As Liz and Alex walked across the lawn toward the review meeting in Building J, Liz realized that she had a rare opportunity — Alex was able to speak freely, if he was inclined to, without the rest of Engineering listening in. So she decided to just ask him straight out. "Alex, you know we've been trying to find out what you all want Marigold to do about Phase II. Tell me."
Alex stopped walking. Liz did too, and as she turned toward him, he said, "Phase II. You mean with the Diamond Square fixes, or without?"
"Both," she replied.
Liz has just used a tactic I call "Seek all possible answers." When you ask a question, and the respondent offers you a choice of conditions, say "Both" or "All of the above." If you choose only one, respondents sometimes slant or spin their answers, possibly without realizing it. When you choose "all," the answers all have to be consistent, which makes spinning much more difficult.
Here are three more patterns that appear frequently in everyday conversation.
Mastering the patternsof our conversations
makes you a more
effective participant.
Compile a catalog.
- Find a neutral way out
- When you and your partner come to an impasse, find a neutral way out. But instead of offering it, let it be discovered. Usually only a little guidance is needed, since you're both searching for an exit. For instance, if you believe that you both agreed to be ready on the 14th, and your partner insists it was the 8th, suggest that you work out a new date together instead of figuring out who was right, or even worse, continuing to insist that you were right.
- Become a master of the interview
- When you sense that your partner is making it up on the fly, don't argue — it probably won't be necessary. Instead, switch to interview mode. Since your partner's argument is probably untested, ask for more detail and examples, watching closely for holes or inconsistencies. When you find one, ask about it. This is especially effective if you can loop back to contradict an initial assertion. On the other hand, if your conjecture about fabrication is incorrect, you will have actually helped to develop a stronger position. Either way, zero risk for you.
- Use the hypothetical to get around the obstacle
- If you meet an obstacle, ask the hypothetical question: "If we could do it, how would we do it?" Then apply the response to reality: "OK, well what if we do that?" If your partner wants to preserve the obstacle, he or she must find a difference between the hypothetical and the real — a difference so compelling that the hypothetical doesn't apply. If you constructed the hypothetical cleverly, finding that difference can be very difficult, and you'll often move closer to agreement.
Patterns are everywhere, but take care — they're often violated, and you can't always tell when they are. For instance, you've probably noticed that these little essays often end with a twist. This one doesn't. Or does it? 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
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenHoWzUJVeioCfozEIner@ChacbnsTPttsdDaRAswloCanyon.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.
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:
Ethical Influence: I
- Influencing others can be difficult. Even more difficult is defining a set of approaches to influencing
that almost all of us consider ethical. Here's a framework that makes a good starting point.
The Knowledge One-Upmanship Game
- The Knowledge One-Upmanship Game is a pattern of group behavior in the form of a contest to determine
which player knows the most arcane fact. It can seem like innocent fun, but it can disrupt a team's
ability to collaborate.
Power Affect
- Expressing one's organizational power to others is essential to maintaining it. Expressing power one
does not yet have is just as useful in attaining it.
Gratuitous Complexity as a Type III Error
- Some of the technological assets we build — whether hardware, software, or procedures —
are gratuitously complex. That's an error, but an error of a special kind: it can be the correct solution
to the wrong problem.
Cyber Rumors in Organizations
- Rumor management practices in organizations haven't kept up with rumor propagation technology. Rumors
that propagate by digital means — cyber rumors — have longer lifetimes, spread faster, are
more credible, and are better able to reinforce each other.
See also Workplace Politics and Effective Communication at Work for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
Coming June 14: Pseudo-Collaborations
- Most workplace collaborations produce results of value. But some collaborations — pseudo-collaborations — are inherently incapable of producing value, due to performance management systems, or lack of authority, or lack of access to information. Available here and by RSS on June 14.
And on June 21: Asking Burning Questions
- When we suddenly realize that an important question needs answering, directly asking that question in a meeting might not be an effective way to focus the attention of the group. There are risks. Fortunately, there are also ways to manage those risks. Available here and by RSS on June 21.
Coaching services
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenHoWzUJVeioCfozEIner@ChacbnsTPttsdDaRAswloCanyon.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
rbrenHoWzUJVeioCfozEIner@ChacbnsTPttsdDaRAswloCanyon.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