Don't Staff the Ammo Dump
by Rick Brenner
"Staffing the ammo dump" is the job of retrieving ammunition for someone else to use in a political attack on a third party. It's a dangerous role.
Carl hated writing his monthly reports, because there was no evidence that anyone ever actually read them. Still, he had to finish it by five, so he kept at it despite the pain, all the while looking for other things to do. He was relieved when the phone rang.
It was Betsy, his boss. After the polite chitchat, she said, "Can you look at Paula's report on Marigold? Let me know what you think of the risk plan."
Paula, Betsy's peer, had recently assumed responsibility for Marigold from Betsy. Betsy had been a little peeved about this, because Marigold was Betsy's brainchild. Almost everyone thought she was still bothered about it, although she never said anything explicitly.
Betsy continued, "in strictest confidence of course."
"Sure," he said. They said good-bye, and Carl slowly and thoughtfully placed the handset in the cradle.
Carl felt uneasy. The request seemed strange, because it had come by telephone, rather than Betsy's more usual email. And Paula herself had asked Carl to comment on her risk plan, and Betsy knew it. As he wondered what was afoot, he completely forgot about his monthly report.
An ammo dump, in military parlance, is a place where ammunition is stored. "Staffing the ammo dump" is the job of retrieving ammunition for someone else to use in an attack on a third party. It's a dangerous role in the military, and it's no less dangerous in the office.
Unlike real ammo,
for safe handlingWe can't know for sure what Betsy had in mind, but it could have been a trip to the ammo dump, looking for ammunition to help her reclaim Marigold from Paula.
This is a dangerous role for Carl, because unlike real ammunition, Carl can't be sure of the safety or effectiveness of any metaphorical ammunition he provides. If something he provides harms Betsy, she might not honor her assurance of Carl's anonymity. She might be tempted to defend herself by claiming that she was relying on Carl's information. So if the ammunition is defective, or if it's misused, the staff of the ammo dump could be blamed.
What did Carl do? He replied by email to Betsy, indicating that he was perfectly comfortable with being open with Paula, and enclosed as an attachment the comments he had previously sent to Paula. What could Betsy do? She couldn't ask — or wasn't willing to ask — for ammunition explicitly, at least not in email. If she had in fact wanted ammunition, she had cloaked the request as a request for information, which Carl had honored. So Carl had complied with her request, without incurring the risk of staffing the ammo dump.
Requests for ammunition are usually ambiguous; ambiguity gives the requester deniability. But if the requester needs protection, you do too. If you think you might have been asked to staff the ammo dump, find a way to honor the literal request as openly as possible. Top Next Issue
Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. Order Now!
Your comments are welcome
Would you like to see your comments posted here? Send me your comments by email
, or by Web form
About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful,
and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend
Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive
of past issues. Subscribe for free.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout,
as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in,
anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
More articles on Workplace Politics
- Devious Political Tactics: Cutouts
- 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?
- Hostile Collaborations
- Sometimes collaboration with people we hold in low regard can be valuable. If we enter a hostile collaboration without first accepting both the hostility and the value, we might sabotage it outside our awareness, and that can render the effort worthless — or worse. What are the dynamics of hostile collaborations, and how can we do them well?
- The Advantages of Political Attack: Part I
- In workplace politics, attackers sometimes prevail even when the attacks are specious, and even when the attacker's job performance is substandard. Why are attacks so effective, and how can targets respond effectively?
- The Perils of Political Praise
- Political Praise is any public statement, praising (most often) an individual, and including a characterization of the individual or the individual's deeds, and which spins or distorts in such a way that it advances the praiser's own political agenda, possibly at the expense of the one praised.
- Why Others Do What They Do
- If you're human, you make mistakes. A particularly expensive kind of mistake is guessing incorrectly why others do what they do. Here are some of the ways we get this wrong.
See also Workplace Politics for more related articles.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates.
Contact Rick for details at rbrenner@ChacoCanyon.com
or (617) 491-6289, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout
are available in six ebooks:
Reprinting this article
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline?
Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
- Cognitive Biases and Workplace Decision-Making
- For most of us, making decisions is a large part of what we do at work. And we tend to believe that we make our decisions rationally, except possibly when stressed or hurried. That is a mistaken belief — very few of our decisions are purely rational. In this eye-opening yet entertaining program, Rick Brenner guides you through the fascinating world of cognitive biases, and he'll give concrete tips to help you control the influence of cognitive biases. Read more about this program. Here's an upcoming date for this program:
- MITRE, in Bedford, MA: October 21, Monthly Meeting, Boston SPIN.
- The Politics of Meetings for People Who Hate Politics
- There's a lot more to running an effective meeting than having the right room, the right equipment, and the right people. With meetings, the whole really is more than the sum of its parts. How the parts interact with each other and with external elements is as important as the parts themselves. And those interactions are the essence of politics for meetings. This program explores techniques for leading meetings that are based on understanding political interactions, and using that knowledge effectively to meet organizational goals. Read more about this program. Here are some upcoming dates for this program:
- Managing Virtual Meetings for Real Results
- Leading or participating in virtual meetings — teleconferences, Web conferences, video conferences, and more — is challenging. Miscommunications, misunderstandings, distractions, politics, and interpersonal conflict all thrive in the typical environment of the virtual team. We'll inventory the challenges virtual meeting leaders and participants face, and provide tools for anticipating and addressing them. The focus of this program is practical — attendees will learn concrete techniques for preventing and dealing with the problems that arise in virtual meetings. Read more about this program. Here's an upcoming date for this program:
- The Race to the South Pole: Ten Lessons for Project Managers
- On 14 December 1911, four men led by Roald Amundsen reached the South Pole. Thirty-five days later, Robert F. Scott and four others followed. Amundsen had won the race to the pole. Amundsen's party returned to base on 26 January 1912. Scott's party perished. As historical drama, why this happened is interesting enough, but to project managers, the story is fascinating. Lessons abound. Read more about this program. Here's an upcoming date for this program: