11 ms·

When Jeff Hodges gave a presentation of his "Notes on Distributed Systems for Youngbloods"[1] at Lookout Mobile Security back in like 2014 or 2015, he did this

• dfjfklei 1y ago
  When has employment politics ever meant "leveling up in soft skills"? Employment politics has always meant: brown nosing, throwing vulnerable people under the bus, posturing, taking credit for other people's contributions, blaming other people for your failures, and on and on. Or to use the language of TFA, "iNfLUeNcE".
  • lazyasciiart 1y ago
    And what, you think those are technical skills?
    • dfjfklei 1y ago
      My point is that framing "bad politics" as a problem with you, or your employees if you're an employer, is absurd. "Bad politics" comes straight from the top.
  • hchdifnfbgbf 1y ago
    If that’s all you see, you probably need to level up your soft skills. Certainly the things you’re talking about are real, and particularly severe in some environments, but there’s a lot of room to improve your influence without engaging in any of that.
    • dfjfklei 1y ago
      You have yet to meet someone at a company you work for you who does one or more of the things I listed above to successfully advance their career?
      • rkomorn 1y ago
        I don't think that's their point. I think their point is that you can have influence without doing these things.
        • dfjfklei 1y ago
          Then I was misunderstood as well. As if anyone, myself included, would suggest that my listed items are the only way to influence your employer is a hilariously bad faith read. I take issue with TFA framing the problem of people saying they hate "employment politics" as a you problem when I am of the opinion it is a leadership problem. Bad leaders fail to, or refuse to, see the things I listed as "bad politics". Just take my supplements, bro. It'll fix your "soft skills", bro.
          • rkomorn 1y ago
            I think you were misunderstood as well, yes.
      • hchdifnfbgbf 1y ago
        Many do. More common the further up the ladder you get. But I’ve been able to gain enough influence to affect most of the things I care about without engaging in that, unless you consider being friendly and supportive (something that did not come remotely naturally to me) to be brown-nosing. If you want to significantly influence a lot of high-level strategic decision-making at very large companies, then you do probably need to engage in nasty things like that. But most of us don’t work at that scope.
    • rkomorn 1y ago
      > If that’s all you see, you probably need to level up your soft skills. Not OP but I honestly don't see how this comment/tone is warranted in response to what they wrote.
  • psunavy03 1y ago
    This is frankly a very childish and Reddit-level take on the issue.
    • dfjfklei 1y ago
      If you think HN is a bastion of "adultish takes", you're gonna have a bad time.
  • rkomorn 1y ago
    I agree with your description of "politics" as a negative/pejorative thing. That's also the only way I'm used to hearing it. Hearing about "politics" in a neutral/positive way would be new to me.
    • BeetleB 1y ago
      > I agree with your description of "politics" as a negative/pejorative thing. That's just a difference in framing between winners and losers. If you get your way, you say it was due to influence, bridge building, teamwork, etc. If you don't, you say "politics". For every occasion someone says "politics" negatively, realize the other party is using the other framing. More importantly: For every time you get your way, the other party is saying "Politics!"
      • rkomorn 1y ago
        I think that's a very valid take, actually.
      • ryandrake 1y ago
        The way I see it is: "Office politics" means getting work done, making business decisions, and/or advancing your career using means other than technical or domain expertise. It could have a good or bad outcome, but it's still politics. The key attribute is that the outcome is achieved through some other method besides actually doing or directing the work.
        • BeetleB 1y ago
          > "Office politics" means getting work done, making business decisions, and/or advancing your career using means other than technical or domain expertise. s/other than/in addition to/ That's the fundamental disagreement in this thread.
        • mlrtime 1y ago
          But nobody actually says that. I've not once heard anyone say politics in a positive term when it comes to the work environment. I agree in principle, but this whole topic needs some definitions so we're all on the same terms. "Politics" can have several different meanings.
• bartread 1y ago
  I used to work for a software company that literally had "no politics" as part of its DNA. It was in the company handbook, it was in our values, people would say it when they talked about what it was like to work at the company. Hell, whilst I can't recall any specific instances, I guarantee that I said it and probably many times[0]. But, of course, it was never true. It might have felt true - certainly superficially - when we were a smaller company, but the reality is that it never was. We just didn't want to be grown up enough to admit that. You can only really interface effectively with reality and make good decisions when you face up to that reality rather than living in denial. Or, as one of my favourite quotes (albeit that it's now a bit overused), from Miyamoto Musashi, puts it: “Truth is not what you want it to be; it is what it is. And you must bend to its power or live a lie.” So that company maintained the "no politics" value for long years after it became apparent to anyone with a working brain that it wasn't true. Wasn't even close to true. And that's poison: it bleeds into everything. Avoidance of the truth promotes avoidance elsewhere. Lack of openness, lack of accountability, perverse mythologies, bitterness, resentment, and a sort of gently corrosive low grade mendacity that eats away at everything. And all because we're lying to ourselves about "no politics". So I agree: politics is unavoidable and, if we are to succeed, we must do so by becoming politicians, and admitting to both ourselves and to others that we're doing it, because success cannot be sustained without that, and we also can't help others to reach their full potential unless we are honest with ourselves and eachother. [0] And certainly I'd say that I hated politics and wanted no part of it.
  • hobs 1y ago
    I think the problem is that this is the core of most companies. A core lie that they tell the employees and sometimes even the customers - "we value you" - "we care about our employees" "we want to serve our shareholders" "we build community" "we try to ..." vision statement type stuff, almost always suborned to "I want the C suite to make the most money possible RIGHT NOW" or "You can never make me look bad even when I am an idiot". Anything that violates those core precepts are rejected out of hand, and often times for things that would support the companies stated principles. I have worked 20+ jobs in my life, and either petty bullshit or greed rules the top of the heap in all but the most particular circumstances. I cant even remember how many meetings I have setup with CEO's to hand feed them information and cheer them on like a toddler so they can make the obviously correct decision.
• BatteryMountain 1y ago
  But then, there might be two different kinds of politics: One is a cordial game of soft power exchange, getting things done and everyone winning at the end of the day. No malicious intent, just day to day frustrations boiling over here & there. Tomorrow is another, we are friends again tomorrow & will succeed tomorrow. Forgiveness & forgetting is in good supply. Some amount of grace is allowed, no drawing blood. Help each other up when down (even if via manipulation). The other kind of politics is basically a blood sport. Its a game of hard power exchange where people try to dominate and humiliate each other. There is almost no self-preservation, no care about tomorrow, no learning, no adapting - only the next way to slaughter you opponent, setting legal traps, messing with their personal lives. Zero grace. These kinds of games & people often do not care about the the goal, the company or product - they only care about winning at the blood sport and each interaction for them is a way to gather data, search for weak spots and so on. Its not enough to win, you have to humiliate and oppress another's spirit. Kick the person while they are down. Certain corps attracts a couple of these contestants and soon you have a full floor of psycho's playing a vicious game. For them it feels normal. So its best to find groups/companies with good people that plays the gentle game (and keeping the bad apples out), that knows it is all made up & essentially role play, that doesn't crave blood. Its the only places where you can really succeed as a human. The other kind you only succeed at drawing blood and destroying others, while enjoying it.
  • nkax0 1y ago
    I suspect that the people who enjoy the blood sport are disproportionately drawn to the kind of places that loudly proclaim "no politics" or "we're all equal" without having the proper defenses in place. Or perhaps, more accurately, they're drawn to places without defenses: both those that are pretend egalitarian but have informal power hierarchies without accountability; as well as those that outright say "we're in it for the game", like the stereotypical high-pressure investment bank.
• kakacik 1y ago
  Succeed in which way? Some empty career in some soulless company that doesn't care about you? Some miniscule extra cash on the account? Those are not proper life successes in any meaningful way. Most of engineers are rather introverts with rich internal life and strong imagination. You can lose most of it and transform for more 'success' over time, but at great costs to yourself. I am not arguing against say better communication or organizational skills, we all benefit from it, but you can't avoid various form of highly functioning sociopaths once you climb above ground level. Those tend to drag weaker individuals down to their rabbit holes. That's the core of the 'politics' I've seen over past 20 years in all corporations I've worked for. Looking at people and measuring how good relationship is right now, how you can use them, how worthy they are. Forging alliances always doing such calculus in your mind, everything is a chess board, everybody is a chess figure. Don't forget how you behave and think at work will end up permeating rest of your life, you are just you in all places. One example I see very consistently - folks promoted to more responsibility get over time much bigger egos, very few are immune to this and one has to realize it and actively fight it to avoid it. Be a good human being, help others in need, be a properly good parent, husband, son/daughter, friend. For many folks high on organizational charts, in above metrics they failed in life while drowning in money of career. No thank you.
  • Mouvelie 1y ago
    What you wrote resonated with me, I think the same way and so, allow me the pushback. :) Does it have to be that way, a severance type of scenario where the work life is opposite of the "life" life ? I feel that it should, perhaps could, be different. Yeah, it depends on what you do for a living, your need for money and so on, but do people that win at career always lose at life ?
• raxxorraxor 1y ago
  Smalltalk and professional exchange aren't politics, the author is conflating the too. When people say "no politics" they mean have a position on certain issues that mostly are off topic in a business environment. For example if I have my group where nobody is religeous. You could rant about how stupid religeous people are because nobody would feel particularly attacked and some would nod along. Disregarding that the pittyful self-revelation from pointing at others calling them stupid, this is a political stance. But we employ people from all over the world and viewpoints change. Some don't have the most dense main stream belief you find everywhere. You don't go into the next office and pronounce how atheism is the best thing. That is meant with "no politics". It is a requirement for multi-cultural exchange without immediate conflict. It is of course not restricted to religion. The auther misunderstood what politics means. What he describes is office and relationship dynamics. There is quite a bit of overlap, especially when it comes to signal your viewpoints and perspectives in the hope to get recognition. I would be careful about that in a professional environment though. Depends on the company and how many cultures meet each other in random watercooler talk. You can convolute the terms here, but it just blurrs the precision of any statement. That said, relationship dynamics or "power play" leads to an effect where the most competent people often aren't the most well liked people. That is unfortunate and not very new. But the problem cannot be adressed by "talking more about politics". On the contrary, it would make things much, much worse.
  • Izkata 1y ago
    That's politics in the office, not office politics. But you are right that the author is mixing things up: Office politics isn't collaboration as described in the article. Office politics refers to things like one-upmanship, taking credit for stuff, playing the blame game - making yourself look good and others look bad, to get raises or promotions. Or for a phrase used in the article, office politics is about becoming a scheming backstabber.
    • danaris 1y ago
      It doesn't have to be. It can also be the opposite. Making yourself indispensable. Being the one who shows up for people (not as in "comes in and does a lot of unpaid work", but as in "helps out when other people need it"). Giving people credit where credit is due, especially the unsung heroes. If you are well-known around the office as the person who is honest, kind, and helpful, the next time someone else tries to take credit for your work, make you look bad, or otherwise stab you in the back, it's much less likely to work—and when that kind of thing fails, it invariably makes the person who tries it look much, much worse.
• tempodox 1y ago
  Politics begins as soon as there is more than one person involved. As much as I want to avoid it, I just can’t. And if I have to do it anyway, I might just as well give it my best shot.