Lenore and Brad stepped through the revolving door and out into the sunshine of the plaza. Lenore had intended to wait until they got to the car, but nobody was around, so she took a risk. "Here's a tip, since you're new," she began. "It's just not safe to talk that way in these meetings."
Brad was listening. "I figured," he said. "Warner's reaching for his double-bladed axe was the tip-off."
"Uh-huh," Lenore agreed, "and you haven't even seen real trouble yet."
Lenore is educating Brad in survival strategies for the organization he has just joined. Hopefully, it isn't too late, but if he had known what to look for, he might have been a little more cautious. Here are ten attributes that suggest that your work culture might be a blaming culture.
- Blame runs downhill in public, and uphill at the water-cooler
- Lessons-learned panels rarely assign any responsibility to the owner of the panel or to any superiors. Blame almost always runs downhill. But water-cooler talk is the opposite — people grumble about management.
- We rarely blame processes
- In a blaming culture,
if something goes wrong,
it's always the fault
of some one person - Blame is rarely assigned to equipment, to a process, or to a situation. If something went wrong, human error is the cause.
- We usually blame an individual
- Rarely do we assign blame to a group or to several people. One is enough to satisfy the beast.
- We kill messengers
- Bearers of bad news are especially at risk, because we have a pattern of killing the messenger.
- CYA is a standard business procedure
- Since you can't be sure when you might need cover, it's only prudent to take every opportunity to cover your behind.
- In response to catastrophe, we apply revised policy retroactively
- When something bad happens, we convene a panel to write or revise policies and procedures. Then we apply them retroactively, and we blame violators.
- We never revise policy in response to success
- When something good happens, we feel that our policies and procedures are validated, so there's nothing to do.
- We have designated winners
- When good things happen, we usually assign credit to someone who's already an anointed winner. Heroes are rarely found in the trenches.
- We blame people for breaking unwritten rules
- Some policies and rules are written down only in obscure documents, if they're written at all. No matter. You can still be blamed for violating them.
- People get sandbagged
- Some people find out about a failure or policy violation for the very first time in their annual reviews. This is especially maddening when having withheld the information prevented the employee from righting a wrong, or from avoiding repetitions.
If you find yourself being blamed, remember that blame is almost always inappropriate. Blaming yourself then only adds to your trouble. Learning is a far better choice. Top Next Issue
Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info
The words blame and accountability are often used interchangeably, but they have very different meanings. See "Is It Blame or Is It Accountability?," Point Lookout for December 21, 2005, for a discussion of blame and accountability. For the effects of blame on the investigations of unwanted outcomes, see "Obstacles to Finding the Reasons Why," Point Lookout for April 4, 2012. For more on blaming and blaming organizations, see "Organizational Coping Patterns" and "Plenty of Blame to Go Around," Point Lookout for August 27, 2003.
Your comments are welcome
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.
Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
Related articles
More articles on Workplace Politics:
- How to Avoid a Layoff: Your Situation
- These are troubled economic times. Layoffs are becoming increasingly common. Here are some tips for
positioning yourself in the organization to reduce the chances that you will be laid off.
- Communication Traps for Virtual Teams: II
- Communication can be problematic for any team, especially under pressure. But virtual teams face challenges
that are less common in face-to-face teams. Here's Part II of a little catalog with some recommendations.
- Coercion by Presupposition
- Coercion, physical or psychological, has no place in the workplace. Yet we see it and experience it
frequently. We can end the use of presupposition as a tool of coercion, but only if we take personal
responsibility for ending it.
- Multi-Expert Consensus
- Some working groups consist of experts from many fields. When they must reach a decision by consensus,
members have several options. Defining those options in advance can help the group reach a decision
with all its relationships intact.
- The Fallacy of Division
- Errors of reasoning are pervasive in everyday thought in most organizations. One of the more common
errors is called the Fallacy of Division, in which we assume that attributes of a class apply to all
members of that class. It leads to ridiculous results.
See also Workplace Politics, Conflict Management and Managing Your Boss for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming May 15: Should I Write or Should I Call?
- After we recognize the need to contact a colleague or colleagues to work out a way to move forward, we next must decide how to make contact. Phone? Videoconference? Text message? There are some simple criteria that can help with such decisions. Available here and by RSS on May 15.
- And on May 22: Rescheduling Collaborative Work
- Rescheduling is what we do when the schedule we have now is so desperately unachievable that we must let go of it because when we look at it we can no longer decide whether to laugh or cry. The fear is that the new schedule might come to the same end. Available here and by RSS on May 22.
Coaching services
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
Follow Rick
Recommend this issue to a friend
Send an email message to a friend
rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.comSend a message to Rick
A Tip A Day feed
Point Lookout weekly feed
Beware any resource that speaks of "winning" at workplace politics or "defeating" it. You can benefit or not, but there is no score-keeping, and it isn't a game.
- Wikipedia has a nice article with a list of additional resources
- Some public libraries offer collections. Here's an example from Saskatoon.
- Check my own links collection
- LinkedIn's Office Politics discussion group