If you're responsible for people or resources — most of us are responsible for at least ourselves — you probably make commitments at work. You commit to do something (or not to), at a certain pace, or by a certain date, or within some constraints. Sometimes the commitment is part of an exchange: I'll do this, and you'll do that; or I won't do this, and you won't do that; and so on.
When commitments are part of exchanges, we sometimes call them informal agreements. Rarely are they written down, though they might be; rarely are there handshakes, though there might be. Most agreements actually work. What makes agreements durable? Here are some of their attributes.
- They're bilateral
- Bilateral agreements are based on mutual consent. In a unilateral agreement one of the parties believes there is an agreement, but the other doesn't, or is unaware of any agreement. For durability, both parties must be aware that a deal has been struck.
- They're clear
- Even if both parties acknowledge existence of an agreement, they might not agree on the terms. It's essential that all concerned agree about what's being exchanged, and how it will be exchanged.
- They're voluntary
- Neither party is coerced — not by the other, nor by events, nor by another party. If coercion drives the bargain, the agreement is durable only while coercion persists.
- The parties are equally knowledgeable
- Each party has roughly Even if both parties acknowledge
existence of an agreement,
they might not agree
on the termsequal information about the value of the items exchanged and the framework of the exchange. That is, both parties estimate the agreement's fairness equally accurately. If one party has better information than the other, then when the second party "wakes up," the deal often implodes, or the relationship sours.
- Incentives have symmetric value
- When the agreement includes incentives, the value of the incentives to each party is roughly identical. Incentives that mean much more to one party than the other are likely to lead to non-performance by the party that has lesser regard for its incentives.
- There are no incentives for breach of confidentiality
- When the agreement is confidential and sub rosa a trap awaits, because there can be an incentive to breach confidentiality. The first party to admit to a sub rosa agreement can sometimes avoid the penalties of having made such an agreement, even after harvesting value from it.
Most important, there can be no incentive for one party to turn against the other. If one party can capture value by inflicting harm on the other, the agreement is inherently unstable. It becomes a form of "I'll scratch your back; you stab me in mine." Durable agreements are structured such that turning on one's partner is very, very expensive. Top Next Issue
Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenlnfRADQgSpOSRLkener@ChacnwwejLcKgGvLhygAoCanyon.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:
- When All Your Options Are Bad
- When you have several options, and all seem politically risky, what can you do? Here are two guidelines
to finding your way to a good outcome.
- Animosity Patterns
- Animosity between two people at work is often attributed to "personality clashes." While sometimes
people can't get along, animosity can also be a tool for accomplishing strictly political ends. Here's
a short catalog of some of its uses.
- Political Framing: Communications
- In organizational politics, one class of toxic tactics is framing — accusing a group or individual
by offering interpretations of their actions to knowingly and falsely make them seem responsible for
reprehensible or negligent acts. Here are some communications tactics framers use.
- Devious Political Tactics: More from the Field Manual
- Careful observation of workplace politics reveals an assortment of devious tactics that the ruthless
use to gain advantage. Here are some of their techniques, with suggestions for effective responses.
- Anticipate Counter-Communication
- Effective communication enables two parties to collaborate. Counter-communication is information provided
by a third party that contradicts the basis of agreements or undermines that collaboration.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming November 22: Motivation and the Reification Error
- We commit the reification error when we assume, incorrectly, that we can treat abstract constructs as if they were real objects. It's a common error when we try to motivate people. Available here and by RSS on November 22.
- And on November 29: Manipulators Beware
- When manipulators try to manipulate others, they're attempting to unscrupulously influence their targets to decide or act in some way the manipulators prefer. But some targets manage to outwit their manipulators. Available here and by RSS on November 29.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenTwkEhVXYKKMovuwGner@ChacksDQvbelLEylWCiloCanyon.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
- Ten Project Management Fallacies: The Power of Avoiding Hazards
- Most of what we know about managing projects is useful and effective, but some of what we know "just ain't so." Identifying the fallacies of project management reduces risk and enhances your ability to complete projects successfully. Even more important, avoiding these traps can demonstrate the value and power of the project management profession in general, and your personal capabilities in particular. In this program we describe ten of these beliefs. There are almost certainly many more, but these ten are a good start. We'll explore the situations where these fallacies are most likely to expose projects to risk, and suggest techniques for avoiding them. Read more about this program. Here's a date for this program:
- 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.