Devious Political Tactics: Bad Decisions

Devious political operators don't make decisions intended to harm their organizations. Well, not often. But frequently they do intentionally take steps that incidentally — that is, as collateral damage — incidentally do lead others to make decisions that harm their organizations. And the steps they take that lead to these bad decisions appear superficially to be reasonable, or even constructive. That superficial appearance is what makes detection and prevention of intentional bad decisions so difficult. But by studying the techniques people use, and becoming familiar with their general structure, we can make a first step towards prevention.

Defining workplace politics

To be careful, I begin by clearly defining workplace politics. There are dozens of definitions, maybe more. Here's mine:

Workplace politics is what happens when we contend with each other for control or dominance, or when we work together to solve specific problems.

Thus a Workplace politics is what happens when
we contend with each other for control or
dominance, or when we work
together to solve specific problemspolitical tactic is one that's employed in the course of engaging in workplace politics. Notice that in these definitions there is no stipulation that the effect of the political activity be harmful (or helpful) to the organization, or that the activity be in service to the organization, or that it be in service to the political actor. What makes activity political is whether or not it involves multiple people, contending for control or dominance, working together to solve a problem.

Defining devious political tactics

For me, a devious political tactic must meet six criteria.

• It is essentially political, in the above sense.
• Its advocates appear to intend to be helpful to the organization. They might or might not actually be helpful, but they do appear to be.
• At least some of its advocates are primarily concerned with achieving an objective they know to have harmful effects on the organization.
• It has a primary advocate. If there are multiple advocates, one advocate is identifiable as primary.
• The tactic is structured such that there is no evidence linking the primary advocate to the harmful objective.
• The tactic provides the primary advocate plausible deniability, though deniability might or might not be provided to other advocates.

Examples of devious political tactics

I've published descriptions of some of the more commonly used devious tactics in past posts. They are summarized at the end of this post. Here are three more devious political tactics, emphasizing those that lead people to make decisions of lesser quality than they otherwise would.

Speak in code

Especially in meetings, make unnecessary use of jargon, new or rarely used acronyms or initialisms, or technical terms to make a point or raise an issue that could be better expressed in plain language. The idea here is to compel others to ask for clarification, thereby establishing oneself as more expert in important matters than anyone else in attendance.

In the worst case, people are unwilling to expose their ignorance by asking for clarification. They then guess at the speaker's meaning. If they guess incorrectly, the group might make a mistaken decision that leads to an outcome inferior to what would have resulted if everyone understood the import of the speaker's comment. See "Self-Importance and Conversational Narcissism at Work: II," Point Lookout for October 11, 2023, for more.

Argue against risk management measures

Procedures such as assessments, audits, and inspections are regarded as best practices because they are effective ways to manage risk. And often, they do so by limiting the costs and delays associated with events that haven't yet occurred. Offered the option of executing these procedures, decision-makers must choose between (A) executing the procedures, which have non-zero but small immediate costs and delays, and (B) bypassing the procedures, which has no immediate costs and delays, but which has a significant probability of high costs and delays in the future if risk events do materialize.

Option B is attractive if risk events don't occur. Costs are low and delivery is earlier. It has the additional "benefit" of concealing prior bad decisions. If there are past decisions someone wants to conceal, those arguing for Option B might have a hidden agenda.

Hoard information selectively

Decision quality is limited by the quality of the information on which the decision is based. By withholding information, or by providing incomplete or inaccurate information, the devious operator can lead decision-makers to make a decision along the operator's preferred lines. The sophisticated operator can do this while appearing to be fully transparent.

For example, by revealing important information only after the time window for using it has closed, the sophisticated operator can claim to have provided the information even though it was withheld for all practical purposes. See "Devious Political Tactics: Mis- and Disinformation," Point Lookout for May 1, 2013, for more.

Scheduling a meeting so as to control attendance

Controlling the attendance list for a meeting is one way to influence its outcome. Usually the owner of the meeting controls the attendance list. But there are other ways to control the attendance list.

For example, suppose that Person A chairs Meeting #1, or at least plays a critical role there. And suppose Person B chairs Meeting #2, and does not want Person A to attend Meeting #2. By scheduling Meeting #2 to conflict with Meeting #1, Person B ensures the absence of Person A.

But in that example, it isn't necessary for the two meetings to conflict entirely. Suppose that only one agenda item of Meeting #2 is sensitive. If Person B controls the agenda of Meeting #2, B need only arrange for the agenda item in question to conflict with Meeting #1.

Last words

There is always the possibility that someone will use these posts as a guide for nefarious activity, instead of as a guide for detecting nefarious activity. The best defense against that scenario is wide circulation. Send this link to everyone you know: https://c4i.co/3o5 .  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

Past posts about devious political tactics

Here are links to past posts about devious political tactics:

More about Devious Political Tactics

Devious Political Tactics: Credit Appropriation  [September 24, 2003]

Managers and supervisors who take credit for the work of subordinates or others who feel powerless are using a tactic I call Credit Appropriation. It's the mark of the unsophisticated political operator.

Devious Political Tactics: The False Opportunity  [October 1, 2003]

Workplace politics can make any environment dangerous, both to your career and to your health. This excerpt from my little catalog of devious political tactics describes the false opportunity, which appears to be a chance to perform, to contribute, or to make a real difference. It's often something else.

Devious Political Tactics: The Three-Legged Race  [October 15, 2003]

The Three-Legged Race is a tactic that some managers use to avoid giving one person new authority. Some of the more cynical among us use it to sabotage projects or even careers. How can you survive a three-legged race?

Devious Political Tactics: Cutouts  [September 29, 2004]

Cutouts are people or procedures that enable political operators to communicate in safety. Using cutouts, operators can manipulate their environments while limiting their personal risk. How can you detect cutouts? And what can you do about them?

Devious Political Tactics: Divide and Conquer: I  [July 6, 2005]

While most leaders try to achieve organizational unity, some do use divisive tactics to maintain control, or to elevate performance by fostering competition. Understanding the risks of these tactics can motivate you to find another way.

Devious Political Tactics: A Field Manual  [November 7, 2007]

Some practitioners of workplace politics use an assortment of devious tactics to accomplish their ends. Since most of us operate in a fairly straightforward manner, the devious among us gain unfair advantage. Here are some of their techniques, and some suggestions for effective responses.

Devious Political Tactics: More from the Field Manual  [August 29, 2012]

Careful observation of workplace politics reveals an assortment of devious tactics that the ruthless use to gain advantage. Here are some of their techniques, with suggestions for effective responses.

Devious Political Tactics: Mis- and Disinformation  [May 1, 2013]

Practitioners of workplace politics intent on gaining unfair advantage sometimes use misinformation, disinformation, and other information-related tactics. Here's a short catalog of techniques to watch for.

Devious Political Tactics: Bad Decisions  [February 26, 2025]

When workplace politics influences the exchanges that lead to important organizational decisions, we sometimes make decisions for reasons other than the best interests of the organization. Recognizing these tactics can limit the risk of bad decisions.

And here are some topics in the queue for future posts.

• Contract killers and enforcers
• The hospital pass
• Lying
• Blocking an effort that would benefit a rival
• Using rhetorical trickery to prevail in debates
• Drawing plausible but misleading conclusions from truthful data
• Designating a hero so as to limit someone else's power
• The true costs of valuing loyalty over merit
• Exploiting boldness to create credibility

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 Devious Political Tactics:

Passive Deceptions at Work

Among the vast family of workplace deceptions, those that involve camouflage are both the most common and the most difficult to detect. Here's a look at how passive camouflage can play a role in workplace deception.

Suppressing Dissent: I

In some groups, disagreeing with the majority, or disagreeing with the Leader, can be a personally expensive act. Here is Part I of a set of tactics used by Leaders who choose not to tolerate dissent.

Cultural Indicators of Political Risk

Because of fire risk, hiking in dry forests during dry seasons can be dangerous. In the forest, we stay safe from fire if we attend to the indicators of fire risk. In the workplace, do you know the indicators of political risk?

Narcissistic Behavior at Work: VI

Narcissistic behavior at work distorts decisions, disrupts relationships, and generates toxic conflict. These consequences limit the ability of the organization to achieve its goals. In this part of our series we examine the effects of exploiting others for personal ends.

Career Opportunity or Career Trap: II

When an opportunity seems too good to be true, it might be. Although we easily decline small opportunities, declining an enticing career opportunity can be enormously difficult. Here's Part II of a set of indicators that an opportunity might actually be a trap.

See also Devious Political Tactics and Devious Political Tactics for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming April 2: Mitigating the Trauma of Being Laid Off

Trauma is an emotional response to horrible events — accidents, crimes, disasters, physical abuse, emotional abuse, gross injustices — and layoffs. Layoff trauma is real. Employers know how to execute layoffs with compassion, but some act out of cruelty. Know how to defend yourself. Available here and by RSS on April 2.

And on April 9: Defining Workplace Bullying

When we set out to control the incidence of workplace bullying, problem number one is defining bullying behavior. We know much more about bullying in children than we do about adult bullying, and more about adult bullying than we know about workplace bullying. Available here and by RSS on April 9.

Coaching services

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