The ‘I don’t like your face’ politics

“Hire people who are better than you are, then leave them to get on with it. Look for people who will aim for the remarkable, who will not settle for the routine. If each of us hires people smaller than we are, we shall become a company of dwarfs.” - David Ogilvy

If you hit google for ‘politics at workplace’, you’ll get 5,500,000 tumbling returns, like a Vegas slot machine gone crazy. Which means dirty politicking at workplace is an ancient problem, discussed threadbare inside boardrooms, bedrooms, self-help books, business management institutes, office cafeterias and urinals alike And yet, there seems to have been no real solution found to counter this universal organisational malaise.

All of us have encountered it or indulged in it at some point or another in our work life, and some of us have suffered because of it, and yet when it comes to framing organisational culture and performance evaluation parameters, we simply shove the P word under the carpet. And ironically enough, unchecked politicking leads to loss of talent, loss of employee morale, loss of productivity, but our traditional hierarchy run structures don’t even bother to account for this leaking hole, leave alone plug it.

And the greatest victim of politics is dissent, the biggest new idea generator in the organisation, because power ODIng managers, by nature and by force of addiction, show zero tolerance for employees who crave to break command and consensus. And the natural fallout is mediocrity and predictable output, as the ability to ‘bond’ with the superior takes precedence over trying to raise the bar at workplace.

I guess I am saying nothing new out here, politics seem to run in our blood, even the mass media, especially our television serials, both real and unreal, reflect this. Family members are seen forever manipulating one another, Sony’s copy of Big Brother is a good example. What intrigues me, however, is that our CEOs and HR heads behave as if this issue doesn’t exist, despite being fully aware of its cancerous dimensions (a dirty political boss will encourage production of his/her clones). And worse, crafty managers are allowed to get away because they conveniently disguise politicking as a team bonding activity, and those unwilling to join this fake club, are labelled as ‘he/she is not a team player’.

So can the misuse of politics be a criterion for evaluating managers? I guess most CEOs shy away from it for not only because it is quantitatively immeasurable, but because it’s a controversial step, no one wants to rock the boat, even it’s leaky. What I can’t understand is this: when it comes to evaluating employee performance, we DO get qualitative, whether we admit to it or not. Subjectivity does come into play, that’s the way it is. Can we not therefore use this route to safeguard against politics at workplace? I am no expert on this subject, but I do believe CEOs should exert pressure on their highly paid and often under-worked HR chiefs to find a way to suppress this disease, if not cure it completely. What’s the use of Gorai beach picnics, meditation rooms, pool tables and birthday cards, if, underneath all this, we are busy knocking employees who dare to think and behave differently?

I’ll leave you with this oft-quoted and brilliant Apple ad, wish more orgs had a similar work culture.

Here's to the crazy ones...
The misfits;
the rebels...
The troublemakers
The round pegs
in the square holes.
The ones who see things differently.
They're not fond of rules,
and they have no respect for the status quo.
You can quote them,
disagree with them,
glorify or vilify them
About the only thing you can't do,
is ignore them;
because they change things
They push the human race forward.
And while some may see them as the crazy ones,
We see genius.
Because the people who are crazy enough
to think they can change the world
are the ones who do.
Think Different.