When someone praises you publicly, instead of objectively reporting your praiseworthy deeds, the praise sometimes characterizes them in a particularly self-serving way. If you don't object to the characterization right then and there, you might seem to approve the characterization. If you do object, you risk appearing ungrateful. For the one praised, political praise can be lose-lose.
For example, suppose you had been ordered by your supervisor to cancel a project that you championed, and which you truly believe is essential to organizational success. You argued passionately against cancellation, but you failed. Your supervisor then required you to "explain the cancellation as being in the organization's best long-term interests." Several months later, in a meeting with you, your boss, his peers, and his supervisor, he praises you for your "courageous and selfless" decision to terminate the project voluntarily. You're disgusted by the misrepresentation, but what can you do?
When political praise happens once or rarely, it could be a mistake. But if the praiser has a pattern of doing this, it might be an act of intention. As such, it's unethical, because it's based on a deprivation of personal freedom.
Here's how it works: The praiser counts on the praisee's unwillingness to dispute the characterization, because of the praisee's desire to receive the benefits of the praise, or to avoid appearing petty or insubordinate. Thus, in exchange for meting out some (often grudging) praise, the praiser has an unchallenged opportunity to characterize the deed or decision so as to fit the praiser's agenda, which might be counter to the praisee's agenda. In effect, by praising someone magnanimously, the praiser advances the praiser's agenda.
What can you do?
- As the praisee
- Not much. Most praisee responses intended to dispute the characterization portion of political praise will seem petty and vindictive. The cost of trying to put things right usually exceeds the benefits by a substantial amount.
- As a bystander
- Bystanders have many more options. The more neutral the bystander's position seems relative to the dispute at hand, the more powerful will be any stated objections. Supervisors of political praisers
can deal with political praise
as a performance issueBy disputing any unfair characterization, while affirming the generously offered praise, the bystander will seem — and will actually be — fair and objective. The bystander thus elevates the ethical standard for the organization, and reduces the benefits of political praise.
- As a supervisor of a political praiser
- Supervisors of political praisers can deal with political praise as a performance issue. Require the praiser to apologize privately to the praisee, and to make a public statement correcting any unfair characterizations. Require advance approval of both the apology and the correcting statement, and let the praiser know that future incidents will be dealt with more severely.
For more about scope creep, see "Ground Level Sources of Scope Creep," Point Lookout for July 18, 2012; "More Indicators of Scopemonging," Point Lookout for August 29, 2007; "Scopemonging: When Scope Creep Is Intentional," Point Lookout for August 22, 2007; "Some Causes of Scope Creep," Point Lookout for September 4, 2002; "The Deck Chairs of the Titanic: Strategy," Point Lookout for June 29, 2011; and "The Deck Chairs of the Titanic: Task Duration," Point Lookout for June 22, 2011.
Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenzYSVXZRnocTZcBPPner@ChacJewLGtWmsfVBSLuWoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.
About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
More articles on Workplace Politics:
- Mitigating Risk Resistance Risk
- Project managers are responsible for managing risks, but they're often stymied by insufficient resources.
Here's a proposal for making risk management more effective at an organizational scale.
- Some Hazards of Skip-Level Interviews: III
- Skip-level interviews — dialogs between a subordinate and the subordinate's supervisor's supervisor
— can be hazardous. Here's Part III of a little catalog of the hazards, emphasizing subordinate-initiated
- Bottlenecks: II
- When some people take on so much work that they become "bottlenecks," they expose the organization
to risks. Managing those risks is a first step to ending the bottlenecking pattern.
- Why We Don't Care Anymore
- As a consultant and coach I hear about what people hate about their jobs. Here's some of it. It might
help you appreciate your job.
- Problem Displacement and Technical Debt
- The term problem displacement describes situations in which solving one problem creates another.
It sometimes leads to incurring technical debt. How? What can we do about it?
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming January 24: Understanding Delegation
- It's widely believed that managers delegate some of their own authority and responsibility to their subordinates, who then use that authority and responsibility to get their work done. That view is unfortunate. It breeds micromanagers. Available here and by RSS on January 24.
- And on January 31: Nine Brainstorming Demotivators: I
- The quality of the output of brainstorming sessions is notoriously variable. One source of variation is the enthusiasm of contributors. Here's Part I of a set of nine phenomena that can limit contributions to brainstorm sessions. Available here and by RSS on January 31.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenQOELOpgiurRXxiQtner@ChacySVzxBQGxHRotvRPoCanyon.com or (617) 491-6289, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
- The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power
- Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program. Here's a date for this program:
Beware any resource that speaks of "winning" at workplace politics or "defeating" it. You can benefit or not, but there is no score-keeping, and it isn't a game.