In Part I of our discussion of stonewalling tactics, we looked at ploys that involve misrepresentations. In this Part II, we explore tactics that rely on bureaucratic behavior.
- Appeal to authority
- The appeal to authority is a transfer of responsibility for the obstruction from the stonewaller to someone whose authority you dare not question. Usually, the invoked authority is a co-conspirator. Example: "Personally, I'd like to tell you, but I've been instructed to withhold that information until it can be released."
- The need to invoke authority is tantamount to an admission of weakness. Press your case. One possible response to the appeal to authority: "OK, thanks, I'll just ask her." Of course, if the authority is a co-conspirator, this is somewhat risky, because the stonewaller might just say, "OK, knock yourself out." An alternative: "OK, I'll see what I can find out elsewhere." Because the alternative is nonspecific, stonewallers sometimes take such responses more seriously.
- Continued study
- At the organizational scale, this tactic takes the form of chartering commissions, creating task forces, or adding the issue to the agenda of next month's committee meeting. At the personal scale, the response is of the form, "I don't know just now, but I'll research it and get back to you," or, "I don't decide that, but I'll look into it for you." It's a delay, rather than a denial.
- At the organizational scale, this tactic is available only to those who control resources. As such, it's an abuse of power, and only those who have greater organizational power can counter it. At the personal scale, it's an excuse so flimsy that it would be foolish to use it unless it's already backed up by more powerful means. Here, too, power is required for an effective response. If you expect that the stonewaller might employ this tactic, find a powerful ally first, and make the alliance clear along with your request.
- Major Major Major
- To defeat bureaucratic stonewalling
you have to assault the wall at
multiple points nearly simultaneously
- This tactic is one of avoidance (named after the character in Joseph Heller's Catch-22) (Order from Amazon.com). The obstructor is unavailable to the obstructed, and rarely returns email or phone calls relevant to any inquiry.
- To contact the obstructor, you'll have to use extraordinary methods. Call at odd hours from varying telephones so as to defeat Caller ID. If you're co-located, drop by after hours or before hours. If you're willing to deny it or blame it on a glitch, write code to send email or text messages every three minutes for eight hours. Anything you can do to include humor might be helpful: send a carved pumpkin, gift-wrapped in a box, with your inquiry inside it.
Bureaucratic stonewallers are more difficult to detect, because their methods appear to be prudent and routine — similar to business as usual. But when they fit a pattern of obstruction, there's usually little doubt. First in this series 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
For more about obstructionist tactics generally, see "Obstructionist Tactics: I," Point Lookout for July 23, 2008.
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenZLkFdSHmlHvCaSsuner@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.
More articles on Workplace Politics:
- Hostile Collaborations
- Sometimes collaboration with people we hold in low regard can be valuable. If we enter a hostile collaboration
without first accepting both the hostility and the value, we might sabotage it outside our awareness,
and that can render the effort worthless — or worse. What are the dynamics of hostile collaborations,
and how can we do them well?
- A Critique of Criticism: I
- Whether we call it "criticism" or "feedback," the receiver can sometimes experience
pain, even when the giver didn't intend harm. How does this happen? What can givers of feedback do to
increase the chance that the receiver hears the giver's message without experiencing pain?
- Deceptive Communications at Work
- Most workplace communication training emphasizes constructive uses of communication. But when we also
understand how communication can be abused, we're better able to defend ourselves from abusive communication.
One form of abusive communication is deception.
- That Was a Yes-or-No Question: I
- In tense situations, one person might question another. As the respondent replies, the questioner interjects,
"That was a yes-or-no question." The intent is to trap the respondent. How does this work,
and how can the respondent escape the trap?
- Conway's Law and Technical Debt
- Conway's Law is an observation that the structures of systems we design tend to replicate our communication
patterns. This tendency might also contribute to their tendency to accumulate what we now call technical debt.
See also Workplace Politics and Conflict Management for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming March 29: Time Slot Recycling: The Risks
- When we can't begin a meeting because some people haven't arrived, we sometimes cancel the meeting and hold a different one, with the people who are in attendance. It might seem like a good way to avoid wasting time, but there are risks. Available here and by RSS on March 29.
- And on April 5: The Fallacy of Division
- Errors of reasoning are pervasive in everyday thought in most organizations. One of the more common errors is called the Fallacy of Division, in which we assume that attributes of a class apply to all members of that class. It leads to ridiculous results. Available here and by RSS on April 5.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenZLkFdSHmlHvCaSsuner@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
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