Pumpers

Have you ever encountered a pumper at work? Someone who seems overly inquisitive about matters political, but never seems to offer any information of value in return? Your answers never satisfy, and questions come one after the other: "What did you think of how they let Grant go? Who's next? Heard anything about the reorg?" It never ends.

Most of us consider pumpers to be pests. Some of them are just that, and nothing more. But sometimes, the matter is more serious. Pumpers can be politically dangerous.

Some pumpers are engaged in the dark side of workplace politics, either enthusiastically, or with naiveté or ignorance, or out of fear or extortion. When one of these pumpers targets you, the problem isn't finding the best response — it's finding the least bad response.

If you sense that you're being pumped, you might consider asking about it directly, if you feel safe enough to ask. Usually, though, a pumper's intentions are clear, and openness isn't really an option. What then?

Sophisticated pumpers first prime the pump. They offer information, usually unbidden, to gain trust. The less sophisticated offer no prepayment. They're easier to identify, but still potentially dangerous.

Stonewalling isn't an option. Stonewalling a pumper who's acting on behalf of someone with organizational power over you marks you as a noncooperator, or even part of the opposition. Offering something is better than offering nothing.

Cooperating enthusiastically is also unwise. If you provide useful information, you might be one of the only sources for it. If the pumper is concealing his or her client, which could indicate lack of trust, trusting the pumper is risky. If you're in, you want to be all the way in, and if you aren't trusted, you aren't in. That's why providing rare information could be risky, especially if the pumper's client considers what you provided to be harmful.

Most of us consider pumpers to
be little more than pests, but
pumpers can be politically dangerousA middle course is probably less risky. In utmost confidence, of course, offer information that many people have. That way it can't be traced to you as the sole or likely source. Ideally, you convey information that the pumper already has confirmed. Although it's of no value to the pumper, it establishes you as a reliable if naïve cooperator who believes that the information is valuable. True pumpers won't tell you that what you've told them is worthless, because they don't want to reveal that they already know it. They'll express gratitude, assuring you that your confidence will be respected. After a few incidents like this, the pumper will probably stop pumping you, because you will have demonstrated that you're fairly harmless, and not valuable as a resource.

Those who seek political information as part of a free and fair exchange are usually behaving ethically. But beware those who exploit power or ignorance to achieve that same end.  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.

This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.

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:

Ten Tactics for Tough Times: II

When you find yourself in a tough spot politically, what can you do? Most of us obsess about the situation for a while, and then if we still have time to act, we do what seems best. Here's Part II of a set of approaches that can organize your thinking and shorten the obsessing.

Lateral Micromanagement

Lateral micromanagement is the unwelcome intrusion by one co-worker into the responsibilities of another. Far more than run-of-the-mill bossiness, it's often a concerted attempt to gain organizational power and rank, and it is toxic to teams.

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.

Embarrassment, Shame, and Guilt at Work: Creation

Three feelings are often confused with each other: embarrassment, shame, and guilt. To understand how to cope with these feelings, begin by understanding what different kinds of situations we use when we create these feelings.

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?

See also Workplace Politics for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming July 16: Responding to Unwelcome Events

Unwelcome events have two kinds of effects on decision-makers. One set of effects appears as we respond to events that have actually occurred. Another set manifests itself as we prepare for unwelcome events that haven't yet occurred, but which might occur. Making a wrong decision in either case can be costly. Available here and by RSS on July 16.

And on July 23: Microdelegation

Microdelegation is a style of delegation in which the delegator unintentionally communicates the task to the subordinate in such detail and so repetitively that the subordinate is offended. As a result of this delegation style, many subordinates feel distrusted or suspected of fraud or goldbricking. Available here and by RSS on July 23.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenaXXxGCwVgbgLZDuRner@ChacDjdMAATPdDNJnrSwoCanyon.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