In modern organizations, people working alone contribute only a small part of what their organizations do. For example, most knowledge work requires cooperation. If people can't get along with each other, they're unhappy, and their work usually suffers. One of the more common causes of hurt feelings and disrupted relationships is exploitation of one person by another for personal ends. People who feel they've been exploited sometimes retaliate, sometimes shut down, and sometimes depart for more hospitable and nurturing environments. All these outcomes harm the organization.
As a reminder, the behaviors and attitudes typically regarded as narcissistic are these:
- Expresses exaggerated self-importance
- Preoccupied with superiority fantasies
- Believes that he or she is special and that only special people or institutions can fully appreciate that specialness
- Constantly demands attention and admiration from others
- Expects and demands favorable treatment
- Exploits others for personal ends
- Displays ruthless disregard for the feelings of others
- Envies others or believes that others envy him or her
- Is off-the-charts arrogant
Let's now have a closer look at the sixth item above: exploiting others for personal ends. For convenience in this series, I've been referring to the person exhibiting narcissistic behaviors and attitudes as either Nick or Nora. This time, it's Nick.
- A typical A typical form of exploitation
is taking credit personally for
contributions others have producedform of exploitation is taking credit personally for contributions others have produced, commonly called credit theft or credit appropriation. This behavior has a mate of the opposite polarity: blame shifting. By pre-emptively blaming others for failures, Nick avoids having to put on a defense about those failures. Other forms of exploitation include making others feel stupid and hijacking meetings.
- Exploitation at work need not be work-related. For example, by suggesting the possibility of romantic involvement, one person can induce another to provide a favor. The reverse exchange is also possible: by using the power of one's position to provide a favor, or to threaten, one person can induce another to provide favors of a more intimate nature.
- The variety of ways Nick can exploit other people for his own ends is breathtaking. The overt acts of exploitation, such as those offered above as illustrations, are unsurprising. Of greater interest is covert exploitation.
- Consider a somewhat common situation: contending for promotion. Nick might exploit the other contenders by arranging covertly to create traps for his competitors that might reduce their chances of promotion. He might spread rumors about them. If a contender's project needs the assistance of someone with rare skills, Nick might arrange for that person to be unavailable. Or Nick might charm others into forming a tight alliance that excludes the other contender. By these means he exploits the foibles and weaknesses of the other contenders to increase his own chances of promotion.
- Homework: select another situation and work out how Nick's narcissistic exploitation of others to advance his own personal goals can distort the way that situation evolves.
- Organizational risks
- One common result of Nick's exploiting others for personal ends is distortion of the organization's perception of which people or groups are producing (or failing to produce) value. Consequently, organizational decision makers are at risk of making personnel decisions that are inconsistent with achieving organizational goals.
- There are other effects less common but potentially more significant. For example, if Nick attains an elevated level of responsibility for determining organizational goals, he might choose to bias his decisions in the direction of his own personal advantage. When his decisions directly benefit himself or his family members, the conflict of interest is overt and usually preventable. But he can conceal his conflict of interest by conspiring covertly with other similarly situated individuals to "swap" decisions, each benefiting the other. See "Budget Shenanigans: Swaps," Point Lookout for May 14, 2003, for examples of swaps.
- These examples of exploitation are less common only because Nick requires the ability to influence the direction of the enterprise. But they can produce substantial benefit for Nick, and substantial harm for the enterprise.
- Coping tactics
- As Nick's supervisor, two concerns are paramount. First, if Nick has engaged in narcissistic behavior often enough to alert you to the possibility that he exploits others, or the enterprise, for personal gain, wake up your inner detective. Interview Nick's potential targets privately to determine the truth about who creates value for the enterprise and who does not. Second, if Nick has significant decision-making authority, investigate his decisions closely enough to ensure that they are in true alignment with enterprise objectives. And don't rely on the appearance of legitimacy — look carefully for swaps.
- As Nick's co-worker, be aware that he's probably much more adroit at exploiting you than you are at defending yourself from exploitation. Be alert to Nick's use of charm and deceit to induce you to make choices you wouldn't otherwise make. Trust your intuition.
- As Nick's subordinate, if he's shown an inclination to take credit for the work of subordinates, make sure others know what you're working on. If Nick demands secrecy, or otherwise prevents you from making your contributions public, that's an indicator of elevated risk of credit theft. Make your work so spectacular and so ridden with subtleties that if Nick is asked about particular details, he cannot possibly explain them.
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? rbrenmhXARWRMUvVyOdHlner@ChacxgDmtwOKrxnripPCoCanyon.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:
- When You Think Your Boss Is Incompetent
- After the boss commits even a few enormous blunders, some of us conclude that he or she is just incompetent.
We begin to worry whether our careers are safe, whether the company is safe, or whether to start looking
for another job. Beyond worrying, what else can we do?
- Managing Pressure: Communications and Expectations
- Pressed repeatedly for "status" reports, you might guess that they don't want status —
they want progress. Things can get so nutty that responding to the status requests gets in the way of
doing the job. How does this happen and what can you do about it? Here's Part I of a little catalog
of tactics and strategies for dealing with pressure.
- What Insubordinate Non-Subordinates Want: I
- When you're responsible for an organizational function, and someone not reporting to you won't recognize
your authority, or doesn't comply with policies you rightfully established, you have a hard time carrying
out your responsibilities. Why does this happen?
- Staying in Abilene
- A "Trip to Abilene," identified by Jerry Harvey, is a group decision to undertake an effort
that no group members believe in. Extending the concept slightly, "Staying in Abilene" happens
when groups fail even to consider changing something that everyone would agree needs changing.
- Not Really Part of the Team: II
- When some team members hang back, declining to show initiative, we tend to overlook the possibility
that their behavior is a response to something happening within or around the team. Too often we hold
responsible the person who's hanging back. What other explanations are possible?
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming July 24: The Stupidity Attribution Error
- In workplace debates, we sometimes conclude erroneously that only stupidity can explain why our debate partners fail to grasp the elegance or importance of our arguments. There are many other possibilities. Available here and by RSS on July 24.
- And on July 31: More Things I've Learned Along the Way: IV
- When I have an important insight, or when I'm taught a lesson, I write it down. Here's Part IV from my personal collection. Available here and by RSS on July 31.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenmhXARWRMUvVyOdHlner@ChacxgDmtwOKrxnripPCoCanyon.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 Race to the South Pole: Lessons in Leadership
- On 14 December 1911, four men led by Roald Amundsen reached
the South Pole. Thirty-five days later, Robert F. Scott and four others followed. Amundsen had won the
race to the pole. Amundsen's party returned to base on 26 January 1912. Scott's party perished. As historical
drama, why this happened is interesting enough. But to organizational leaders, business analysts, project
sponsors, and project managers, the story is fascinating. We'll use the history of this event to explore
lessons in leadership and its application to organizational efforts. A fascinating and refreshing look
at leadership from the vantage point of history. Read
more about this program. Here's a date for this program:
- Baldwin-Wallace University, 275 Eastland Road, Berea, Ohio
44017: November 7,
Kerzner Lecture Series/International Project Management Day, sponsored by Baldwin Wallace University and the Northeast Ohio Chapter of the Project Management Institute.
- Baldwin-Wallace University, 275 Eastland Road, Berea, Ohio 44017: November 7, Kerzner Lecture Series/International Project Management Day, sponsored by Baldwin Wallace University and the Northeast Ohio Chapter of the Project Management Institute. Register now.
- 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.