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
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenDJpmhgyaDTwBQXkhner@ChacmGoYuzfZpOvDQdRkoCanyon.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.
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:
Scopemonging: When Scope Creep Is Intentional
- Scope creep is the tendency of some projects to expand their goals. Usually, we think of scope creep
as an unintended consequence of a series of well-intentioned choices. But sometimes, it's much more than that.
The Deck Chairs of the Titanic: Task Duration
- Much of what we call work is as futile and irrelevant as rearranging the deck chairs of the
Titanic. We continue our exploration of futile and irrelevant work, this time emphasizing behaviors
that extend task duration.
Fooling Ourselves
- Humans have impressive abilities to convince themselves of things that are false. One explanation for
this behavior is the theory of cognitive dissonance.
Narcissistic Behavior at Work: III
- People who behave narcissistically tend to regard themselves as special. They systematically place their
own interests and welfare ahead of anyone or anything else. In this part of the series we consider how
this claimed specialness affects the organization and its people.
Dealing with Credit Appropriation
- Very little is more frustrating than having someone else claim credit for the work you do. Worse, sometimes
they blame you if they get into trouble after misusing your results. Here are three tips for dealing
with credit appropriation.
See also Workplace Politics and Workplace Politics for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
Coming May 14: Working with the Overconfident
- A cognitive bias known as the Overconfidence Effect causes us to overestimate the reliability of our judgments. Decisions we make based on those judgments are therefore suspect. But there are steps we can take to make our confidence levels more realistic, and thus make our decisions more reliable. Available here and by RSS on May 14.
And on May 21: Mismanaging Project Managers
- Most organizations hold project managers accountable for project performance. But they don't grant those project managers control of needed resources. Nor do they hold project sponsors or other senior managers accountable for the consequences of their actions when they interfere with project work. Here's a catalog of behaviors worth looking at. Available here and by RSS on May 21.
Coaching services
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenDJpmhgyaDTwBQXkhner@ChacmGoYuzfZpOvDQdRkoCanyon.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
rbrenDJpmhgyaDTwBQXkhner@ChacmGoYuzfZpOvDQdRkoCanyon.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