Don't Staff the Ammo Dump

Carl hated writing his monthly reports, because there was no evidence that anyone ever actually read them. Still, he had to finish it by five, so he kept at it despite the pain, all the while looking for other things to do. He was relieved when the phone rang.

It was Betsy, his boss. After the polite chitchat, she said, "Can you look at Paula's report on Marigold? Let me know what you think of the risk plan."

Paula, Betsy's peer, had recently assumed responsibility for Marigold from Betsy. Betsy had been a little peeved about this, because Marigold was Betsy's brainchild. Almost everyone thought she was still bothered about it, although she never said anything explicitly.

Betsy continued, "in strictest confidence of course."

"Sure," he said. They said good-bye, and Carl slowly and thoughtfully placed the handset in the cradle.

Carl felt uneasy. The request seemed strange, because it had come by telephone, rather than Betsy's more usual email. And Paula herself had asked Carl to comment on her risk plan, and Betsy knew it. As he wondered what was afoot, he completely forgot about his monthly report.

An ammo dump, in military parlance, is a place where ammunition is stored. "Staffing the ammo dump" is the job of retrieving ammunition for someone else to use in an attack on a third party. It's a dangerous role in the military, and it's no less dangerous in the office.

Unlike real ammo,
political ammunition
isn't designed
for safe handlingWe can't know for sure what Betsy had in mind, but it could have been a trip to the ammo dump, looking for ammunition to help her reclaim Marigold from Paula.

This is a dangerous role for Carl, because unlike real ammunition, Carl can't be sure of the safety or effectiveness of any metaphorical ammunition he provides. If something he provides harms Betsy, she might not honor her assurance of Carl's anonymity. She might be tempted to defend herself by claiming that she was relying on Carl's information. So if the ammunition is defective, or if it's misused, the staff of the ammo dump could be blamed.

What did Carl do? He replied by email to Betsy, indicating that he was perfectly comfortable with being open with Paula, and enclosed as an attachment the comments he had previously sent to Paula. What could Betsy do? She couldn't ask — or wasn't willing to ask — for ammunition explicitly, at least not in email. If she had in fact wanted ammunition, she had cloaked the request as a request for information, which Carl had honored. So Carl had complied with her request, without incurring the risk of staffing the ammo dump.

Requests for ammunition are usually ambiguous; ambiguity gives the requester deniability. But if the requester needs protection, you do too. If you think you might have been asked to staff the ammo dump, find a way to honor the literal request as openly as possible.  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 welcome

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.

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:

Devious Political Tactics: The False Opportunity

Workplace politics can make any environment dangerous, both to your career and to your health. This excerpt from my little catalog of devious political tactics describes the false opportunity, which appears to be a chance to perform, to contribute, or to make a real difference. It's often something else.

Devious Political Tactics: The Three-Legged Race

The Three-Legged Race is a tactic that some managers use to avoid giving one person new authority. Some of the more cynical among us use it to sabotage projects or even careers. How can you survive a three-legged race?

Patterns of Everyday Conversation

Many conversations follow identifiable patterns. Recognizing those patterns, and preparing yourself to deal with them, can keep you out of trouble and make you more effective and influential.

Exasperation Generators: Irrelevant Detail

When people relate stories at work, what seems important to one person can feel irrelevant to someone else. Being subjected to one irrelevant detail after another can be as exasperating as being told repeatedly to get to the point. How can we find a balance?

Suppressing Dissent: II

Disagreeing with the majority in a meeting, or in some cases, merely disagreeing with the Leader, can lead to isolation and other personal difficulties. Here is Part II of a set of tactics used by Leaders who choose not to tolerate differences of opinion, emphasizing the meeting context.

See also Workplace Politics for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming September 26: Congruent Decision-Making: I

Decision-makers who rely on incomplete or biased information are more likely to make faulty decisions. Congruent decision-making can limit the incidence of bad decisions. Available here and by RSS on September 26.

And on October 3: Congruent Decision-Making: II

Decision-makers who rely on incomplete or biased information are more likely to make decisions that don't fit the reality of their organizations. Here's Part II of a framework for making decisions that fit. Available here and by RSS on October 3.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenwIHDbzUOYyeMZlCLner@ChacTvRxuwlPMFIVbRicoCanyon.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, 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

Public seminars

10 Non-Technical Phenomena That Lead to Technical Debt

When organizations set about gaining control of their accumulated and newly incurring technical debt, a common error of thinking is that the problem can be addressed by modifying their technical processes alone. That can be effective in cases in which the causes of technical debt are found only in the engineering and IT organizations. But those cases are rare. This program surveys ten examples of organizational phenomena that lead to technical debt and which are not restricted to the engineering or IT organizations. Indeed, many of these phenomena cannot be found in the engineering or IT organizations, or if found there, they have relatively small effects on technical debt. For each of the ten phenomena, we describe how it leads to technical debt formation or persistence, and what can be done to mitigate its effects. Most important, we explain how effective control of technical debt requires contributions from a broad array of organizational roles. Read more about this program. Here's a date for this program:

• Wherever you are: it's a teleseminar: September 20, Teleseminar, Computer Aid, Inc. (CAI). Register now.
   

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.

• A recording of a program presented 6:00 PM June 29 (Eastern Time), Monthly Webinar, Technobility Webinar Series. You can earn 1.0 Category 'A' PDU by viewing this program. View this program now.