Ask HN: Best books for dealing with workplace politics and dishonesty?

This is a very interesting question since it is a fundamental problem in any group human activity. I have found the following useful;

* Management: A political activity by Ted Stephenson. For some reason, most people are not aware of this book. Deals with Power, Conflict, Bargaining, Compromise, Participation and Change. The opening line of the preface states "This book presents the view that management is substantially a political activity, based on power and characterized by conflict". Since we are dealing with Human organisms this is absolutely the right approach to take.

* The Empowered Manager: Positive Political Skills at Work by Peter Block is also good but more idealistic. But be aware that trying to be/do good does not guarantee reciprocation.

* The Complete Upmanship: Including Gamesmanship, Lifemanship, One-upmanship and Supermanship by Stephen Potter. Humourous, but a great deal of life advice in it. Basically, how to put down other people and show yourself in the best light using "genteel" psychological means.

* Behavior Modification: Principles and Procedures by Raymond Miltenberger. ABA psychology course textbook which is a must read.

* Brainwashing: The science of thought control by Kathleen Taylor. The title is bit sensationalist, but the content is very relevant.

The 1960 movie School for Scoundrels based on the Upmanship books is worth a watch to see the techniques in action.

I stole this from someone else but what you are experiencing is this:

Some workplaces value consensus and some workplaces value correctness.

Sound about right?

Unfortunately there's nothing you can do to change the culture.

Instead of trying to change or deal with or adapt to culture, ask pointed questions about correctness vs consensus culture during the interview.

EDIT: One book to suggest is Survival of the Savvy: High-Integrity Political Tactics for Career and Company Success

Thank you for the book tip. Just ordered it!

+1 to that book suggestion.

Check out “Moral Mazes” by Robert Jackall. Contains some great research on how bureaucracy shapes the way that we act, think, and work.

This seems very interesting; thanks for the lead!

> The priority is always compromise and getting along.

I’m struggling to see when this wouldn’t be the case in any form of modern conflict management.

As far as to how you deal with weak leadership leading to design by committee? You probably don’t, unless it’s your job to do so.

There isn’t really a lot of literature on this subject aimed at employees trying to lead up-wards, but any sort of team-management literature will cover it.

There is a big difference between conflict management, and leading a team in a design process though. They really don’t relate on any level. If “you’re” entering design by committee, then “you’re” not using “your” resources correctly, “you’re” not defining the direction or goal and “you’re” not making decisions. Note that “you” is the person in charge and this persons manager, but there is typically very little people, who are not in charge can do, to successfully change that. Conflict by contrast is how you resolve disagreements, and in interpersonal conflict you’ll always want to seek compromise and figuring out how to get along. In design processes, you’ll want a team leader to take charge and pick whatever input is most likely to achieve the projects goals.

I wouldn’t worry about conflict though. It’s a natural part of life. Be honest and be assertive but be polite and pick your battles wisely. If whatever it is that is being mismanaged isn’t actually your responsibility, then you don’t actually have to care. Even if you can’t change your job right now, it’ll be healthier for you, if you stay true to yourself and don’t carry any weight they don’t pay you to carry.

https://www.ribbonfarm.com/the-gervais-principle/

“Developer hegemony” expands this very well.

Therapy from a qualified professional might be more helpful here than a book suggestion.

I was going to say the exact same thing. I may be reading too much into the author's question, but I have definitely worked with people who had a "but I'm right" attitude that have talked like this. What I mean is, they were very passionate about how something should be done, and didn't particularly appreciate hearing or incorporating other people's input. They didn't have high enough seniority, though, to force the outcome, so they were often stressed and judgemental of leadership and co-workers. In my opinion, they needed to take time to learn more about themselves, to understand why they were perceiving and reacting to their work interactions in the way they were.

Any recommendations on finding a therapist/coach specializing in professional growth?

This is a good place to start: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/therapists

Ancient classics like Sophocles, Ajax, Philoctetes, Antigone, Oedipus or the writings of Cicero, etc. Everything that happens today already happened thousands of years ago the only difference was they lived in a much less censored time back then, so Sophocles could really express to the viewer(now reader) the true nature of the human condition such as workplace dishonesty, or why accolades are given to the scoundrels and the virtuous never receive any recognition. All of this can be found reading our civilizations history because the fundamental nature of humans has not changed in that time.

To better understand how to navigate it: "Power: Why Some People Have It—and Others Don't" by Jeffery Pfeffer https://www.amazon.com/Power-Some-People-Have-Others-ebook/d...

Really good read, and has Jim Collins and Robert Cialdini singing its praises (check the back flap on amazon) if you need bona fides

+1; Very good suggestion. I came to Jeffrey Pfeffer through his other book Leadership BS: Fixing Workplaces and Careers One Truth at a Time which is a must read too.

This is a topic that I've been thinking about strongly this year and I strongly relate to what you're feeling as well. As for books on this, apart from the more mainstream ones, an example would be "Business without the Bullsh*t: 49 Secrets and Shortcuts You Need to Know", which has some interesting ideas.

But the general gist of all this is essentially to "fight fire with fire", as awful it may sound. But do note that there are some cultural aspects to this as well, companies with a strongly American culture are way more subject to that "dishonest harmony" phenomena compared to companies with a German or Dutch culture for example (other countries with a more honest and direct culture apply as well).

Your question is related to why we don't have flying cars! :)

This book seems to deal with just about anything worthwhile, and while it does not go deep into specific workplace situations, it touches a lot on the subject of motivation and behaviors that affect the subjects, so you might yet find it interesting, if you're willing to take wild ride.

Of the books I've read in 2020, this is the one I must recommend anytime I get a chance: Where Is My Flying Car?: A Memoir of Future Past by J Storrs Hall

48 Laws of Power by Robert Greene.

Fits the "values dishonest harmony over honest conflict" description.

Nothing inherently wrong with this actually; we just have to make peace with it while safeguarding our interests.

Stealing The Corner Office by Brandon Reid was very useful for me. The premise of the book is that there are certain behaviours that you need to exhibit in order to get ahead at work (other than actually doing a good job and producing for your employer) and that you'd better know what they are so that someone else doesn't get ahead at your expense.

I've found The Five Dysfunctions of a Team useful. It's a clear description of things that go wrong when people work together, even when everyone has good intentions.

I'll second the suggestion to speak with a professional therapist or coach if it's an option. These situations are difficult to navigate and a neutral perspective can be helpful.

Any recommendations for finding a professional therapist/coach?

I don't know of any books, but I can offer some advice if you like. Let me know.

Yes, please!

Peter Hintjens' Psychopath Code fits the bill perfectly. Available for free online. http://hintjens.com/blog:_psychopaths

Not a book but there's a movie called "9 to 5" with Jane Fonda, Lily Tomlin and Dolly Parton that touches on the subject.

Being Buddha at Work: 108 Ancient Truths on Change, Stress, Money, and Success Paperback

by Franz Metcalf (Author), Bj Gallagher (Author)

Machiavelli's The Prince :)

First, I understand what you are saying and understand the constraints keeping you at a job you have issues with. I've certainly seen organizations go too far on consensus even when each person individually (especially the ones at the top) would like more decisiveness. This is a hard and draining place. And all moves out require even more energy that you may not have and should not (in a just world) have to expend.

Someone recommended "Moral Mazes" and I heartily second it. Though mostly because it was so profoundly cynical that it pushed me to defend the systems I was so annoyed by.

If you want to learn the language of design by committee, "Nonviolent Communication" by Marshall Rosenberg is the book that the rest of the committee is playing from. It has genuinely useful pieces. But I also find it fundamentally dishonest in that it frames all other forms of communication as "violent" in a rank misuse of the word. Additionally, the techniques it recommends require that you put in all the effort of framing a situation as no-blame or shared-blame when it very much is not. You do not need to agree with your opponents' tactics manual to find value in its study.

"Radical Candor" by Kim Scott is an attempt to bring directness in to otherwise passive aggressive situations. It's a valiant attempt but it's unclear to me how viable its recommendations are.

However it's not clear to me that any amount of high or low level reading is going to help with your feelings of dissatisfaction here. It sounds like you're looking for a "win" instead of an "out". And despite the deeply cynical feelings it can generate, you cannot succeed at office politics through cynicism. Or irony. Or cynical, ironic, distance. The successful are either completely earnest, or sociopathic enough to fake complete earnestness. And from the outside those are indistinguishable.

How to win friends and influence people

Principles by Ray Dalio

Reading this is likely to make being around crappy, toxic office politics feel even worse, without offering a solution if you’re not already in an empowered position. I otherwise strongly recommend it as an excellent read; the first section (“Life Principles”) is relevant for everyone, even if the latter section (“Work Principles”) is pretty heavily weighted towards those with managerial/ownership status or aspirations.

“Lying” by Sam Harris. Changed my world. Audiobook might be even better.

From the summary:

“In Lying, bestselling author and neuroscientist Sam Harris argues that we can radically simplify our lives and improve society by merely telling the truth in situations where others often lie. He focuses on “white” lies—those lies we tell for the purpose of sparing people discomfort—for these are the lies that most often tempt us. And they tend to be the only lies that good people tell while imagining that they are being good in the process.”

"Winning Through Intimidation" by Robert Ringer.

Or, just quit. I've taken conflict all the way through being fired multiple times and there really isn't a way to win if you are not part of the mafia. At a very huge ecommerce company they had SDE career training, and you are told bluntly all the people deciding things are cigar smoking mobsters so basically, you are a peon and you're fucked for a career if you are not in management. You need to enter a company through personal connections not skills, or it just isn't going to work no matter how much politics you try.

There are tactics I call socialist tactics. Many people for instance being on the losing end of an argument having a dumb idea or no clue, will use their position as a management to call a large meeting, confuse all the people in it with bullshit, then get them to agree on something they don't understand. Another tactic is when challenged in a meeting, call for a instant vote (its a democracy) while pressuring people to vote for them. Third tactic is to meet for a few hours, decide everything you want, then try to force teammates into the meeting two hours later, then claim the whole team is on board with what they decided because everyone was in the meeting. Fourth tactic, is to lie continuously and whoever is around upper management the most/most face time wins with the most lies.

I don't condone any of these, but shitty managers will use all of them and they seem to be learning them somewhere because I see them repeatedly.

Perhaps the best advice for your situation is to praise publicly, criticize privately which is also what a lot of office bastards do all the time.

>There are tactics I call socialist tactics.

No, do not call them "socialist" tactics since it gives quite the wrong impression. They are just "Realpolitik". That said, i agree completely with your post, it is how people play games to get what they want. We just have to learn and beat them at it without moralizing.

Second Robert Ringer's books. A good follow up is his other book Action!: Nothing happens until something moves.

I call it socialist because managers, who otherwise support totalitarian dictatorship corporate structure, suddenly become advocates of democratic and egalitarian principles like voting, cooperation, empowerment, or group discussion when they think it suits their purposes but not a second longer.

Maybe this advice can apply to your situation —

I’ve found what works for me is being honest while keeping perspective of what I can and cannot control.

In a recent situation, I was set up in an uncomfortable position, having to work around my manager to get the right outcome for our clients or just agreeing with my manager and watching things slowly, painfully fail.

I wrote a document explaining the situation, the key decisions that need to be made, and their trade offs. I asked my manager if he had concerns if we reviewed this document together with other stakeholders.

Generally, people may be doing the wrong thing because they lack the right information or because they’re afraid something might put them in a bad light, and that defensiveness leads to undesirable behaviors and outcomes.

We all reviewed the document together in a meeting. 20 minutes of reading time followed by another 15 minutes of discussion and another 15 minutes to agree on next steps.

Next steps can be - here’s a rough plan of action, tracer4201 you go work out the details. Or it can be, we don’t have enough information, let’s get the data and meet again. Or it can be — we are not able to agree, let’s escalate.