves on fromone high profile activity to anotherwhile the current effort is stillunderway, he or she might knowthat the current effortis at risk or doomed
Supervisors sometimes designate a favored subordinate who receives extra attention, multiple benefits, and who can seemingly do no wrong. Especially when this designation results from supervisor initiative — that is, when the designee hasn't curried favor — the supervisor has acknowledged and usually accepts the possibility that other subordinates will become resentful or demoralized.
Whether or not the favored subordinate has sought special status, it's likely that the supervisor's intentional choice is a signal to other subordinates that they must either accept secondary status, or move on. Because there are rarely any limits to how secondary that secondary status will be, it's probably best to move on. You lose little, though, because the favored position is usually just another form of subordination, maintained only at the price of freedom and dignity.
Detecting these patterns in our own situations can be difficult, because we don't want to find them. Look for them first in the situations others face. When you become adept at spotting them there, examine your own.

Devious Political Tactics: Cutouts
by Rick Brenner
Cutouts are people or procedures that enable political operators to communicate in safety. Using cutouts, operators can manipulate their environments while limiting their personal risk. How can you detect cutouts? And what can you do about them?
n espionage, a cutout acts as a secure means of communication. Its security usually derives from an asymmetry in its connection to the larger system. That is, while the people who communicate through the cutout know how to send messages to the cutout and how to receive messages from the cutout, the cutout probably doesn't know how to contact the communicators. A "dead drop" can be an example of a cutout. Another example: a courier who doesn't know the source of the freight carried.
Cutouts also play roles in organizational politics. Here are three examples of cutouts or their use in the workplace.
Deniable disclosure

Scott McLellan, White House Press Secretary, 2003-2006. The President's Press Secretary often acts as a cutout. If a statement creates trouble, the Secretary is the one who misspoke or who had incorrect information. This practice is not specific to Mr. McLellan's boss — all modern U.S. Presidents have employed press secretaries in this way. Photo courtesy U.S. White House.By simply making information available in a deniable way, an operator might encourage an ambitious subordinate to pursue a project. The disclosure might be something as simple as an apparently careless exposure of a memo on a desk or screen. The subordinate receives the information, but cannot reveal its source, without seeming to be a snoop.
Ambiguous direction
Ambiguous direction creates a chance that subordinates will do what the operator wants when the operator cannot ethically direct the subordinate to do so. If ever a problem arises, the operator can assert that he or she had something else in mind, and that the subordinate initiated the ethical breach. When combined with subjective cues, such as facial expressions and knowing glances, especially when delivered in private, ambiguous directions are especially effective.
People Cutouts enabledevious operatorsto limit the risksof organizational politics
Typically, human cutouts deliver or leak information on behalf of their operators, but they're unwilling or unable to credibly reveal sources or other related information. This protects the operator when the information leads to undesirable consequences or to pressure to reveal more. If the ploy backfires, then the operator can assert that either the human cutout misspoke, or exceeded authority, or any of a variety of other insulating claims.
When you spot a ploy that could be a cutout, what can you do?
Decide if it's acceptable
You might be content to receive the information through the cutout. This is a risky approach, but always a possibility.
Seek clarification
Ask for a direct disclosure instead, especially if you're receiving ambiguous direction. For instance, "You certainly wouldn't want us to act unethically...do you mean X or Y?"
Smoke out the operator
If you receive information that you "shouldn't" have, ask about it directly. "I've heard that Marigold might be revived. Know anything about that?" The operator now has a stark choice: to deny, to lie, to decline, or to reveal. If the information is revealed in front of witnesses, you're safe. If the operator continues to withhold, or dissembles, you might have found an accidental slip. Otherwise, take care.
Cutouts give you information that can be too hot to handle. Sometimes it's best to just ignore it — to appear to have missed the message. But don't miss this message.

Devious Political Tactics:The Three-Legged Race
by Rick Brenner
The Three-Legged Race is a tactic that some managers use to avoid giving one person new authority. Some of the more cynical among us use it to sabotage projects or even careers. How can you survive a three-legged race?
y assigning a task to two or more impossibly incompatible people, the political operator creates a three-legged race. Perhaps you remember the races from picnics long ago — participants pair up, and standing side-by-side, the right-hand partners tie their left legs to the right legs of the left-hand partners. The pairs then run a race, and comical spills are inevitable.
Three-legged races might be funny at picnics, but in business they're extremely dangerous, because the political operator who selects the race partners has likely arranged for failure. By exploiting a past history of conflict, leadership ambiguity, organizational tensions, or contention for the same promotion, the operator ensures project sabotage, or damage to one or both careers.
Three-legged races are especially challenging when the partners hold joint responsibility for mission success. But even if one is designated lead, there can still be significant trouble if one partner is required to accept the other and is ordered to "make it work."
Three-legged racesmight be funnyat picnics, butin businessthey're dangerousEven if you aren't now engaged in a three-legged race, look around. If others are lashed together, or have been in the past, check for patterns. Is it cultural? Does one specific player repeatedly create three-legged races? If so, your turn will come.
If you find yourself in a three-legged race, what can you do?
Show your partner this essay
Giving a name to this dynamic helps you both talk about it together. When you both see that someone else has arranged for your troubles, you can see your common interest more clearly.
Come to consensus about your situation
Whoever tied you together might be unaware of how destructive the arrangement can be, but more often, the tactic is a cynical attempt to undermine the project or to damage careers. Try to come to consensus about what's really going on.
Ask for help
If you can't work things out between you, ask for outside assistance. A professional mediator or facilitator can help both of you see things a bit differently. Avoid asking for help from the operator who lashed you together. By now, you know where that leads.
If you can't work it out, prepare contingencies
Things may be so far gone that consensus is impossible, even with the help of a professional. If you're unable to agree, head for the exit. Even if you have enough power in the situation to prevail, your partner usually has enough strength to sabotage the effort. Getting out might be your best option.
Perhaps, as a manager, you arrange three-legged races to give warring parties a chance to "work together" to resolve their problems. Even though you mean well, find another way to help them — this method puts them and the organization at risk. Get help. Dealing with interpersonal difficulties directly actually does work. Top Next Issue
addthis_pub = 'rbrenner';


Devious Political Tactics:The False Opportunity
by Rick Brenner
Workplace politics can make any environment dangerous, both to your career and to your health. This excerpt from my little catalog of devious political tactics describes the false opportunity, which appears to be a chance to perform, to contribute, or to make a real difference. It's often something else.
ordan looked up to see Stephanie standing in his doorway. She didn't look happy. With her eyes, she asked him for some time. Jordan rolled over towards his table and pointed to a chair, palm up. Stephanie closed the door, set down her water bottle and slowly sat.
False opportunitiesappear to be chancesto contribute or achieve.They aren't."Bad day," she began. "Marigold might be shelved."
Jordan had no words. Stephanie had created Marigold, and she'd hoped for a ride on its success. Marigold was a great idea, and she certainly deserved recognition. "I don't understand," he said. "Why?"
Stephanie stared at her water bottle. "Emmons mumbled something about new priorities from Diamond Square, that's all I know."
"But he must have known," said Jordan. "Why would he give you Marigold only to shut it down a month later?"
Lots of possibilities. Stephanie's predicament could be the result of having accepted a false opportunity. A false opportunity is a tactic some managers use to manipulate subordinates or to build empires. Here are some kinds of false opportunities.
The rhinestone
It glitters, but it's worthless. A rhinestone looks like an opportunity, but the grantor can undermine it in important ways: offering it too late; providing insufficient resources; requiring impossibly short completion dates or impossible amounts of work; or failing to remove conflicting demands.
The diversion
The offer might be less desirable than another opportunity that's out of your awareness or isn't yet announced. Once you accept, you're tied up, and unavailable for the really good one that comes along.
The dead end
It looks like an opportunity, but it's under threat of material change, such as reorganization, acquisition or downsizing; or a new high-level manager might be about to appear — one who's hostile to the opportunity; or a related business line is about to be sold off or shut down; or a competitive project is about to begin.
The foray
The opportunity might be an attempt to infringe on the turf of another, using you as a pawn. Sometimes the Foray is covert. If the project works, the grantor might go public, claiming an achievement. If it fails, it fails secretly. If it's discovered before completion, you might be left exposed, and bear some or all of the responsibility for the infringement.
Calisthenics
Some opportunities serve only to occupy the subordinate. Even if the project is successful, it will likely be shelved. This kind of "opportunity" is most often secret, because it could lead to demands from others for support for their own preferred opportunities.
You don't have to accept the False Opportunity when it appears — you can consider it a request for a favor, and ask for something in exchange before you accept. Remember to be careful what you ask for.

Devious Political Tactics:Credit Appropriation
by Rick Brenner
Managers and supervisors who take credit for the work of subordinates or others who feel powerless are using a tactic I call Credit Appropriation. It's the mark of the unsophisticated political operator.
ordan peeked into Stephanie's office, and felt relief when he saw that she was in, sitting as usual with her feet up on her desk, talking into her headset. She waved him in and pointed to a chair. He sat.
As he waited, Stephanie smiled at him, then rolled her eyes as she wagged her head back and forth, indicating with her usual good humor that the person at the other end of the phone was droning on, and that she had to wait for it to end. Mercifully, it ended after only a minute, and she clicked off. Pulling off her headset, she punched "Do Not Disturb" on the phone. Jordan got up, closed the door, and sat down again. It was becoming their routine.
Stephanie took a pull from the water bottle next to the phone. "OK, spill."
Jordan began, "Joseph lied to Emmons about who did the estimates, and now every time Emmons asks Joseph a question, he tells him 'I'll get back to you,' and then he asks me. I'm sick of this. More than sick."
"What happened now?" Stephanie asked.
Credit appropriationis the trademark ofthe unsophisticated operator"Just now I find out that Joseph misunderstood Emmons' problem with Marigold's budget, so my latest version wasn't what Emmons wanted. Now Joseph is blaming me."
Jordan is entangled in the consequences of a tactic I call Credit Appropriation. In Credit Appropriation, the appropriator (in this instance, Joseph) takes credit for the work of the target (Jordan), who's usually a subordinate or someone who is or feels vulnerable.
Since credit appropriation is the most obvious, least effective, and perhaps the most common of all political maneuvers, it's the trademark of the unsophisticated operator. Still, it hurts. Here are some tips to keep in mind if an Appropriator targets you.
Be aware
Even if you haven't yet been targeted, the Appropriator will likely get around to you, eventually. Notice patterns of appropriation, not only from your peers, but from the Appropriator's peers, too. Awareness is preparedness.
Watch for blowback
What can be taken can be returned. If the "credit" turns negative, the appropriator is likely to blame you. Resist making modifications or doing any follow-ons to the appropriated work, since these activities can lead to trouble. This is what happened to Jordan.
Complexity is your friend
Seed your work with complexities and nuance that you alone understand. Eventually, the complexity will compel the Appropriator to reveal the work's true author. If the complexity is evident enough, it might even deter appropriation altogether.
Credit Appropriation is the first item in my catalog of Devious Political Tactics — more are coming. Have you found yourself in this situation? Or others? Tell me your story. Making these tactics public — and giving them names — is perhaps the best way to prevent their use.