Bad Trouble: Misdirection

On most days knowledge work consists of meetings, pick-up conversations, reading either from a screen or from paper, writing and transmitting information for others to read, participating in video calls, finding stuff out again that you once knew, helping colleagues figure out other stuff, getting help yourself, debating, drinking stimulant-laden fluids, and on and on. And every now and then there's a brushfire to put out. Sometimes, though, there's trouble for which the term brushfire doesn't seem adequate. Call it Bad Trouble.

Bad trouble is the kind of tangle that leaps across team boundaries and functional boundaries. It can last days, weeks, or longer. Truly Bad Trouble occupies top slots in the agendas of many meetings. If it's bad enough Bad Trouble, some of the conversations about it get classified Org Chart Level One Confidential. Level One is the most highly sensitive category, and that would be for really bad Bad Trouble, but even Level Three can produce significant anxiety for everyone.

How some people respond to Bad Trouble

When Bad Trouble appears, a few people see it as an opportunity to demonstrate their talents or abilities. But most people try to find ways to get through to the other side with their careers intact or slightly improved in some way. Below is part of a little catalog of coping styles I've seen in use when Bad Trouble appears. These styles emphasize misdirecting others to deflect corrective actions in the direction of someone else.

Concealing the existence of the trouble

Some choose to prevent those who don't yet know about the trouble from ever learning about it. They might form a Conspiracy of Silence. Certainly they avoid reporting the trouble, or discussing it in any medium that has a memory. They might deny knowing about it — not flatly, but in ways that limit their involvement with the trouble.

If you're When Bad Trouble appears, a few
people see it as an opportunity
to demonstrate their
talents or abilitiesresponsible, even in part, for developing responses to Bad Trouble, evaluate the veracity of reports that affect your decisions. And ensure that after-action reviews assess the quality of status reports generated either during the incident, or in the pre-acute time period.

Disguising

Some forms of trouble can adopt disguises, if they have a little help. People try to make the trouble look like not-trouble. Some of the less deceitful methods for doing this are sometimes known as "spin." But at the deceitful end of the spectrum are the techniques of making false reports, or submitting false financial data.

Among the least ethical and most damaging disguise-oriented tactics is retroactive altering of data and reports about the incident. Ensure that these materials are appropriately protected and that attempts to modify them trigger alarms.

Transferring

If the organization is searching for root causes of the trouble, the search can readily transform into a hunt for someone to blame, unless the organization understands and manages this risk. [Brenner 2005] But even if the organization takes pains to avoid blaming, those who feel vulnerable might sense an urge to protect themselves from blame by transferring attention from their own roles to the roles of others.

Efforts to transfer the focus of investigation can be general or specific. The general approach provides justification for a stance of "Not Me." The specific approach transfers attention to "Them." The means of transferring can be devious or straightforward — ethical or not. The cleverest tactics leave no audit trail, making it difficult to identify the person responsible for shifting the focus of investigation.

Weaponizing

A tactic that requires an element of ruthlessness is converting the Bad Trouble into a weapon to be used against political rivals. Blaming the rival for the trouble is among the less sophisticated forms of this approach. Another form involves manufacturing narratives that support resource reallocation away from the rival's control to some other use, typically to benefit the person doing the weaponizing.

For those least encumbered by ethical constraints, tactics are limited only by the bounds of creativity. Truth is an early victim. For example, if the Bad Trouble is a scandal of some sort, the political actor might suggest, without evidence, that the rival is implicated in a similar or related scandal.

Some people do respond to Bad Trouble constructively, more or less. Next time we'll survey some more constructive responses.   Next issue in this series   Top    Next Issue

Projects never go quite as planned. We expect that, but we don't expect disaster. How can we get better at spotting disaster when there's still time to prevent it? How to Spot a Troubled Project Before the Trouble Starts is filled with tips for executives, senior managers, managers of project managers, and sponsors of projects in project-oriented organizations. It helps readers learn the subtle cues that indicate that a project is at risk for wreckage in time to do something about it. It's an ebook, but it's about 15% larger than "Who Moved My Cheese?" Just . Order Now! .

Footnotes

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: I

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 I of a set of approaches that can organize your thinking and shorten the obsessing.

Impasses in Group Decision Making: I

Groups sometimes find that although they cannot agree on the issue at hand in its entirety, they can agree on some parts of it. Yet, they remain stuck, unable to reach a narrow agreement before moving on to the more thorny areas. Why does this happen?

The Perils of Novel Argument

When people use novel or sophisticated arguments to influence others, the people they're trying to influence are sometimes subject to cognitive biases triggered by the nature of the argument. This puts them at a disadvantage relative to the influencer. How does this happen?

Problem Displacement and Technical Debt

The term problem displacement describes situations in which solving one problem creates another. It sometimes leads to incurring technical debt. How? What can we do about it?

Stone-Throwers at Meetings: II

A stone-thrower in a meeting is someone who is determined to halt forward progress. Motives vary, from embarrassing the chair to holding the meeting hostage in exchange for advancing an agenda. What can chairs do about stone-throwers?

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