Some people use presuppositions to coerce others into accepting responsibilities they don't want or can't fulfill. Here's an example: "Jesse, when can you have this done?" It sounds like an innocent question, and often, it is. But suppose Jesse hasn't yet committed to the task because he's overloaded, as he had politely explained yesterday. And suppose further that the question is asked in a meeting, with colleagues and perhaps Jesse's supervisor looking on (or listening in).
Jesse would be cornered. He would have to choose between acquiescence and contradicting the speaker, and thereby seeming uncooperative. Worse, if he contradicts the speaker, however politely, the speaker might respond with something like, "Whoa, pal, you already committed to doing this. Are you reneging now at this late date?" Some operators might do this even if Jesse had never said or done anything resembling accepting responsibility.
This tactic is difficult to deal with because it contains a presupposition. A swatch of speech or text contains a presupposition if it assumes something, usually implicitly. In the example above, the presupposition is that Jesse has agreed to do the work. (See "The Power of Presuppositions," Point Lookout for September 1, 2004, for more.)
Presuppositions aren't inherently evil. A presupposition can be appropriate when all parties to the exchange are aware of the assumption and agree to it. I call this a Type 1 Presupposition (PS1). But when the recipient of the message is unaware of the presupposition or doesn't agree with it, trouble like Jesse's begins. If the presupposition is inadvertent it's of Type 2 (PS2). If it's intentional, it's Type 3 (PS3).
Here's what you can do about Type 3 presuppositions.
- Educate everyone
- Ending the use of PS3s begins with learning what they are. Outside the context of any PS3 incident, explain PS3s to others. The word presupposition is familiar to some, but many don't really know what it means.
- Recognize PS3s as abuse
- PS1s are useful shorthand; PS2s are accidents; PS3s are a We must recognize as abusers any
managers who use presuppositions
to coerce subordinatesform of psychological abuse. We must recognize as abusers any managers who use presuppositions to coerce subordinates.
- As a third party, point out presuppositions when they're used
- Targets of PS2s and PS3s are vulnerable. Responding safely is difficult. But third party bystanders can respond constructively and forcefully by simply identifying the presupposition. Example: "Wait a minute, I didn't realize Jesse had committed to this task. I'm concerned that he might become overloaded."
One step you can take right away: circulate this essay. If your organization harbors operators who use presuppositions as tools of coercion, you'll do a great deal of good by making people aware of the tactic in advance, even if you can't take overt action "in the moment." It's a small step towards eliminating this form of coercion, but it is a step. 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? rbrenmmcqOXERROVXPttcner@ChacWQeBDJVruzeTcxmioCanyon.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:
- What Insubordinate Non-Subordinates Want: III
- When you're responsible for an organizational function, and someone not reporting to you doesn't comply
with policies you rightfully established, trouble looms. What role do supervisors play?
- Reactance and Micromanagement
- When we feel that our freedom at work is threatened, we sometimes experience urges to do what is forbidden,
or to not do what is required. This phenomenon — called reactance — might explain
some of the dynamics of micromanagement.
- Some Hazards of Skip-Level Interviews: I
- Although skip-level interviews have their place, they can be dangerous, explosive, and harmful to the
organization. What are the dangers?
- Allocating Airtime: II
- Much has been said about people who don't get a fair chance to speak at meetings. We've even devised
processes intended to more fairly allocate speaking time. What's happening here?
- Narcissistic Behavior at Work: I
- Briefly, when people exhibit narcissistic behavior they're engaging in activity that systematically
places their own interests and welfare ahead of the interests and welfare of anyone or anything else.
It's behavior that threatens the welfare of the organization and everyone employed there.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming December 12: Effects of Shared Information Bias: II
- Shared information bias is widely believed to lead to bad decisions. But over time, it can erode a group's ability to assess reality accurately. That can lead to a widening gap between reality and the group's perceptions of reality. Available here and by RSS on December 12.
- And on December 19: 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. Available here and by RSS on December 19.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenRdVbdqFhEShXmqEjner@ChacAjIFBuDTGVaWfSyfoCanyon.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, USD 11.95)
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)
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.
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.