by Rick Brenner
Animosity between two people at work is often attributed to "personality clashes." While sometimes people can't get along, animosity can also be a tool for accomplishing strictly political ends. Here's a short catalog of some of its uses.
The causes of animosity between two people might be outside the awareness of bystanders, or even outside the awareness of either party or both. But animosity usually has roots somewhere. One common explanation for animosity between two people — overused, I believe — is a "personality clash."
But animosity can arise from other sources. For example, it can be structural, arising when the people involved represent groups that are in a state of toxic conflict. And animosity can be a tactic — created by one or both parties, who might use animosity to achieve an undisclosed goal.
A gray wolf. Most gray wolves are affiliated with a pack, which patrols and maintains a marked territory, defending it from neighboring packs and unaffiliated wolves. To a pack, territory means food and den sites — in short, survival. Territory violations by members of neighboring packs and unaffiliated animals are seen as threats to survival, and often result in fights to the death. This mechanism helps ensure a healthy balance between predator and prey populations. More about the gray wolf from the Wisconsin Department of natural Resources.
In the workplace, animosity can serve a similar function. When a particular organization becomes too crowded with people of similar ambitions, contention can result in displacement of some to other organizations. Although animosity can serve such a constructive role, the price in terms of lost productivity and depressed morale can be very high. Unlike the gray wolf, humans are capable of devising alternative mechanisms perhaps better suited to distributing talent. Photo courtesy U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
When animosity is a tactic, addressing it as anything else probably won't work. Here's a little catalog of animosity patterns I've seen people use. It might help you recognize when animosity is a tactic.
- The indirect target
- Sometimes the actual target of the operator isn't obvious. For example, if the actual target is a team lead, and the operator hopes to displace the team lead, the operator might target someone else to create dissension, providing evidence that the team lead is ineffective. This tactic works better when the dissension created doesn't involve the team lead directly.
- Feet of clay
- Disrupting a team's social structure can be one route to becoming a dominant figure on a team. The disrupter gradually antagonizes the current dominant figure, intending to force what appear to be unforced errors. Flustered, dominant figures under such attack might commit blunders serious enough to compromise their positions, and the displacement is then complete. This approach is more effective when the current dominant figure champions noble, higher ideals.
- Some believe that all their relationships must be pleasant and cheerful. Their willingness to bend is what many would term "beyond reasonable" or even "self-destructive." They're easy targets for those who use animosity as a tactic. By creating tension in the relationship, the operator can use it for all manner of workplace favors, such as freeing up assignments or obtaining political support for their endeavors.
- Discrediting the competition
- Some operators When animosity is a tactic,
addressing it as anything
else probably won't workuse animosity to discredit potential competitors. By creating difficulty between the competitor and those around him or her, they create the impression that the competitor is difficult to work with. This approach is more effective if the operator is especially productive and ingratiating to the shared superior. In some cases, the operator actually becomes the superior's close confidant.
One more pattern of animosity is particularly troubling. It could be called "Just for kicks." There are those who derive satisfaction or comfort from animosity in the atmosphere. Perhaps they're unaware of what they're doing, but that matters little to those around them. If you find someone like this in your world, it's probably best to show him or her the way out, or find a way out for yourself. Top Next Issue
Are you fed up with tense, explosive meetings? Are you or a colleague the target of a bully? Destructive conflict can ruin organizations. But if we believe that all conflict is destructive, and that we can somehow eliminate conflict, or that conflict is an enemy of productivity, then we're in conflict with Conflict itself. Read 101 Tips for Managing Conflict to learn how to make peace with conflict and make it an organizational asset. 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 Conflict Management
- When Leaders Fight
- Organizations often pretend that feuds between leaders do not exist. But when the two most powerful people in your organization go head-to-head, everyone in the organization suffers. How can you survive a feud between people above you in the org chart?
- Assumptions and the Johari Window: Part II
- The roots of both creative and destructive conflict can often be traced to the differing assumptions of the parties to the conflict. Here's Part II of an essay on surfacing these differences using a tool called the Johari window.
- Managing Pressure: Milestones and Deliveries
- Pressed repeatedly for "status" reports, you might guess that they don't want status — they want progress. Things can get so nutty that responding to the status requests gets in the way of doing the job. How does this happen and what can you do about it? Here's Part III of a set of tactics and strategies for dealing with pressure.
- Communication Templates: Part I
- Some communication patterns are so widely used that nearly everyone in a given cultural group knows them. These templates demand certain prescribed responses, and societal norms enforce them. In themselves, they're harmless, but there are risks.
- Letting Go of the Status Quo: the Debate
- Before we can change, we must want to change, or at least accept that we must change. And somewhere in there, we must let go of some part of what is now in place — the status quo. In organizations, the decision to let go involves debate.
See also Conflict Management, Emotions at Work and 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: