Daily, we engage in dozens or hundreds of social transactions. We greet others; we say farewell; we yield (or not) in hallways, on the street, or entering elevators; we shake hands, wave, or hug; we hold doors open for others; we let doors close; we place lunch or latte orders; we leave voicemail; we send email thanks; and on and on.
We can choose from dozens of different approaches to these engagements. There are degrees of intensity, cheerfulness, and enthusiasm. Usually we make these choices without thinking much about them.
Some social transactions are reciprocal: one party initiates, and the other responds. Each chooses a style, more or less voluntarily. Waving hello from afar is an example of a reciprocal transaction. Other social transactions are mutual: the two parties usually engage in the transaction in similar styles, because of the nature of the transaction. Shaking hands and hugging are examples of mutual social transactions.
In mutual social transactions disagreements as to style are awkward at best. They can even result in insult. One stance that leads to disagreement is insisting on doing it one's own way, despite the preferences of the partner. Another stance, perhaps even more problematic, is being completely unaware that one's own way is just one way, and that it might differ from the partner's. The former entails at least an acknowledgment that others have a point of view, while the latter might be considered a form of cultural ignorance.
Here's an example of a disagreement. Interviewers of candidates for employment report that occasionally, at the end of an interview, when the interviewer extends a hand for a parting handshake, the candidate will approach for a hug, effectively brushing aside the extended hand, saying, "I'm a hugger." In effect, the candidate says, "We're doing it my way."
Sometimes, a power differential between the parties settles the question. The less powerful yield to the more powerful, because resistance can be socially — or financially — In mutual social transactions
disagreements as to style
are awkward at best. They
can even result in insult.expensive. Whether we have the greater power or not, we tend to accept this resolution, but when viewed from outside the power system, it's clear that using power to settle differences in approaches to social transactions is no more fair or right than is using any other form of coercion.
Our personal preferences probably arise from the cultures and microcultures of our early years. Yet, as adults, we mix with others from many different cultures, and then we must make choices about how we engage in mutual social transactions. We can demand that our own preferences prevail, we can yield to others, or we can seek a mutually acceptable arrangement. Reflect on how you've dealt with this issue so far today or so far this week. How do you feel about that? What can you change? 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 welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenuQKLUMsVubCpqOpqner@ChacCCvpZbzKGsgliMGNoCanyon.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 Workplace Politics:
- Obstructionist Tactics: I
- Teams and groups depend for their success on highly effective cooperation between their members. If
even one person is unable or unwilling to cooperate, the team's performance is limited. What tactics
do obstructors use?
- 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.
- The Utility Pole Anti-Pattern: I
- Organizational processes can get so complicated that nobody actually knows how they work. If getting
something done takes too long, the organization can't lead its markets, or even catch up to the leaders.
Why does this happen?
- Exploiting Functional Fixedness: I
- Functional fixedness is a cognitive bias that creates difficulty in seeing novel uses of things that
have familiar uses. Some devious moves in workplace politics exploit functional fixedness.
- Grace Under Fire: IV
- People can be astonishingly inventive when trying to harm others. Some strategies involve driving to
distraction the target of their malevolence by humiliating the target and lying about the target's character,
deeds, or abilities. Targets who recognize these methods are more likely to be able to maintain composure.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming August 5: Red Flags: III
- Early signs of troubles in collaborations include toxic conflict, elevated turnover and anti-patterns in communication. But among the very earliest red flags are abuses of power. They're more significant than other red flags because abuses of power can convert any collaboration into a morass of destructive politics. Available here and by RSS on August 5.
- And on August 12: Cognitive Biases at Work
- Cognitive biases can lead us to misunderstand situations, overlook options, and make decisions we regret. The patterns of thinking that lead to cognitive biases provide speed and economy advantages, but we must manage the risks that come along with them. Available here and by RSS on August 12.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenuQKLUMsVubCpqOpqner@ChacCCvpZbzKGsgliMGNoCanyon.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 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.
- Bullet Points: Mastery or Madness?
Decision-makers in modern organizations commonly demand briefings in the form of bullet points or a series of series of bullet points. But this form of presentation has limited value for complex decisions. We need something more. We actually need to think. Briefers who combine the bullet-point format with a variety of persuasion techniques can mislead decision-makers, guiding them into making poor decisions. Read more about this program.
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.