39 ms·

Office politics is not optional: learn to play the game or you'll be its victim

162 points by cebert 3y ago

cebert 3y ago
https://archive.ph/fP60i https://archive.ph/fP60i
WantonQuantum 3y ago
I hate office politics as much as the next developer. This FT article is a very light "review" of a book called "7 Rules Of Power". To save you time, here are the 7 rules: 1. Get out of your own way. 2. Break the rules. 3. Appear powerful. 4. Build a powerful brand. 5. Network relentlessly. 6. Use your power. 7. Success excuses almost everything you may have done to acquire power. "Get out of your own way" means (in this book) that not showing or communicating your worth or value will leave you behind peers who do go out of their way to show their worth and value. I.e., If you keep your head down and just do good work, you won't get noticed. So, it seems "office politics is not optional" is based on the unstated premise: "if success in the workplace is the only thing you care about." As for me, I've been a developer for 25 years and never wanted to go into management. I love my job because I love to code and I love learning new things. I'm 100% not the target audience for this book.
- foobarian 3y ago
  > success in the workplace Even that can be so many different things. Measured how - title? Number of underlings? Number of committees? Money?
  - lazide 3y ago
    Money, and interesting problems to work on.
  - jvanderbot 3y ago
    In my experience there's a few that are critical: Getting the funnest projects Getting reasonable flexibility in hours or days Not being the garbage disposal, meaning you are allowed to work on important, not necessarily urgent things Etc These do require politics and reputation management. But much of it is being reliable and asking for what you want, but doing what you're given. The rest, a non-negligible amount, comes from the active steps listed on GP.
  - gcp123 3y ago
    Power, money, influence.
  - gumby 3y ago
    What you consider success is up to you. The criteria you listed may matter to you or they may be other peoples’ criteria of success. Perhaps success for you is “known as important enough that I’m never on the layoff list”. And “get to spend time with my family; can avoid the death march programs”.
- rayiner 3y ago
  As an aside, I also think this explains the "bamboo ceiling" phenomenon. South asian culture is comfortable with self-promotion--my dad taught me most of these rules from a young age--in a way I get the impression east asian culture maybe looks down upon. That plays out when you look at who is in management. So if you're an engineer (from any background) who wants to move up, consider reading this book.
  - shermantanktop 3y ago
    People who are constantly asserting their own value are definitely looked down upon by a whole lot of their peers. If that's what you mean by "comfortable with self-promotion," it's a double-edged sword.
    - rayiner 3y ago
      Your peers don’t make promotion decisions.
      - esafak 3y ago
        Generally true, but not if they start their own companies.
      - shermantanktop 3y ago
        Your bosses notice this too. EDIT: not you personally,sorry. In any case, I sit in promo discussions all the time and self-promoting behavior has the unintended effect of driving greater scrutiny.
    - loeg 3y ago
      It's a showing vs telling thing, isn't it? Don't just tell everyone you're awesome; show people the cool/challenging work you've done.
- WWLink 3y ago
  > As for me, I've been a developer for 25 years and never wanted to go into management. I love my job because I love to code and I love learning new things. I'm 100% not the target audience for this book. I feel like you can still gain a lot of respect by loving to code. For one, if you're impactful enough your name will be all over your company's git repositories in commits. You'll have your name in documentation. A lot of newer employees will remember your mentoring. That in itself all earns you valuable respect. Perhaps it's not the same as making sure the CEO knows that you made this piece of software, and did this thing, and that thing... but it does make its way there in a healthy organization.
  - reactordev 3y ago
    “For one, if you're impactful enough your name will be all over your company's git repositories in commits” Or… you’re a busy body that likes to move files around and pretty things up leaving your name on the blame and making it look like you did a ton of work. All you did was open it/save it in VIM. Let’s not praise false indicators. Lines of code isn’t a good measurement of quality, nor is lines committed.
    - MiguelX413 3y ago
      Not necessarily.
    - evantbyrne 3y ago
      The dude who probably had the most commits at our org was just chosen as the sacrificial lamb of the development team's share of cost cutting. Now I have no opinion of his work personally due to working separately and I generally thought highly of him as a person, but he was considered by some to be responsible for one of the most significant engineering f-ups in the history of the org. It is generally true that traumatic events resonate more deeply with people than positive ones. So you can quietly commit code all day everyday, but if your mistakes are more visible than your successes then you won't go far.
      - Jensson 3y ago
- ThrowawayR2 3y ago
  > "So, it seems office politics is not optional' is based on the unstated premise: 'if success in the workplace is the only thing you care about.'" The FAANGs and similar corporate environments and even academia have unhealthily competitive "up or out" cultures. In those places, people are simply not allowed to not care about success or they'll get washed out because of low promotion velocity.
  - kylebenzle 3y ago
    Was trying to find a way to reply to your comment about my book. But yes, I wrote a scifi novel about a computer hacker and occasionally post it here. Calling me a "shill" for trying to promote my book seems harsh. Have you ever tried to accomplish anything in your life? How would you suggest a new author gets their work outlet there?
    - ThrowawayR2 3y ago
      Your account has been around long enough that you should be amply familiar with the HN guidelines linked at the bottom of the page, particularly the one about not using HN for promoting your own products. However, if you believe that your post has been unfairly flagged, you may contact the site moderators, whose email address is also in the guidelines, and make your case to them.
  - refulgentis 3y ago
    This isn't true at all at Google (well, wasn't, 2016-2023). The value was/is in signalling you don't care. Large portions of employees are ye olde Ivy League grad / 2nd generation wealthy. More WASP values than hacker values.
  - AdieuToLogic 3y ago
    Success != Promotions > The FAANGs and similar corporate environments and even academia have unhealthily competitive "up or out" cultures. If given a choice between "up or out" and "up" is not what one wants to do (for whatever reasons), then "out" is the only path which might lead to happiness, as "here" is not an option allowed.
- NoPicklez 3y ago
  As someone who started at a big four firm 8 years ago in cyber consulting, a lot of this rings true outside of programming. Especially the part about not showing or communicating your worth or value will leave you behind. I was the worker who kept their head down, did good work and built good networks with people around me early on in my career. I got a lot of feedback through 1:1 discussions that said "You do great work and particular people know that, but other people with influence don't". You don't need to be a dick and push others around to show your value, but speaking up, being supporting of others openly and contributing in other areas help show people who you are. All of this needs to be wrapped up under leaders who support growth.
- Exoristos 3y ago
  How different is this from, Be an open and optimistic communicator, exploit opportunities vigorously as they arise, show confidence in your track record and your thinking -- for the good of yourself and the business? In other words, "office politics" does not have to be odious.
- 0ckpuppet 3y ago
  some of these rules sound like euphemisms for backstabby lickspittle who's biggest expertise is resembing an expert.
- bitwize 3y ago
  > "Get out of your own way" means (in this book) that not showing or communicating your worth or value will leave you behind peers who do go out of their way to show their worth and value. I.e., If you keep your head down and just do good work, you won't get noticed. The best business advice I ever received came in a dream in which All Might (from My Hero Academia) told me: "If you want to succeed and get recognized at work, you must let your company know: 'I am here!'"
- jay_kyburz 3y ago
  I cringe a little reading that list, but I do think people should spend time thinking about, and communicating their worth. I'm in games development, and many years ago when I worked in a big studio we used to do these Friday afternoon meetings where people would stand up and show off the best work they did during the week. The artists would show off a cool new character model, or a programmer might show how the pathfinder improved, or some nice new animation blending. I'm sure some people hated it, but I think it was really great for the whole team to sit around and congratulate each other for what was achieved that week.
- jdksmdbtbdnmsm 3y ago
  [flagged]
- j-bos 3y ago
  Agreed, for most of us those games are optional, But "good" people still need to play, and play well. When they don't we get 21st century Boeing
- gmd63 3y ago
  It's wild to me that folks seem to be unable to figure out how to fix rot at large companies when this is such a toxic set of trials for selecting people to put in power
  - bdw5204 3y ago
    Society can't figure out how to stop the most toxic, corrupt and incompetent people from becoming high ranking politicians so it makes perfect sense for the same kind of rot to be endemic at large corporations. Rotten people gravitate towards power and most of those who aren't rotten are cowards who won't do anything to stop them because that'd risk their own careers or their own relationships with people naive enough to fall for the rotten people who are climbing towards the top. The only thing that fixes this is for a critical mass of people to find the courage to stand up to rotten individuals who are powerful or likely to obtain power soon.
    - Jensson 3y ago
      > The only thing that fixes this is for a critical mass of people to find the courage to stand up to rotten individuals who are powerful or likely to obtain power soon. Or you know, competition from new companies that will replace them. So companies can't rot too much, they have to continue to provide at least a bit of value or get replaced.
  - ramraj07 3y ago
    The reason is more often than not it just cannot be fixed. Only way to fix it is to fundamentally start fresh.
    - gmd63 3y ago
      I feel like with the level of surveillance we point at ad targeting, if we just steered it in the right direction it would provide at least some clue in sussing out who is power gaming versus people who are earnestly trying to do good for the team On a personal level I've developed a sense for when someone tends toward these behaviors, like when they downplay the contribution of someone who actually did work while promoting their "direction" which happened outside of recorded history
- saghm 3y ago
  > So, it seems "office politics is not optional" is based on the unstated premise: "if success in the workplace is the only thing you care about." > As for me, I've been a developer for 25 years and never wanted to go into management. I love my job because I love to code and I love learning new things. I'm 100% not the target audience for this book. Agreed. I think it's also a false dichotomy that you either have to "play the game" or "not play the game"; as most things, how much you want to "play the game" is a spectrum, and there's definitely merit in picking your battles. I ultimately don't care enough about most technical decisions in the products I've worked on to try to outmaneuver someone else who's trying to play politics, but if someone is actively politicking to try to affect _me_ specifically rather than the product, I'm not likely to stand by and let it happen rather than try to influence things. It's useful to be able to understand how office politics work from defensive perspective even if you don't plan to actively utilize it.
  - mlrtime 3y ago
    I think some of the debate here is that politics is always happening to you, you have no choice but to play the game. You can be passive or active, you are just choosing to be passive but you're still playing. So, if you don't want to play it's still better to know the rules.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- neilv 3y ago
  If you start a company, how do you avoid anyone trying to practice those 7 "rules" and BS-ify your company? When some individuals do try this BS, can you correct or eject them fast enough, or is it inevitable that they take over? Does BS-ification always start bottom-up, top-down, or it varies? Is there a point at which a company as an entity consciously chooses BS for its operations (such as because there's a superior net result, or non-BS is deemed intractable or is not understood)?
  - weregiraffe 3y ago
    Keep the headcount under the Dunbar number and be the only boss.
    - mlrtime 3y ago
      I think this is the only answer here. If you want to keep control you have to keep the number low enough to see all the pieces being played. This doesn't stop the game from playing, but if you are founder/CEO you have more ability to shape.
  - esafak 3y ago
    Use tools to help workers estimate their contribution. Basically try to automate performance evaluation. You can't completely, but you can give bullshitters less opportunity to embellish. And like the other commenter said, keep the company as small as possible. That way, each person's contribution is more prominent.
    - neilv 3y ago
      > [...] productivity measurement [...] analytics [...] workers estimate their contribution [...] automate evaluation [...] Won't this inevitably lead to the same familiar BS? We already know that current tech workers start focusing on corporate BS metrics (e.g., FAANG interviews) while still in school. Even getting into the college was its own gauntlet of BS of resource-intensive hoop-jumping, questionable metrics, artifice, and self-promotion. CS students have already been told how to strategically pick their first job, how to work promotions, when to job-hop, to have no loyalty to project and team, to network, to self-promote, etc. By the time tech workers hit their first job, they've practically been engineered and filtered to be corporate BS machines. Part of the trick might be to un-train that. And to filter for people who can be un-trained.
- strken 3y ago
  While everything past 1 is cut-throat garbage, I'm not convinced that communicating what you've been doing is actually useless to the rest of the company. If you don't bullshit and just present your work then it's a good way for management to learn why projects went well/poorly, and a good way for you to organise your own thoughts and your stream of work. There's a basic level of self-promotion - demos, emails, talks to other engineers or users about how to use the new thing you made, retrospective write-ups of failed projects - below which you're not telling other people enough about what you did.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- incomingpain 3y ago
  >"Get out of your own way" means (in this book) that not showing or communicating your worth or value will leave you behind peers who do go out of their way to show their worth and value. I.e., If you keep your head down and just do good work, you won't get noticed. My last job, I was out of the office the vast majority of the time. I was working 50-60 hour weeks. There wasnt enough time to sell myself to my boss. I did work out of the office with sales guys and the ceo quite often so I did sell to them. They loved me. I would get back into the office and it was like everyone was caught up in a battle with each other. I tried my best to stay out of it, but you get drawn into that shit so quickly. Specifically, there was a senior sysadmin who knew nothing about networking at war with the network admin. I was the only other network admin, so naturally I get drawn into it. So I would help out there to help him avoid that conflict. Then on multiple occasions I did the network work, but the other network admin thought the sysadmin did and started saying how bad of a job he did. But it was me... Then the dreadful day where I was booked 4-6 weeks in advanced and there was work needed to be done. So they brought this other network admin in on my clients. Totally fine with me to have less on my plate. But then I get a phone call from my client telling me the network admin badmouthed me the entire time he was there. I got that recorded, provided it to HR. HR then said they cant just fire him because then I'd be the last network admin and im overloaded with work. They then let me in on something I shouldn't know. He also has another fireable offence being hateful toward a lesbian peer. She was awesome, no idea why he had a fued with her. So I left the harassment complaint with HR. But like 3 days later my boss who rarely speaks with me comes into my office to tell me that the other network admin went through my tickets and found many problems. I stopped him there, i told him that that other network admin is harassing me, that i'm making it official now and he has to do something about it. The next morning I got fired.
  - mlrtime 3y ago
    That escalated quickly, if HR had a "file" on the other guy, what was the cause of firing? Did your manager like the other guy more? Also why does it matter that the peer was a lesbian?
    - incomingpain 3y ago
greatpostman 3y ago
The biggest office politics I see these days is demographic/racial based. Big tech splits very cleanly on these lines, exceptions abound
- throwawaaarrgh 3y ago
  You're not paying attention then. Office politics applies to everyone. It's the one meritocratic thing about business. The person who's better at manipulating people goes to the top, regardless of race, gender, etc.
  - roenxi 3y ago
    On average I expect promotions to be meritocratic; in that the further up the hierarchy we sample the more likely we are to get exceptional people. That being said, if I were looking for a career in management I'd rather be female. In most of the workplaces I've been they've got a decided advantage at promotion after controlling for motivation and political savvy; and around a third of the girls in my university year moved in to senior management positions.
    - throwawaaarrgh 3y ago
      Promotions are not meritocratic. You get promoted if you are useful to the person promoting you; you'll play ball, follow orders, know a secret, can do a favor, are reliable, don't ruffle feathers, under promise and over deliver, make friends easy, etc. That's not merit, that's corruption. This is true for one simple reason: Promotions are not weighed by an impartial algorithm, chosen by sorting, and doled out on a set schedule. They are submitted for consideration and approved by the powerful, when they feel like it, for whatever reasons they feel like. The further up the hierarchy you go, the less exceptional people are. It's called the Peter Principle. Even if you used to be exceptional at your job, a promotion gives you a different job. And technical skill has almost nothing to do with ability to get promoted. The only reason women might be promoted more is they're working twice as hard as the men. I'm sure if you asked them, they would rather have been men, when it comes to getting promotions. The bar would be a lot lower.
nine_zeros 3y ago
Here's the truth about office politics: it's a rat race trap. You spend your life away jockeying for attention, resources and org chart positions. You go through immense stressors, let others down and get let down, swallow your mental peace - only to jockey for a higher position in the ladder. Every rung of the ladder is just being more and more assistant to your boss. You just CANNOT have your boss think badly of you. It's an abusive attachment. You grind and grind away, only to get laid off because some distant boss wants it to happen. Imagine a video game where monkeys spend their lives climbing an imaginary rung, only to find that reaching the top rung is the same as falling from a middle rung - both are "game overs"
- nosefurhairdo 3y ago
  The point isn't to play politics at the expense of your happiness. Awareness of the political reality allows you to more effectively reach your goals. I used to do great work without caring whether I got recognition, because I just like to keep my head down and write code. However, I've learned that by showcasing my work, collecting metrics, etc. I am able to gain credibility that allows me to sell management on projects I'd like to take on. Playing a little bit of politics has made work more enjoyable.
  - nine_zeros 3y ago
    What you are engaging in is a double edged sword. In your case, what you have is incompetent management that needs some BS (metrics) to be constantly fed to themselves. The quarter you don't feed BS metrics to them will be the quarter they try to manage you out. An alternative system is one where management is responsible for understanding the business value of the work and being ok with the outcome e.g. being ok with good metrics vs poor metrics both - whatever the outcome. It was the path they charted for some objective. They need to own the objectives.
    - tdeck 3y ago
      As an individual, it's very hard to avoid incompetent managers. There are so many different ways a manager can fall short, and it's often very difficult to assess before joining a team. Even if you have a personal connection to someone on the manager's team, they may not be very observant or may not even realize something could be better. Also, there's a practical limit to how many times you can change managers. This means it's important to learn certain communication skills even if you wouldn't need them with an ideal manager.
zzzeek 3y ago
Ive relied on the same formula for office politics for decades: 1. write all the code 2. Noone can fire you 3. Ignore all the politics and wait for everyone to quit and/or the company to lay everyone off. Nobody is left so now you're the manager ! Go get the next job
- jvanderbot 3y ago
  Eventually you may realize that maintaining the image of the productive a-political cornerstone, is in fact a political move. That is reputation management. You're "above it". That's the true meaning behind politics being non-optional.
  - timeagain 3y ago
    Right. Even the top commenter right now about just being interested in coding and learning is playing. They are playing the “engaged IC”. You can bet the political people know how to use and abuse that role just like any other.
    - latency-guy2 3y ago
      I think politically obsessed people are just invading all the conversation in an attempt to be relevant, a lot of politically obsessed people are just not that important. Not playing is simply, not playing. Apolitical is a position of apoliticalness, not politicalness. Attempts to change the meaning of these words is laughable.
      - mlrtime 3y ago
        I don't agree, you are always playing. You are either actively or passively playing. This isn't obsession, it is observation of reality and understanding sociology in any group of humans (and other mammals).
      - jvanderbot 3y ago
        One fish says to the other fish: how's the water? He replies: what's water? Politics is just people, and people's perception of you. It's talking to folks to effect change, ideally a positive change. It's when you sit down with someone to review their code and suggest a different way. It's when you discuss someone's strengths with their boss so they can get better work. It's when you email someone to make sure they saw your merge request so you can get it done faster. It's literally the people side of a business, and knowing who to ask for what, how to ask, and so on. When someone gets all Machiavelli with those relationships, making sure the right people know what they're working on, or trying to get inside information on upcoming projects, or etc, and then used that to their own advantage then we suddenly call it politics. But that's just shitty people playing politics primarily. Work relationships and lines of power and communication are not optional. They exist. What you do with them does not determine if you are in a political game or not, it just determines how you play it. TFA probably was read to say "You have to be Machiavellian". I think it's fair to say that's an over statement. But pretending or purporting to be antipolitical is an oxymoron. To whom are you pretending? A straightforward a-political style request or response must still define a relationship style.
Barrin92 3y ago
Personal alternative, started to work for a family business with a grey collar culture where people know each other. No need to read weird self-help literature. If 'networking' is a central part of anyone's job personally I'd start picking a less Patrick Bateman-esque workplace. The best way to not have to deal with backstabbing and conniving is just to work with people who are in it for the long term and where that behavior does not pay off.
- verve_rat 3y ago
  What is a grey collar culture? Somewhere between blue and white, or something else?
  - Barrin92 3y ago
    yes, a work environment where you have a sort of mix of white and blue collar culture both individually and collectively rather than the "manager on the top floor, worker at the bottom" thing. Companies where the boss is also able and willing to grab some tools and get to work. Flat hierarchies and informal relationships, not the 15 levels to the top ladder thing. Prototypical example is a German or Japanese small/medium business, but software startups often are a lot like it too. They just lose it generally as they blow up and transition to the typical US/British management style.
jacquesm 3y ago
I've found that the best way to deal with office politics is simply to refuse to play. The one place where I worked where this was a real factor (a bank) taught me that I really didn't want to spend the rest of my life to end up in middle age caught up in a web of responsibilities with my market value only maximized at my current employer. Freelancing was more risky, but far more educational and left me completely free to ignore the office politics, as long as I delivered value my bills would get paid and I didn't have to show up in any office. After more than a decade of that (and making reasonable money, not great, but definitely not bad either compared to my peers) I eventually founded the company that still exists in it's nth incarnation today. If I had stayed in that office.... shudder.
bmulcahy 3y ago
No. Instead, I'm going to be excellent to my fellow people. I'm not going to sink to their level.
- goosejuice 3y ago
  I believe this is the way. That said, it might be a privilege to think this way. One can be nice to others and still play to a political advantage.
  - crotchfire 3y ago
    Integrity is not a "privilege".
    - goosejuice 3y ago
      Indeed integrity isn't. You're misrepresentating my comment. Perhaps privilege is too much of a trigger word these days. Depending on ones economic situation, not playing the political game could mean being on the street, losing your kids, etc. In that sense, it can be a privilege offered to those with the financial freedom. This doesn't mean in any way that you can't do it with integrity.
- demondemidi 3y ago
  It's not about sinking, it is about a totally different skill set. There's no good/bad here, it just IS. Also, your statement implies you are "above" other people, which is so arrogant, it is almost like you are the people you despise.
- ramraj07 3y ago
  You can learn the politics and choose not to play it. It’s still useful to understand why people act the way they do and never be surprised by things that affect you.
- spangry 3y ago
  Admirable, but be aware that you are choosing to play 'co-operate' in a multi-agent prisoner's dilemma: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma
RyanAdamas 3y ago
politics is community cancer
- dymk 3y ago
  politics is how you convince people above you to do things
  - RyanAdamas 3y ago
    politics is inherently manipulative what i said is still true even if what you say is too
thr0way120 3y ago
I was at a AAA++++ brand FAANG. The politics, from the second I joined, were so over-the-top. It was like Wrestlemania. Everyone was smashing eachother and throwing elbows and it was like a spectator sport about who could club who first and the loudest. I had just gotten out of a super toxic prior employer and had zero motivation to engage in corporate politics so I just decided to wait and watch and try to understand how to be effective. I waited. And watched. And waited. And watched. And raised some ideas. All shot down. Finally I came to the realization that if I wanted to "play this game" I would need to get into the ring and start shutting people down, throwing elbows, telling other people their ideas suck etc. After thinking about it a long time, I decided: (a) I didn't want to do any of the above (b) I cared about building things good for customers (c) I hated the VPs involved and had nothing in common with them (d) I didn't want their jobs, because it would require doing what they were doing I ended up leaving for a startup. It was a very good company. I still think about if it was the right thing to do. But I was not growing, not getting to do anything, it was antithetical to my personal and career growth, I wasn't learning. It was just a wrestling ring with morons yelling at eachother and acting out their insecurities loudly. I couldn't do it. Contrast to prior employer: EVeryone was political, but in a sneaky, underhanded way. It was all covert assassination. At a startup, there was no bullshit. It was: There is the work, do the work. The end. No politics. With remote work: Politics is even worse in my opinion. Remote workers are at a huge disadvantage.
- AdieuToLogic 3y ago
  > I was at a AAA++++ brand FAANG. > The politics, from the second I joined, were so over-the-top. It was like Wrestlemania. Everyone was smashing eachother and throwing elbows and it was like a spectator sport about who could club who first and the loudest. This is phenomena I've seen played out in organizations which are flush with cash and want to hire "only the best", yet end up having multi-layered management building fiefdoms in order to affirm their importance. Bored smart people will find a way to make their days feel important. If it is not in the work they do, then it will be the political fights they have.
  - thr0way120 3y ago
xnx 3y ago
I absolutely believe this is true, but it makes me sick and I don't want to be a part of it.
goosejuice 3y ago
Politics certainly play a part in most of society. I'm not sure that it's more common or sinister in the office setting. I also believe that some enjoy it.. one need not look farther than the success of reality TV. I believe it boils down to scarcity and the seemingly odd human attraction to drama. Even in the US, where there's plenty of wealth, life can still be darwinian. Pessimism aside, there are definitely opportunities out there without these qualities.
paul7986 3y ago
If you work in government there's way less of all that. Of course you can't top out a massive salaries like at FAANG but whatever most important ... tons of money & stress or a very good living and not much stress or drama (ppl in government mostly are not clawing at themselves to climb a ladder rather its a nice paying gig with mostly nice ppl doing their job).
- pdonis 3y ago
  I think this depends very much on which government agency and at what level (federal, state, local). I know people who have had the sort of good experience you describe in government. I also know people who have worked in government jobs where the workplace was highly dysfunctional and most of the workers had no interest in actually doing their jobs.
  - paul7986 3y ago
    Maybe those who described it dysfunctional were dysfunctional and or under 40. I say under 40 cause after 40 you start to care less about what others think annd are much more comfortable in your skin ..that goes with others too in the same demographics. Thus if you are working with more ppl who are insecure (younger person thing) worrying too much /trying to out do each other due to insecurities then that's a dysfunctional environment and describes the demographic at most FANNG company's compared to government.
    - pdonis 3y ago
      > Maybe those who described it dysfunctional were dysfunctional and or under 40. In the cases I was referring to, particular events were described to me which, if true, would be extremely dysfunctional in a workplace by any reasonable criterion. In some of the cases, I personally observed such events on visits to the workplaces in question.
- spangry 3y ago
  It varies, in my experience. I've worked in government agencies with very little politics, and agencies with shitloads of workplace politics. The latter perform far worse than the former. The political agencies tend to have ill-defined goals, which causes misalignment which in turn generates politics.
aaomidi 3y ago
Office politics is effectively discrimination against many neuro divergences. It also kills productivity in companies. No I don’t have a solution.
- Aeolun 3y ago
  Not necessarily. Certain divergences can very easily ‘learn’ to play. Even if it’s all mechanics to them.
  - aaomidi 3y ago
    Hence the word “many”
- Gigachad 3y ago
  I agree that this happens, but it’s just a fact of life. We are all born different and those differences make us more or less suited to certain jobs. I can never be a professional basketball player because I wasn’t born with the right genetics for it. Some neurodivergent traits might make jobs in management or public communication difficult or impossible, but they could be a boost for other kinds of work like programming and research.
  - yencabulator 3y ago
    The harder someone plays office politics the less likely that person is the one doing the actual work. From the point of view of a neuro divergent person, it's a corruption of the system by "the other group".
    - aaomidi 3y ago
      And devs are not insulated from this. So much time of devs are wasted to play office politics.
bb88 3y ago
bb88's rule of management #1: Management is always dysfunctional. Good management is less so when compared to the average.
jauntywundrkind 3y ago
It would be so interesting to try to build an organization that tries & works to discern, rather than leaving everyone to fend for themselves & playing the game. There's various systems of 360 review, but they seem to silently boil out into a discussion between manager and employee. To actually combat "the game", we need both a real attempt at direct & honest assessment first, and we need to radiate out the findings, share awareness & impact second. As we do it, the structure of the org is still implicit, game-bases: we need to make it clear what these witnesses & testimonies have sussed, share our understanding of things are seem now. Actual decision making power needs to be vested in people based on the results. These reviews to serve the corporate need to assess never seem to come around & reify the findings: they're left a mystery to employees and power remains a structureless tyranny, to forever be interpreted by game players as they may. Down with the game players. Do good shit instead. (Empower interesting people, even if they don't play the game.)
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
PeterisP 3y ago
As in any community, you can ignore politics but politics won't ignore you.
osigurdson 3y ago
Do shareholders and customers want office politics?
quadcore 3y ago
Medications are not optional too. All the "players" I know are on medication, period. I suspect cancer is following (just my view I have no source). So thanks but no thanks. For me the next benchmark after perceived happiness is wether or not you're on medication (with rare exceptions). It you're on medication (rare exceptions apply), you can be driving the most beautiful of cars, your life is shit. Rare exceptions apply like you're working on something great or you have inherited your condition. You get the idea. You think your job and you politics and your thoughts are not responsible for your condition? You think it's the cat? You havent read the manual.
- timeagain 3y ago
  I feel dumb but can you be more specific? Are you talking about antidepressants or amphetamines? I’m guessing you aren’t talking about insulin.
  - quadcore 3y ago
    Food and the people you're spending time with are critical. You can be sick because you deal with a toxic person, particularly relatives or intimate relationship. Leaving that person will make a seemingly unrelated sickness disapear almost overnight (asma, back pain, etc.). It happened to me and my father. No rocket science here. Thats why they all on medication in offices. They are toxic to each other, they get sick. It's just that sometimes the person go from toxic parent to office and never realize whats causing the disease.
    - CRConrad 3y ago
      I'm pretty sure neither my diabetes nor my high blood pressure, both of which I take medications for, were caused by "toxic co-workers". What you're writing sounds like new-age gobbledy-gook, not far removed from crystals and auras (or shoving rocks up your...)
    - paulcole 3y ago
      I feel dumb but can you be more specific? Are you talking about antidepressants or amphetamines? I’m guessing you aren’t talking about insulin.
hyggetrold 3y ago
In my experience (two decades) you don’t have to play politics or participate, BUT - you do have to understand what’s happening and how it affects you.
andrewstuart 3y ago
When I was company founder and had multiple people working for me, I thought there was no office politics. My right hand man (who was always happy to tell me exactly what he thought) laughed.
- esafak 3y ago
  Did you take action after hearing that?
giantg2 3y ago
Yep, I'm it's victim. Oh well.
justapassenger 3y ago
[dead]
dukeofdoom 3y ago
It's safest to be a conformist coward, and never say anything politically incorrect.
- upupupandaway 3y ago
  Agreed. When I worked at a big tech company (let's say top 3) one person suggested the creation of a race-based committee (no whites allowed) that would receive complaints about any org members' personal social media - if they said something racist or insensitive, said committee would have the power to fire the person from the company. Org had 800 people, there were 153 likes on the post. I complained to HR about the tone and proposal and nothing happened. Days later, the post disappeared miraculously. I seriously doubt these 153 idiots liked the idea - most likely than not they are exactly the conformist cowards you describe.
rramadass 3y ago
A timely remainder on the realities of "Life/Work/Society/Groups" for everybody. Politics (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics) is considered a dirty discipline but it is not so and is intrinsic to the life of any Social Animal and in particular to complex social structures like those setup by Homo Sapiens. Everybody needs to learn how to "play the game" albeit within whatever boundaries they choose to confine themselves to. It is human nature whether one be in a role of Engineer/Admin/Management/whatever that is at play here and cannot be wished away but needs to be faced. At the minimum one needs it to "protect" oneself from the games others play and which may lead one to be at the losing end. Some relevant resources (in addition to the works of Jeffrey Pfeffer mentioned in the article); 1. The 4 Types of Organizational Politics - https://hbr.org/2017/04/the-4-types-of-organizational-politics https://hbr.org/2017/04/the-4-types-of-organizational-politi... 2. The Empowered Manager: Positive Political Skills at Work by Peter Block. 3. Management: A Political Activity by Ted Stephenson. 4. HBR's 10 must reads; 2-vol On Communication, 2-vol On Managing Yourself, 2-vol On Managing People.
- mlrtime 3y ago
  Great list, thank you.
  - rramadass 3y ago
    A few more relevant books but coming from different angles; 1. Why We Do What We Do : Understanding Self-Motivation by Edward Deci. - From Psychology angle. 2. The Evolution of Cooperation and The Complexity of Cooperation both by Robert Axelrod - From Game Theory angle.
tflinton 3y ago
Every large organization is going to have competing interests and ideas. Whether it’s a difference in priority or project approach or perhaps an entire product. Knowing how to navigate conflict is essential to any relationship including professional one. In addition knowing how to well communicate (e.g., sell) your ideas (or youself) is also needed. I get there’s toxic individuals to take this to a dark place as they would anything. But at its core I don’t see anything inherently evil about it, perhaps just that it can make manipulative people become more public.
- RHSman2 3y ago
  Well said. It does follow the network effect of propagating through systems. It requires important nodes to not spread further down and the close collaboration of other supporting nodes. Anyone slightly higher in the hierarchy can have an effect.
demondemidi 3y ago
It's funny, I've been a developer for 40+ years, been coding since the 80's. I always thought I would "just" write code, but around year 25, I realized I had outgrown programming and wanted to make bigger things, with greater reach. This meant not just entire products, but product lines, product strategies, brand identities. After this realization, it took me a decade to see that office politics exist because you are literally trying to steer the company, and so are other people, and you will disagree. I guess I haven't been fucked hard enough yet, because I enjoy this process. Some people call it a game, but I think it is just reality: if you want to do big things, you need an entirely new set of problem solving skills. 40 year old me would have scoffed at 58 year old me as a sellout, but here I am, enjoying it far more than debugging C code for a paycheck. I only debug my own C code now, and layout my stereo amplifiers circuits, even if they suck, because it doesn't impact my paycheck!
- gilbetron 3y ago
  I'm about 5 years behind you, career-wise, and have been transitioning to that way of thinking the past several years and am now in a position to actually get to do it. It is weird to realize that coding, while I still kinda like it, feels like a waste of time. By that I mean too little of an impact. It's fun, but stressful, in this "new" role. I'm still debugging systems, but I now include the human/organizational element. Not really a manager, but not really an engineer either. Very strange - any advice?
  - demondemidi 3y ago
    I thiiiink I know where you are, so here's my $0.02. $0.01 - Don't overachieve other peoples' work, keep boundaries. I'm an overachiever, but I found that when people around me start to miss things I would do their work. Two levels above me are blind to who does the work, they just want it done. If I'm getting others' work done people will expect me to keep doing it. While this might jeopardize the product if I stop doing it, it is important to not be the one that cleans up everyone's messes because it will kill your soul and the mess never really gets cleaned up. Sometimes things need to break and be visible at the top level for change to happen. This becomes more important as you start to manage more products at higher levels. $0.01 - Define requirements and deliverables exquisitely, since you can't solve all of your problems just by putting in more time. When I was a dev, I could pull an 80 hour week and finish something. But now I depend on 150+ engineers, and I cannot simply work more hours to fix things. Make your peace with that, and instead work on having very clear requirements. The more effort you put into clearly defining what you need, the more you can feel at ease with letting go and letting people do their thing. Bonus: don't be afraid to say "no". You gotta protect your sanity. If someone wants to blow past you and win all the gold medals, let 'em. There are always going to be people that will work 200%, I'm just not willing to sacrifice what's left of my life. I'm by no means a slacker, but there is ALWAYS 300x more work to be done no matter how efficient you and your teams are. Hope that helps? Good luck!
byyll 3y ago
Office is for work, not politics.
BLKNSLVR 3y ago
Having fallen ass-backwards into a couple of promotions to positions responsible for managing (very) small groups, I don't consider it worthwhile - and that's without having to sell my soul by engaging in office politics. One interpretation is as per the title "play the game or be the victim", my interpretation is "the only way to win is not to play". Office politics only escalates the higher you get. As completely as I can commit to anything, I believe that any time spent on office politics is time better spent on almost anything else. Those who seek money, power, and influence may disagree to their hearts content, but I've experienced enough, personally and vicariously, to know that their opinions are from a universe I do not, and can not happily, inhabit. The caveat to the above is that I'm in a position where I can provide for my family without feeling like I vitally need to sacrific any amount of who I am in order to give them "more". All needs and probably more than enough wants are met. Maintain the balance...
moandcompany 3y ago
You can't afford to put 0% into understanding or playing "the game," but that doesn't mean it should be the majority or a significant part of your work. It needs to be enough that your boss/boss' boss can recall a positive association between you/your work and what they care about. Some of this is your manager/boss' job, but at least try to make it easier for them to do. This is also a decent self sanity check on figuring out if what you're doing is important to do (with regard to the business, etc)
GaryNumanVevo 3y ago
I minored in sociology, a degree that some would consider "useless" but it's been absolutely invaluable in navigating the social dynamics within the various engineering orgs I've worked for.
fmajid 3y ago
I'd add: 1. Always make your manager looks good 2. Do not make disagreements personal, you may win this round but make an enemy for life
yencabulator 3y ago
Psychopaths telling others how to behave so they don't stab them in the back. No thanks.
teunispeters 3y ago
My dad was burnt by not involving in office politics at school. He didn't go to parties, he didn't go to social events, and he didn't largely pay attention in meetings. It ... did not go well for him. He figured it out at the end, but never did figure out how to engage well. Mind, he was likely autistic, carrying many of the signs. Not very relevant, but perhaps a good reminder.
TwoNineFive 3y ago
Low IQ clickbait for pathetic people. Just don't be an asshole and bring out the consequences for those who are.

162 points by cebert 3y ago

https://archive.ph/fP60i https://archive.ph/fP60i

I hate office politics as much as the next developer. This FT article is a very light "review" of a book called "7 Rules Of Power". To save you time, here are the 7 rules: 1. Get out of your own way. 2. Break the rules. 3. Appear powerful. 4. Build a powerful brand. 5. Network relentlessly. 6. Use your power. 7. Success excuses almost everything you may have done to acquire power. "Get out of your own way" means (in this book) that not showing or communicating your worth or value will leave you behind peers who do go out of their way to show their worth and value. I.e., If you keep your head down and just do good work, you won't get noticed. So, it seems "office politics is not optional" is based on the unstated premise: "if success in the workplace is the only thing you care about." As for me, I've been a developer for 25 years and never wanted to go into management. I love my job because I love to code and I love learning new things. I'm 100% not the target audience for this book.

foobarian 3y ago
> success in the workplace Even that can be so many different things. Measured how - title? Number of underlings? Number of committees? Money?
- lazide 3y ago
  Money, and interesting problems to work on.
- jvanderbot 3y ago
  In my experience there's a few that are critical: Getting the funnest projects Getting reasonable flexibility in hours or days Not being the garbage disposal, meaning you are allowed to work on important, not necessarily urgent things Etc These do require politics and reputation management. But much of it is being reliable and asking for what you want, but doing what you're given. The rest, a non-negligible amount, comes from the active steps listed on GP.
- gcp123 3y ago
  Power, money, influence.
- gumby 3y ago
  What you consider success is up to you. The criteria you listed may matter to you or they may be other peoples’ criteria of success. Perhaps success for you is “known as important enough that I’m never on the layoff list”. And “get to spend time with my family; can avoid the death march programs”.
rayiner 3y ago
As an aside, I also think this explains the "bamboo ceiling" phenomenon. South asian culture is comfortable with self-promotion--my dad taught me most of these rules from a young age--in a way I get the impression east asian culture maybe looks down upon. That plays out when you look at who is in management. So if you're an engineer (from any background) who wants to move up, consider reading this book.
- shermantanktop 3y ago
  People who are constantly asserting their own value are definitely looked down upon by a whole lot of their peers. If that's what you mean by "comfortable with self-promotion," it's a double-edged sword.
  - rayiner 3y ago
    Your peers don’t make promotion decisions.
    - esafak 3y ago
      Generally true, but not if they start their own companies.
    - shermantanktop 3y ago
      Your bosses notice this too. EDIT: not you personally,sorry. In any case, I sit in promo discussions all the time and self-promoting behavior has the unintended effect of driving greater scrutiny.
  - loeg 3y ago
    It's a showing vs telling thing, isn't it? Don't just tell everyone you're awesome; show people the cool/challenging work you've done.
WWLink 3y ago
> As for me, I've been a developer for 25 years and never wanted to go into management. I love my job because I love to code and I love learning new things. I'm 100% not the target audience for this book. I feel like you can still gain a lot of respect by loving to code. For one, if you're impactful enough your name will be all over your company's git repositories in commits. You'll have your name in documentation. A lot of newer employees will remember your mentoring. That in itself all earns you valuable respect. Perhaps it's not the same as making sure the CEO knows that you made this piece of software, and did this thing, and that thing... but it does make its way there in a healthy organization.
- reactordev 3y ago
  “For one, if you're impactful enough your name will be all over your company's git repositories in commits” Or… you’re a busy body that likes to move files around and pretty things up leaving your name on the blame and making it look like you did a ton of work. All you did was open it/save it in VIM. Let’s not praise false indicators. Lines of code isn’t a good measurement of quality, nor is lines committed.
  - MiguelX413 3y ago
    Not necessarily.
  - evantbyrne 3y ago
    The dude who probably had the most commits at our org was just chosen as the sacrificial lamb of the development team's share of cost cutting. Now I have no opinion of his work personally due to working separately and I generally thought highly of him as a person, but he was considered by some to be responsible for one of the most significant engineering f-ups in the history of the org. It is generally true that traumatic events resonate more deeply with people than positive ones. So you can quietly commit code all day everyday, but if your mistakes are more visible than your successes then you won't go far.
    - Jensson 3y ago
ThrowawayR2 3y ago
> "So, it seems office politics is not optional' is based on the unstated premise: 'if success in the workplace is the only thing you care about.'" The FAANGs and similar corporate environments and even academia have unhealthily competitive "up or out" cultures. In those places, people are simply not allowed to not care about success or they'll get washed out because of low promotion velocity.
- kylebenzle 3y ago
  Was trying to find a way to reply to your comment about my book. But yes, I wrote a scifi novel about a computer hacker and occasionally post it here. Calling me a "shill" for trying to promote my book seems harsh. Have you ever tried to accomplish anything in your life? How would you suggest a new author gets their work outlet there?
  - ThrowawayR2 3y ago
    Your account has been around long enough that you should be amply familiar with the HN guidelines linked at the bottom of the page, particularly the one about not using HN for promoting your own products. However, if you believe that your post has been unfairly flagged, you may contact the site moderators, whose email address is also in the guidelines, and make your case to them.
- refulgentis 3y ago
  This isn't true at all at Google (well, wasn't, 2016-2023). The value was/is in signalling you don't care. Large portions of employees are ye olde Ivy League grad / 2nd generation wealthy. More WASP values than hacker values.
- AdieuToLogic 3y ago
  Success != Promotions > The FAANGs and similar corporate environments and even academia have unhealthily competitive "up or out" cultures. If given a choice between "up or out" and "up" is not what one wants to do (for whatever reasons), then "out" is the only path which might lead to happiness, as "here" is not an option allowed.
NoPicklez 3y ago
As someone who started at a big four firm 8 years ago in cyber consulting, a lot of this rings true outside of programming. Especially the part about not showing or communicating your worth or value will leave you behind. I was the worker who kept their head down, did good work and built good networks with people around me early on in my career. I got a lot of feedback through 1:1 discussions that said "You do great work and particular people know that, but other people with influence don't". You don't need to be a dick and push others around to show your value, but speaking up, being supporting of others openly and contributing in other areas help show people who you are. All of this needs to be wrapped up under leaders who support growth.
Exoristos 3y ago
How different is this from, Be an open and optimistic communicator, exploit opportunities vigorously as they arise, show confidence in your track record and your thinking -- for the good of yourself and the business? In other words, "office politics" does not have to be odious.
0ckpuppet 3y ago
some of these rules sound like euphemisms for backstabby lickspittle who's biggest expertise is resembing an expert.
bitwize 3y ago
> "Get out of your own way" means (in this book) that not showing or communicating your worth or value will leave you behind peers who do go out of their way to show their worth and value. I.e., If you keep your head down and just do good work, you won't get noticed. The best business advice I ever received came in a dream in which All Might (from My Hero Academia) told me: "If you want to succeed and get recognized at work, you must let your company know: 'I am here!'"
jay_kyburz 3y ago
I cringe a little reading that list, but I do think people should spend time thinking about, and communicating their worth. I'm in games development, and many years ago when I worked in a big studio we used to do these Friday afternoon meetings where people would stand up and show off the best work they did during the week. The artists would show off a cool new character model, or a programmer might show how the pathfinder improved, or some nice new animation blending. I'm sure some people hated it, but I think it was really great for the whole team to sit around and congratulate each other for what was achieved that week.
jdksmdbtbdnmsm 3y ago
[flagged]
j-bos 3y ago
Agreed, for most of us those games are optional, But "good" people still need to play, and play well. When they don't we get 21st century Boeing
gmd63 3y ago
It's wild to me that folks seem to be unable to figure out how to fix rot at large companies when this is such a toxic set of trials for selecting people to put in power
- bdw5204 3y ago
  Society can't figure out how to stop the most toxic, corrupt and incompetent people from becoming high ranking politicians so it makes perfect sense for the same kind of rot to be endemic at large corporations. Rotten people gravitate towards power and most of those who aren't rotten are cowards who won't do anything to stop them because that'd risk their own careers or their own relationships with people naive enough to fall for the rotten people who are climbing towards the top. The only thing that fixes this is for a critical mass of people to find the courage to stand up to rotten individuals who are powerful or likely to obtain power soon.
  - Jensson 3y ago
    > The only thing that fixes this is for a critical mass of people to find the courage to stand up to rotten individuals who are powerful or likely to obtain power soon. Or you know, competition from new companies that will replace them. So companies can't rot too much, they have to continue to provide at least a bit of value or get replaced.
- ramraj07 3y ago
  The reason is more often than not it just cannot be fixed. Only way to fix it is to fundamentally start fresh.
  - gmd63 3y ago
    I feel like with the level of surveillance we point at ad targeting, if we just steered it in the right direction it would provide at least some clue in sussing out who is power gaming versus people who are earnestly trying to do good for the team On a personal level I've developed a sense for when someone tends toward these behaviors, like when they downplay the contribution of someone who actually did work while promoting their "direction" which happened outside of recorded history
saghm 3y ago
> So, it seems "office politics is not optional" is based on the unstated premise: "if success in the workplace is the only thing you care about." > As for me, I've been a developer for 25 years and never wanted to go into management. I love my job because I love to code and I love learning new things. I'm 100% not the target audience for this book. Agreed. I think it's also a false dichotomy that you either have to "play the game" or "not play the game"; as most things, how much you want to "play the game" is a spectrum, and there's definitely merit in picking your battles. I ultimately don't care enough about most technical decisions in the products I've worked on to try to outmaneuver someone else who's trying to play politics, but if someone is actively politicking to try to affect _me_ specifically rather than the product, I'm not likely to stand by and let it happen rather than try to influence things. It's useful to be able to understand how office politics work from defensive perspective even if you don't plan to actively utilize it.
- mlrtime 3y ago
  I think some of the debate here is that politics is always happening to you, you have no choice but to play the game. You can be passive or active, you are just choosing to be passive but you're still playing. So, if you don't want to play it's still better to know the rules.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
neilv 3y ago
If you start a company, how do you avoid anyone trying to practice those 7 "rules" and BS-ify your company? When some individuals do try this BS, can you correct or eject them fast enough, or is it inevitable that they take over? Does BS-ification always start bottom-up, top-down, or it varies? Is there a point at which a company as an entity consciously chooses BS for its operations (such as because there's a superior net result, or non-BS is deemed intractable or is not understood)?
- weregiraffe 3y ago
  Keep the headcount under the Dunbar number and be the only boss.
  - mlrtime 3y ago
    I think this is the only answer here. If you want to keep control you have to keep the number low enough to see all the pieces being played. This doesn't stop the game from playing, but if you are founder/CEO you have more ability to shape.
- esafak 3y ago
  Use tools to help workers estimate their contribution. Basically try to automate performance evaluation. You can't completely, but you can give bullshitters less opportunity to embellish. And like the other commenter said, keep the company as small as possible. That way, each person's contribution is more prominent.
  - neilv 3y ago
    > [...] productivity measurement [...] analytics [...] workers estimate their contribution [...] automate evaluation [...] Won't this inevitably lead to the same familiar BS? We already know that current tech workers start focusing on corporate BS metrics (e.g., FAANG interviews) while still in school. Even getting into the college was its own gauntlet of BS of resource-intensive hoop-jumping, questionable metrics, artifice, and self-promotion. CS students have already been told how to strategically pick their first job, how to work promotions, when to job-hop, to have no loyalty to project and team, to network, to self-promote, etc. By the time tech workers hit their first job, they've practically been engineered and filtered to be corporate BS machines. Part of the trick might be to un-train that. And to filter for people who can be un-trained.
strken 3y ago
While everything past 1 is cut-throat garbage, I'm not convinced that communicating what you've been doing is actually useless to the rest of the company. If you don't bullshit and just present your work then it's a good way for management to learn why projects went well/poorly, and a good way for you to organise your own thoughts and your stream of work. There's a basic level of self-promotion - demos, emails, talks to other engineers or users about how to use the new thing you made, retrospective write-ups of failed projects - below which you're not telling other people enough about what you did.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
incomingpain 3y ago
>"Get out of your own way" means (in this book) that not showing or communicating your worth or value will leave you behind peers who do go out of their way to show their worth and value. I.e., If you keep your head down and just do good work, you won't get noticed. My last job, I was out of the office the vast majority of the time. I was working 50-60 hour weeks. There wasnt enough time to sell myself to my boss. I did work out of the office with sales guys and the ceo quite often so I did sell to them. They loved me. I would get back into the office and it was like everyone was caught up in a battle with each other. I tried my best to stay out of it, but you get drawn into that shit so quickly. Specifically, there was a senior sysadmin who knew nothing about networking at war with the network admin. I was the only other network admin, so naturally I get drawn into it. So I would help out there to help him avoid that conflict. Then on multiple occasions I did the network work, but the other network admin thought the sysadmin did and started saying how bad of a job he did. But it was me... Then the dreadful day where I was booked 4-6 weeks in advanced and there was work needed to be done. So they brought this other network admin in on my clients. Totally fine with me to have less on my plate. But then I get a phone call from my client telling me the network admin badmouthed me the entire time he was there. I got that recorded, provided it to HR. HR then said they cant just fire him because then I'd be the last network admin and im overloaded with work. They then let me in on something I shouldn't know. He also has another fireable offence being hateful toward a lesbian peer. She was awesome, no idea why he had a fued with her. So I left the harassment complaint with HR. But like 3 days later my boss who rarely speaks with me comes into my office to tell me that the other network admin went through my tickets and found many problems. I stopped him there, i told him that that other network admin is harassing me, that i'm making it official now and he has to do something about it. The next morning I got fired.
- mlrtime 3y ago
  That escalated quickly, if HR had a "file" on the other guy, what was the cause of firing? Did your manager like the other guy more? Also why does it matter that the peer was a lesbian?
  - incomingpain 3y ago

greatpostman 3y ago

The biggest office politics I see these days is demographic/racial based. Big tech splits very cleanly on these lines, exceptions abound

throwawaaarrgh 3y ago
You're not paying attention then. Office politics applies to everyone. It's the one meritocratic thing about business. The person who's better at manipulating people goes to the top, regardless of race, gender, etc.
- roenxi 3y ago
  On average I expect promotions to be meritocratic; in that the further up the hierarchy we sample the more likely we are to get exceptional people. That being said, if I were looking for a career in management I'd rather be female. In most of the workplaces I've been they've got a decided advantage at promotion after controlling for motivation and political savvy; and around a third of the girls in my university year moved in to senior management positions.
  - throwawaaarrgh 3y ago
    Promotions are not meritocratic. You get promoted if you are useful to the person promoting you; you'll play ball, follow orders, know a secret, can do a favor, are reliable, don't ruffle feathers, under promise and over deliver, make friends easy, etc. That's not merit, that's corruption. This is true for one simple reason: Promotions are not weighed by an impartial algorithm, chosen by sorting, and doled out on a set schedule. They are submitted for consideration and approved by the powerful, when they feel like it, for whatever reasons they feel like. The further up the hierarchy you go, the less exceptional people are. It's called the Peter Principle. Even if you used to be exceptional at your job, a promotion gives you a different job. And technical skill has almost nothing to do with ability to get promoted. The only reason women might be promoted more is they're working twice as hard as the men. I'm sure if you asked them, they would rather have been men, when it comes to getting promotions. The bar would be a lot lower.

nine_zeros 3y ago

Here's the truth about office politics: it's a rat race trap. You spend your life away jockeying for attention, resources and org chart positions. You go through immense stressors, let others down and get let down, swallow your mental peace - only to jockey for a higher position in the ladder. Every rung of the ladder is just being more and more assistant to your boss. You just CANNOT have your boss think badly of you. It's an abusive attachment. You grind and grind away, only to get laid off because some distant boss wants it to happen. Imagine a video game where monkeys spend their lives climbing an imaginary rung, only to find that reaching the top rung is the same as falling from a middle rung - both are "game overs"

nosefurhairdo 3y ago
The point isn't to play politics at the expense of your happiness. Awareness of the political reality allows you to more effectively reach your goals. I used to do great work without caring whether I got recognition, because I just like to keep my head down and write code. However, I've learned that by showcasing my work, collecting metrics, etc. I am able to gain credibility that allows me to sell management on projects I'd like to take on. Playing a little bit of politics has made work more enjoyable.
- nine_zeros 3y ago
  What you are engaging in is a double edged sword. In your case, what you have is incompetent management that needs some BS (metrics) to be constantly fed to themselves. The quarter you don't feed BS metrics to them will be the quarter they try to manage you out. An alternative system is one where management is responsible for understanding the business value of the work and being ok with the outcome e.g. being ok with good metrics vs poor metrics both - whatever the outcome. It was the path they charted for some objective. They need to own the objectives.
  - tdeck 3y ago
    As an individual, it's very hard to avoid incompetent managers. There are so many different ways a manager can fall short, and it's often very difficult to assess before joining a team. Even if you have a personal connection to someone on the manager's team, they may not be very observant or may not even realize something could be better. Also, there's a practical limit to how many times you can change managers. This means it's important to learn certain communication skills even if you wouldn't need them with an ideal manager.

zzzeek 3y ago

Ive relied on the same formula for office politics for decades: 1. write all the code 2. Noone can fire you 3. Ignore all the politics and wait for everyone to quit and/or the company to lay everyone off. Nobody is left so now you're the manager ! Go get the next job

jvanderbot 3y ago
Eventually you may realize that maintaining the image of the productive a-political cornerstone, is in fact a political move. That is reputation management. You're "above it". That's the true meaning behind politics being non-optional.
- timeagain 3y ago
  Right. Even the top commenter right now about just being interested in coding and learning is playing. They are playing the “engaged IC”. You can bet the political people know how to use and abuse that role just like any other.
  - latency-guy2 3y ago
    I think politically obsessed people are just invading all the conversation in an attempt to be relevant, a lot of politically obsessed people are just not that important. Not playing is simply, not playing. Apolitical is a position of apoliticalness, not politicalness. Attempts to change the meaning of these words is laughable.
    - mlrtime 3y ago
      I don't agree, you are always playing. You are either actively or passively playing. This isn't obsession, it is observation of reality and understanding sociology in any group of humans (and other mammals).
    - jvanderbot 3y ago
      One fish says to the other fish: how's the water? He replies: what's water? Politics is just people, and people's perception of you. It's talking to folks to effect change, ideally a positive change. It's when you sit down with someone to review their code and suggest a different way. It's when you discuss someone's strengths with their boss so they can get better work. It's when you email someone to make sure they saw your merge request so you can get it done faster. It's literally the people side of a business, and knowing who to ask for what, how to ask, and so on. When someone gets all Machiavelli with those relationships, making sure the right people know what they're working on, or trying to get inside information on upcoming projects, or etc, and then used that to their own advantage then we suddenly call it politics. But that's just shitty people playing politics primarily. Work relationships and lines of power and communication are not optional. They exist. What you do with them does not determine if you are in a political game or not, it just determines how you play it. TFA probably was read to say "You have to be Machiavellian". I think it's fair to say that's an over statement. But pretending or purporting to be antipolitical is an oxymoron. To whom are you pretending? A straightforward a-political style request or response must still define a relationship style.

Barrin92 3y ago

Personal alternative, started to work for a family business with a grey collar culture where people know each other. No need to read weird self-help literature. If 'networking' is a central part of anyone's job personally I'd start picking a less Patrick Bateman-esque workplace. The best way to not have to deal with backstabbing and conniving is just to work with people who are in it for the long term and where that behavior does not pay off.

verve_rat 3y ago
What is a grey collar culture? Somewhere between blue and white, or something else?
- Barrin92 3y ago
  yes, a work environment where you have a sort of mix of white and blue collar culture both individually and collectively rather than the "manager on the top floor, worker at the bottom" thing. Companies where the boss is also able and willing to grab some tools and get to work. Flat hierarchies and informal relationships, not the 15 levels to the top ladder thing. Prototypical example is a German or Japanese small/medium business, but software startups often are a lot like it too. They just lose it generally as they blow up and transition to the typical US/British management style.

jacquesm 3y ago

I've found that the best way to deal with office politics is simply to refuse to play. The one place where I worked where this was a real factor (a bank) taught me that I really didn't want to spend the rest of my life to end up in middle age caught up in a web of responsibilities with my market value only maximized at my current employer. Freelancing was more risky, but far more educational and left me completely free to ignore the office politics, as long as I delivered value my bills would get paid and I didn't have to show up in any office. After more than a decade of that (and making reasonable money, not great, but definitely not bad either compared to my peers) I eventually founded the company that still exists in it's nth incarnation today. If I had stayed in that office.... shudder.

bmulcahy 3y ago

No. Instead, I'm going to be excellent to my fellow people. I'm not going to sink to their level.

goosejuice 3y ago
I believe this is the way. That said, it might be a privilege to think this way. One can be nice to others and still play to a political advantage.
- crotchfire 3y ago
  Integrity is not a "privilege".
  - goosejuice 3y ago
    Indeed integrity isn't. You're misrepresentating my comment. Perhaps privilege is too much of a trigger word these days. Depending on ones economic situation, not playing the political game could mean being on the street, losing your kids, etc. In that sense, it can be a privilege offered to those with the financial freedom. This doesn't mean in any way that you can't do it with integrity.
demondemidi 3y ago
It's not about sinking, it is about a totally different skill set. There's no good/bad here, it just IS. Also, your statement implies you are "above" other people, which is so arrogant, it is almost like you are the people you despise.
ramraj07 3y ago
You can learn the politics and choose not to play it. It’s still useful to understand why people act the way they do and never be surprised by things that affect you.
spangry 3y ago
Admirable, but be aware that you are choosing to play 'co-operate' in a multi-agent prisoner's dilemma: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma

RyanAdamas 3y ago

politics is community cancer

dymk 3y ago
politics is how you convince people above you to do things
- RyanAdamas 3y ago
  politics is inherently manipulative what i said is still true even if what you say is too

thr0way120 3y ago

I was at a AAA++++ brand FAANG. The politics, from the second I joined, were so over-the-top. It was like Wrestlemania. Everyone was smashing eachother and throwing elbows and it was like a spectator sport about who could club who first and the loudest. I had just gotten out of a super toxic prior employer and had zero motivation to engage in corporate politics so I just decided to wait and watch and try to understand how to be effective. I waited. And watched. And waited. And watched. And raised some ideas. All shot down. Finally I came to the realization that if I wanted to "play this game" I would need to get into the ring and start shutting people down, throwing elbows, telling other people their ideas suck etc. After thinking about it a long time, I decided: (a) I didn't want to do any of the above (b) I cared about building things good for customers (c) I hated the VPs involved and had nothing in common with them (d) I didn't want their jobs, because it would require doing what they were doing I ended up leaving for a startup. It was a very good company. I still think about if it was the right thing to do. But I was not growing, not getting to do anything, it was antithetical to my personal and career growth, I wasn't learning. It was just a wrestling ring with morons yelling at eachother and acting out their insecurities loudly. I couldn't do it. Contrast to prior employer: EVeryone was political, but in a sneaky, underhanded way. It was all covert assassination. At a startup, there was no bullshit. It was: There is the work, do the work. The end. No politics. With remote work: Politics is even worse in my opinion. Remote workers are at a huge disadvantage.

AdieuToLogic 3y ago
> I was at a AAA++++ brand FAANG. > The politics, from the second I joined, were so over-the-top. It was like Wrestlemania. Everyone was smashing eachother and throwing elbows and it was like a spectator sport about who could club who first and the loudest. This is phenomena I've seen played out in organizations which are flush with cash and want to hire "only the best", yet end up having multi-layered management building fiefdoms in order to affirm their importance. Bored smart people will find a way to make their days feel important. If it is not in the work they do, then it will be the political fights they have.
- thr0way120 3y ago

xnx 3y ago

I absolutely believe this is true, but it makes me sick and I don't want to be a part of it.

goosejuice 3y ago

Politics certainly play a part in most of society. I'm not sure that it's more common or sinister in the office setting. I also believe that some enjoy it.. one need not look farther than the success of reality TV. I believe it boils down to scarcity and the seemingly odd human attraction to drama. Even in the US, where there's plenty of wealth, life can still be darwinian. Pessimism aside, there are definitely opportunities out there without these qualities.

paul7986 3y ago

If you work in government there's way less of all that. Of course you can't top out a massive salaries like at FAANG but whatever most important ... tons of money & stress or a very good living and not much stress or drama (ppl in government mostly are not clawing at themselves to climb a ladder rather its a nice paying gig with mostly nice ppl doing their job).

pdonis 3y ago
I think this depends very much on which government agency and at what level (federal, state, local). I know people who have had the sort of good experience you describe in government. I also know people who have worked in government jobs where the workplace was highly dysfunctional and most of the workers had no interest in actually doing their jobs.
- paul7986 3y ago
  Maybe those who described it dysfunctional were dysfunctional and or under 40. I say under 40 cause after 40 you start to care less about what others think annd are much more comfortable in your skin ..that goes with others too in the same demographics. Thus if you are working with more ppl who are insecure (younger person thing) worrying too much /trying to out do each other due to insecurities then that's a dysfunctional environment and describes the demographic at most FANNG company's compared to government.
  - pdonis 3y ago
    > Maybe those who described it dysfunctional were dysfunctional and or under 40. In the cases I was referring to, particular events were described to me which, if true, would be extremely dysfunctional in a workplace by any reasonable criterion. In some of the cases, I personally observed such events on visits to the workplaces in question.
spangry 3y ago
It varies, in my experience. I've worked in government agencies with very little politics, and agencies with shitloads of workplace politics. The latter perform far worse than the former. The political agencies tend to have ill-defined goals, which causes misalignment which in turn generates politics.

aaomidi 3y ago

Office politics is effectively discrimination against many neuro divergences. It also kills productivity in companies. No I don’t have a solution.

Aeolun 3y ago
Not necessarily. Certain divergences can very easily ‘learn’ to play. Even if it’s all mechanics to them.
- aaomidi 3y ago
  Hence the word “many”
Gigachad 3y ago
I agree that this happens, but it’s just a fact of life. We are all born different and those differences make us more or less suited to certain jobs. I can never be a professional basketball player because I wasn’t born with the right genetics for it. Some neurodivergent traits might make jobs in management or public communication difficult or impossible, but they could be a boost for other kinds of work like programming and research.
- yencabulator 3y ago
  The harder someone plays office politics the less likely that person is the one doing the actual work. From the point of view of a neuro divergent person, it's a corruption of the system by "the other group".
  - aaomidi 3y ago
    And devs are not insulated from this. So much time of devs are wasted to play office politics.

bb88 3y ago

bb88's rule of management #1: Management is always dysfunctional. Good management is less so when compared to the average.

jauntywundrkind 3y ago

It would be so interesting to try to build an organization that tries & works to discern, rather than leaving everyone to fend for themselves & playing the game. There's various systems of 360 review, but they seem to silently boil out into a discussion between manager and employee. To actually combat "the game", we need both a real attempt at direct & honest assessment first, and we need to radiate out the findings, share awareness & impact second. As we do it, the structure of the org is still implicit, game-bases: we need to make it clear what these witnesses & testimonies have sussed, share our understanding of things are seem now. Actual decision making power needs to be vested in people based on the results. These reviews to serve the corporate need to assess never seem to come around & reify the findings: they're left a mystery to employees and power remains a structureless tyranny, to forever be interpreted by game players as they may. Down with the game players. Do good shit instead. (Empower interesting people, even if they don't play the game.)

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

PeterisP 3y ago

As in any community, you can ignore politics but politics won't ignore you.

osigurdson 3y ago

Do shareholders and customers want office politics?

quadcore 3y ago

Medications are not optional too. All the "players" I know are on medication, period. I suspect cancer is following (just my view I have no source). So thanks but no thanks. For me the next benchmark after perceived happiness is wether or not you're on medication (with rare exceptions). It you're on medication (rare exceptions apply), you can be driving the most beautiful of cars, your life is shit. Rare exceptions apply like you're working on something great or you have inherited your condition. You get the idea. You think your job and you politics and your thoughts are not responsible for your condition? You think it's the cat? You havent read the manual.

timeagain 3y ago
I feel dumb but can you be more specific? Are you talking about antidepressants or amphetamines? I’m guessing you aren’t talking about insulin.
- quadcore 3y ago
  Food and the people you're spending time with are critical. You can be sick because you deal with a toxic person, particularly relatives or intimate relationship. Leaving that person will make a seemingly unrelated sickness disapear almost overnight (asma, back pain, etc.). It happened to me and my father. No rocket science here. Thats why they all on medication in offices. They are toxic to each other, they get sick. It's just that sometimes the person go from toxic parent to office and never realize whats causing the disease.
  - CRConrad 3y ago
    I'm pretty sure neither my diabetes nor my high blood pressure, both of which I take medications for, were caused by "toxic co-workers". What you're writing sounds like new-age gobbledy-gook, not far removed from crystals and auras (or shoving rocks up your...)
  - paulcole 3y ago
    I feel dumb but can you be more specific? Are you talking about antidepressants or amphetamines? I’m guessing you aren’t talking about insulin.

hyggetrold 3y ago

In my experience (two decades) you don’t have to play politics or participate, BUT - you do have to understand what’s happening and how it affects you.

andrewstuart 3y ago

When I was company founder and had multiple people working for me, I thought there was no office politics. My right hand man (who was always happy to tell me exactly what he thought) laughed.

esafak 3y ago
Did you take action after hearing that?

giantg2 3y ago

Yep, I'm it's victim. Oh well.

justapassenger 3y ago

[dead]

dukeofdoom 3y ago

It's safest to be a conformist coward, and never say anything politically incorrect.

upupupandaway 3y ago
Agreed. When I worked at a big tech company (let's say top 3) one person suggested the creation of a race-based committee (no whites allowed) that would receive complaints about any org members' personal social media - if they said something racist or insensitive, said committee would have the power to fire the person from the company. Org had 800 people, there were 153 likes on the post. I complained to HR about the tone and proposal and nothing happened. Days later, the post disappeared miraculously. I seriously doubt these 153 idiots liked the idea - most likely than not they are exactly the conformist cowards you describe.

rramadass 3y ago

A timely remainder on the realities of "Life/Work/Society/Groups" for everybody. Politics (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics) is considered a dirty discipline but it is not so and is intrinsic to the life of any Social Animal and in particular to complex social structures like those setup by Homo Sapiens. Everybody needs to learn how to "play the game" albeit within whatever boundaries they choose to confine themselves to. It is human nature whether one be in a role of Engineer/Admin/Management/whatever that is at play here and cannot be wished away but needs to be faced. At the minimum one needs it to "protect" oneself from the games others play and which may lead one to be at the losing end. Some relevant resources (in addition to the works of Jeffrey Pfeffer mentioned in the article); 1. The 4 Types of Organizational Politics - https://hbr.org/2017/04/the-4-types-of-organizational-politics https://hbr.org/2017/04/the-4-types-of-organizational-politi... 2. The Empowered Manager: Positive Political Skills at Work by Peter Block. 3. Management: A Political Activity by Ted Stephenson. 4. HBR's 10 must reads; 2-vol On Communication, 2-vol On Managing Yourself, 2-vol On Managing People.

mlrtime 3y ago
Great list, thank you.
- rramadass 3y ago
  A few more relevant books but coming from different angles; 1. Why We Do What We Do : Understanding Self-Motivation by Edward Deci. - From Psychology angle. 2. The Evolution of Cooperation and The Complexity of Cooperation both by Robert Axelrod - From Game Theory angle.

tflinton 3y ago

Every large organization is going to have competing interests and ideas. Whether it’s a difference in priority or project approach or perhaps an entire product. Knowing how to navigate conflict is essential to any relationship including professional one. In addition knowing how to well communicate (e.g., sell) your ideas (or youself) is also needed. I get there’s toxic individuals to take this to a dark place as they would anything. But at its core I don’t see anything inherently evil about it, perhaps just that it can make manipulative people become more public.

RHSman2 3y ago
Well said. It does follow the network effect of propagating through systems. It requires important nodes to not spread further down and the close collaboration of other supporting nodes. Anyone slightly higher in the hierarchy can have an effect.

demondemidi 3y ago

It's funny, I've been a developer for 40+ years, been coding since the 80's. I always thought I would "just" write code, but around year 25, I realized I had outgrown programming and wanted to make bigger things, with greater reach. This meant not just entire products, but product lines, product strategies, brand identities. After this realization, it took me a decade to see that office politics exist because you are literally trying to steer the company, and so are other people, and you will disagree. I guess I haven't been fucked hard enough yet, because I enjoy this process. Some people call it a game, but I think it is just reality: if you want to do big things, you need an entirely new set of problem solving skills. 40 year old me would have scoffed at 58 year old me as a sellout, but here I am, enjoying it far more than debugging C code for a paycheck. I only debug my own C code now, and layout my stereo amplifiers circuits, even if they suck, because it doesn't impact my paycheck!

gilbetron 3y ago
I'm about 5 years behind you, career-wise, and have been transitioning to that way of thinking the past several years and am now in a position to actually get to do it. It is weird to realize that coding, while I still kinda like it, feels like a waste of time. By that I mean too little of an impact. It's fun, but stressful, in this "new" role. I'm still debugging systems, but I now include the human/organizational element. Not really a manager, but not really an engineer either. Very strange - any advice?
- demondemidi 3y ago
  I thiiiink I know where you are, so here's my $0.02. $0.01 - Don't overachieve other peoples' work, keep boundaries. I'm an overachiever, but I found that when people around me start to miss things I would do their work. Two levels above me are blind to who does the work, they just want it done. If I'm getting others' work done people will expect me to keep doing it. While this might jeopardize the product if I stop doing it, it is important to not be the one that cleans up everyone's messes because it will kill your soul and the mess never really gets cleaned up. Sometimes things need to break and be visible at the top level for change to happen. This becomes more important as you start to manage more products at higher levels. $0.01 - Define requirements and deliverables exquisitely, since you can't solve all of your problems just by putting in more time. When I was a dev, I could pull an 80 hour week and finish something. But now I depend on 150+ engineers, and I cannot simply work more hours to fix things. Make your peace with that, and instead work on having very clear requirements. The more effort you put into clearly defining what you need, the more you can feel at ease with letting go and letting people do their thing. Bonus: don't be afraid to say "no". You gotta protect your sanity. If someone wants to blow past you and win all the gold medals, let 'em. There are always going to be people that will work 200%, I'm just not willing to sacrifice what's left of my life. I'm by no means a slacker, but there is ALWAYS 300x more work to be done no matter how efficient you and your teams are. Hope that helps? Good luck!

byyll 3y ago

Office is for work, not politics.

BLKNSLVR 3y ago

Having fallen ass-backwards into a couple of promotions to positions responsible for managing (very) small groups, I don't consider it worthwhile - and that's without having to sell my soul by engaging in office politics. One interpretation is as per the title "play the game or be the victim", my interpretation is "the only way to win is not to play". Office politics only escalates the higher you get. As completely as I can commit to anything, I believe that any time spent on office politics is time better spent on almost anything else. Those who seek money, power, and influence may disagree to their hearts content, but I've experienced enough, personally and vicariously, to know that their opinions are from a universe I do not, and can not happily, inhabit. The caveat to the above is that I'm in a position where I can provide for my family without feeling like I vitally need to sacrific any amount of who I am in order to give them "more". All needs and probably more than enough wants are met. Maintain the balance...

moandcompany 3y ago

You can't afford to put 0% into understanding or playing "the game," but that doesn't mean it should be the majority or a significant part of your work. It needs to be enough that your boss/boss' boss can recall a positive association between you/your work and what they care about. Some of this is your manager/boss' job, but at least try to make it easier for them to do. This is also a decent self sanity check on figuring out if what you're doing is important to do (with regard to the business, etc)

GaryNumanVevo 3y ago

I minored in sociology, a degree that some would consider "useless" but it's been absolutely invaluable in navigating the social dynamics within the various engineering orgs I've worked for.

fmajid 3y ago

I'd add: 1. Always make your manager looks good 2. Do not make disagreements personal, you may win this round but make an enemy for life

yencabulator 3y ago

Psychopaths telling others how to behave so they don't stab them in the back. No thanks.

teunispeters 3y ago

My dad was burnt by not involving in office politics at school. He didn't go to parties, he didn't go to social events, and he didn't largely pay attention in meetings. It ... did not go well for him. He figured it out at the end, but never did figure out how to engage well. Mind, he was likely autistic, carrying many of the signs. Not very relevant, but perhaps a good reminder.

TwoNineFive 3y ago

Low IQ clickbait for pathetic people. Just don't be an asshole and bring out the consequences for those who are.