Covert Obstruction in Teams: II

In Part I of this exploration, I noted that some team members are fully committed to obstructing their teams' progress with respect to a given initiative. The position of an obstructers is difficult, for they must pursue subversion of their teams covertly. Whatever they do to obstruct their team's progress must appear to be supportive of the team's goal.

Covert action is required for three reasons. First, and most obviously, if the obstructer's actions are discovered, he or she could be reassigned or terminated, which would end the obstructer's ability to obstruct the team's effort. Second, the obstructer needs access to information about the team's current efforts and plans for the immediate future. The obstructer needs this information for planning obstructive actions, but access to it might be constricted if the obstructer is seen as acting in opposition to the team's efforts. Finally, that same information is also useful to the obstructer's allies and co-conspirators, within the team or elsewhere, if any. Whatever the obstructer does (or doesn't do) must appear to be intended to be supportive.

More examples of covert obstruction

What follows is Part II of a little catalogue of covert obstruction tactics. As in Part I, I use the names Oscar (he/him) or Olivia (she/her) to refer to the Obstructer.

Abusing consensus

Consensus is a form of group decision-making in which the group decides to adopt a decision only if there are no members strongly opposed. The decision is adopted if all members are either neutral or supportive. Because a single opponent can kill the measure, reaching consensus usually entails detailed, thorough airing of views.

Reaching The position of obstructers is difficult. In
whatever way they choose to obstruct their
team's progress, they must always appear
to be working to support the team's goal.consensus can be a time-consuming process. But the investment of time is worthwhile when all members are well versed in the issue, and when a thoughtful airing of issues is required. Requiring that the team proceed only on the basis of consensus is therefore one way of slowing progress. In other circumstances, it can be wasteful and crippling. Oscar abuses the consensus process when he demands that it be applied to decisions in which the benefits of consensus are marginal or negligible.

Limiting availability for meetings

By limiting her availability for meetings, Olivia limits the ability of her team to resolve open issues. This tactic is especially effective when the team has decided that a particular issue requires a consensus-based decision.

But Olivia's limited availability has broader impact. Meetings are delayed until she is available. When unexpected events arise, rescheduling meetings is difficult unless the team can push the meeting into the future. When meetings do occur, Olivia arrives late, or leaves early, or "steps out" repeatedly to deal with phone calls or texts. Delays and confusion are the results.

But if Olivia's limited availability is covert obstruction, she avoids being tagged as obstructive. She isn't obstructing — she's just "over-committed." So Olivia can implement a part of her obstruction strategy by becoming involved in numerous initiatives.

Withholding information

In some situations, the discovery of small bits of information can render unnecessary hours of discussion, or days or weeks of work. Even minimal experience of project work confirms this. But suppressing the availability of critical information is only one way to obstruct progress. Degrading the credibility of critical information is another. In effect, degrading the credibility of the information causes some team members to decline to accept it as correct, even if it is correct. That can have the same impact on team progress as suppressing the information altogether.

Techniques for falsely degrading the credibility of information are easily masked as honest and sincere. That masking is what makes these tactics so compatible with covert obstruction strategies. For example, Oscar can raise questions — or spread lies — about the professionalism of the person who is the source of the information. Or he can repeat false stories about the consequences of relying on that source for this information or even or unrelated information.

Swerving near deadlines

As the team approaches a deadline, it isn't unusual for someone to discover that some piece of the work is incomplete or defective in some way. People then scurry around searching for a way to mend the workpiece in time to meet the deadline. Often these efforts succeed. They're so common that these situations have a generic name: fire drill. When they occur, people are likely to assume that they're genuine. That's why Oscar might be able to escape notice as he covertly obstructs the team using one of these fire drills.

To manufacture a fire drill, all he need do is withhold until the deadline information he has about a defect or a sudden change in requirements.

Oscar's purpose might or might not be related to the issue that precipitates the fire drill. He might be more interested in creating the distraction the fire drill provides, and in allocating people to the fire drill rather than some other matter that he wants to obstruct.

Elaborating the team's mission

Elaboration is another technique of obstruction that masquerades as constructive effort. The masquerade is convincing because people who mean well so often undertake elaboration. In elaboration, the team adopts a strategy that could achieve its stated objective, but it does so as a special case of having solved a more difficult and more general problem.

Elaboration is obstructive because it so rarely succeeds. The failures usually trace to the difficulty of anticipating the complexity of implementing the generalization. But the obstruction is covert because elaboration is so seductive and inspiring. That's why Olivia has so little difficulty in recruiting allies to her efforts. Indeed, recruiting can be so successful that the role she plays in the obstruction (beyond initially advocating elaboration) might be very minor.

Last words

Skilled covert obstructers know how to take steps that are obstructive, but which seem to be intended to be supportive of team goals. That's why covert obstruction tactics can be difficult to distinguish from more ordinary performance issues. And an obstructer who's selective about which efforts to obstruct and which not to obstruct can make detection even more difficult. So track questionable behavior over time. The perspective of time can make patterns recognizable. First in this series   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

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 Conflict Management:

Hostile Collaborations

Sometimes collaboration with people we hold in low regard can be valuable. If we enter a hostile collaboration without first accepting both the hostility and the value, we might sabotage it outside our awareness, and that can render the effort worthless — or worse. What are the dynamics of hostile collaborations, and how can we do them well?

Workplace Bullying and Workplace Conflict: II

Of the tools we use to address toxic conflict, many are ineffective for ending bullying. Here's a review of some of the tools that don't work well and why.

Toxic Conflict at Work

Preventing toxic conflict is a whole lot better than trying to untangle it once it starts. But to prevent toxic conflict, we must understand some basics of conflict, and why untangling toxic conflict can be so difficult.

Patterns of Conflict Escalation: II

When simple workplace disagreements evolve into workplace warfare, they often do so following recognizable patterns. If we can recognize the patterns early, we can intervene to prevent serious damage to relationships. Here's Part II of a catalog of some of those patterns.

Shame and Bullying

Targets of bullies sometimes experience intense feelings of shame. Here are some insights that might restore the ability to think, and maybe end the bullying.

See also Conflict Management and Workplace Politics for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming May 1: Antipatterns for Time-Constrained Communication: 2

Recognizing just a few patterns that can lead to miscommunication can reduce the incidence of miscommunications. Here's Part 2 of a collection of antipatterns that arise in communication under time pressure, emphasizing those that depend on content. Available here and by RSS on May 1.

And on May 8: Antipatterns for Time-Constrained Communication: 3

Recognizing just a few patterns that can lead to miscommunication can reduce the incidence of problems. Here is Part 3 of a collection of antipatterns that arise in technical communication under time pressure, emphasizing past experiences of participants. Available here and by RSS on May 8.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.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