When we possess information that's "company confidential" or politically sensitive, protecting it can be a challenge, because seekers of that information can be very clever and persistent. This is Part II of a catalog of the methods they use. See "When You Aren't Supposed to Say: I," Point Lookout for March 29, 2006, for methods based on special resources. This article examines techniques that use misdirection to prompt the target to disclose valuable information. Some examples:
- By disclosing something that seems personal or sensitive, seekers can gain the trust of the target. They might offer information that disparages or even harms political foes. When you sense that someone trusts you too easily, consider the possibility that you're the target of a trust-building seeker of sensitive information.
- Illusionists commonly use diversion tactics. In the workplace, what happened to Mike might be typical (see "When You Aren't Supposed to Say: I," Point Lookout for March 29, 2006), but even a fire drill provides opportunities.Using misdirection, seekers
of information induce
their targets to willingly
disclose valuable information
- Flirtation, flattery, and romance
- When deftly used, flirtation, flattery, and romance are especially effective with those who are vulnerable or naïve. Between socially incompatible types, and when initiated by the more adept of the pair, these tactics could be indicators of information-seeking.
- By saying something that's wrong or incomplete, or by setting up the target to demonstrate superior knowledge, the seeker might induce the target to disclose sensitive information. Because many high achievers dislike being corrected or being shown to have inferior skill, accepting correction with little comment and no resistance could be an indicator of this tactic.
- Feigning disinterest, either by interruption or by appearing to be distracted, the seeker presents a cue to the target that what was just said was unimportant. Alternatively, the seeker might focus on an unimportant detail of the conversation to mislead the target about what the real point of interest is.
- Cultivating friendship over a relatively long period of time, especially when accompanied by a flow of useful information from the seeker to the target, could be an indicator of this tactic. Those most vulnerable have few friends and might even be isolated by internal politics. Managers who allow isolated individuals to remain so are creating a vulnerability to this tactic.
- By drawing the target into a secret relationship, the seeker forms a tight bond with the target. One famous example of this technique is Connie Chung's 1995 interview of Newt Gingrich's mother, in which she said, "Why don't you just whisper it to me, just between you and me?" When a seeker suggests confidentiality or secrecy, and revealing the information could be harmful to the target, the seeker could be using this technique.
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
Some of these tactics, such as flirtation and bait, are even more effective when they're used in an indirect manner. See "The True Costs of Indirectness," Point Lookout for November 29, 2006, for more.
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenmhXARWRMUvVyOdHlner@ChacxgDmtwOKrxnripPCoCanyon.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 Effective Communication at Work:
- Dangerous Phrases
- I recently upgraded my email program to a new version that "monitors messages for offensive text."
It hasn't worked out well. But the whole affair got me to think about everyday phrases that do tend
to set people off. Here's a little catalog.
- Let Me Finish, Please
- We use meetings to exchange information and to explore complex issues. In open discussion, we tend to
interrupt each other. Interruptions can be disruptive, distracting, funny, essential, and frustratingly
common. What can we do to limit interruptions without depriving ourselves of their benefits?
- Feedback Fumbles
- "Would you like some feedback on that?" Uh-oh, you think, absolutely not. But if you're like
many of us, your response is something like, "Sure, I'd be very interested in your thoughts."
Why is giving and receiving feedback so difficult?
- An Agenda for Agendas
- Most of us believe that the foundation of a well-run meeting is a well-formed agenda. What makes a "well-formed"
agenda? How can we write and manage agendas to make meetings successful?
- Long-Loop Conversations: Anticipation
- In virtual or global teams, conversations are sources of risk to the collaboration. Because the closed-loop
response time for exchanges can be a day or more, long-loop conversations generate misunderstanding,
toxic conflict, errors, delays, and rework. One strategy for controlling these phenomena is anticipation.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming November 20: Paid-Time-Off Risks
- Associated with the trend to a single pool of paid time off from separate categories for vacation, sick time, and personal days are what might be called paid-time-off risks. If your team must meet customer expectations or a schedule of deliverables, managing paid-time-off risks can be important. Available here and by RSS on November 20.
- And on November 27: Implicit Interrogations
- Investigations at work can begin with implicit interrogations — implicit because they're unannounced and unacknowledged. The goal is to determine what people did or knew without revealing that an investigation is underway. When asked, those conducting these interrogations often deny they're doing it. What's the nature of implicit interrogations? Available here and by RSS on November 27.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenmhXARWRMUvVyOdHlner@ChacxgDmtwOKrxnripPCoCanyon.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 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
- The Race to the South Pole: Ten Lessons for Project Managers
On 14 December 1911, four men led by Roald Amundsen reached the South Pole. Thirty-five days later, Robert F. Scott and four others followed. Amundsen had won the race to the pole. Amundsen's party returned to base on 26 January 1912. Scott's party perished. As historical drama, why this happened is interesting enough, but to organizational leaders, business analysts, project sponsors, and project managers, the story is fascinating. Lessons abound. Read more about this program.
Here's a date for this program:
- Gardner Village, 1100 W 7800 S, West Jordan, UT 84084: November
Quarterly Training Session, sponsored by Northern Utah Chapter of the Project Management Institute.
- Gardner Village, 1100 W 7800 S, West Jordan, UT 84084: November 21, Quarterly Training Session, sponsored by Northern Utah Chapter of the Project Management Institute. 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.