Approval or denial of proposals or requests can have impact beyond the disposition of the issue at hand. It also has political impact. It can make or break a career, render other projects moot, or doom or create whole lines of business. Since so much can be at stake, approval seekers have an incentive to use all manner of techniques to enhance approval rates. Sometimes these techniques become habitual — they use them whether the stakes are high or low.
Approvers and recommenders would do well to recognize these techniques. When they do, they can be more alert to them, and better maintain objectivity. In a politically healthy culture, recommendations of the sophisticated approver are more likely to be based on the merits; in an unhealthy culture, sophisticated approvers are less likely to commit political blunders.
Here are some of the tactics of approval seekers.
- Misrepresenting an approval deadline or the narrowness of a "window of opportunity"
- When done to create a sense of urgency, this tactic helps them jump the priority queue. But it's also a way to claim resources before other projects are considered, or to reduce the time available for judicious consideration.
- Hiding among sheep
- Grouping the request with non-controversial requests might make it look more innocent or less risky than it actually is.
- Using misleading competitive intelligence
- Exaggerating the validity or content of competitive intelligence is especially effective when the approver is fearful about the competitive position of the organization.
- Appeals to personal interest
- Appealing to the approver's personal interest often helps, despite the obvious implications about the approver's corruptibility. These appeals include implying that the proposal was the approver's idea, or that it was motivated by the approver's vision, or suggesting that it will help accomplish a political goal of the approver.
- Overvaluing contributions to or synergy with other pet projects
- This is another form of appeal to personal interest, but it enables the seeker to appeal (unreasonably) to the personal interest of political allies of the approver. Analogous attributes of alternative investments might also be misrepresented negatively.
- Competitive champion character assassination
- Underestimation and
probably the leading
causes of budget
and schedule overruns
- When the integrity or performance of the champion of a competitive investment opportunity is suddenly called into question, it's indeed possible that misdeeds are afoot. However, the misdeeds might not be those alleged by the approval seeker; rather, in an ironic twist, they might be the allegations of the approval seeker.
- Misrepresenting costs or time required
- Underestimation and misrepresentation are probably the leading causes of budget and schedule overruns. Comments about costs and time required for alternative investments might also be misrepresentations. Subject all claims and estimates to close scrutiny.
- Misrepresenting risks
- Risks of the proposed effort, when misrepresented, are usually underestimated or omitted. But when the proposal includes analysis of alternative investments, risks of those alternatives can be exaggerated.
Sometimes I fear that articles like this serve as handbooks for people with dark motives. But I hope that shining light in dark corners makes the world a brighter place. My hopes conquer my fears. 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. More info
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenIuoPRgxnJqMOiNzAner@ChacLELstbJuYhqYsqHHoCanyon.comSend 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.
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:
- Patterns of Everyday Conversation
- Many conversations follow identifiable patterns. Recognizing those patterns, and preparing yourself
to deal with them, can keep you out of trouble and make you more effective and influential.
- Top Ten Signs of a Blaming Culture
- The quality of an organization's culture is the key to high performance. An organization with a blaming
culture can't perform at a high level, because its people can't take reasonable risks. How can you tell
whether you work in a blaming culture?
- Bottlenecks: II
- When some people take on so much work that they become "bottlenecks," they expose the organization
to risks. Managing those risks is a first step to ending the bottlenecking pattern.
- Grace Under Fire: I
- If you're ever in a tight spot in a meeting, one in which you must defend your actions or past decisions,
the soundness of your arguments can matter less than your demeanor. What can you do when someone intends
to make you "lose it?"
- Power Affect
- Expressing one's organizational power to others is essential to maintaining it. Expressing power one
does not yet have is just as useful in attaining it.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming May 2: Narcissistic Behavior at Work: VII
- Narcissistic behavior at work prevents trusting relationships from developing. It also disrupts existing relationships, and generates toxic conflict. One class of behaviors that's especially threatening to relationships is disregard for the feelings of others. In this part of our series we examine the effects of that disregard. Available here and by RSS on May 2.
- And on May 9: Unethical Coordination
- When an internal department or an external source is charged with managing information about a large project, a conflict of interest can develop. That conflict presents opportunities for unethical behavior. What is the nature of that conflict, and what ethical breaches can occur? Available here and by RSS on May 9.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenXckwPGadBnUKNDXKner@ChackLitfWghPCmCjWcPoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)
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
- The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power
- Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.
Beware any resource that speaks of "winning" at workplace politics or "defeating" it. You can benefit or not, but there is no score-keeping, and it isn't a game.