Politics — Ugh! or Okay?

If someone is “being political”, everyone has an opinion or story. I recently read two articles (on Smart Brief) with opposing views, published one year apart. The first article written by James daSilva, ‘How Can Office Politics Work for You Instead of Against You’ said “We can’t avoid office politics if we want to work with people.” The second, more recent article, by Keith Danko, “A Fresh Approach to Office Politics: No Approach”, which recommended just walk away, put your head down and do not get involved.

It’s that damned word — politics — that carries all that unfortunate negativity. When you hear an aside of “don’t work there, it’s way too political’’, it doesn’t warm the heart. But bear with me for a minute and let’s quickly unpack this word.

“Politic” is Greek (πολιτικός Politikos) defined as “relating to citizens”, to make informed decisions, creating consensus for the good of the state. (Note the word ‘good’.)

And, today, we can exchange for the good of the state and replace with for the good of the team or the organisation.

It’s thus important to keep in mind that both politics and power are not always negative, and should be liked as often as it may be disliked.

Here’s why.

Last week alone I spoke with three senior leaders, and each shared a similar story: the best advice they’d received in their career early on was ‘’learn to embrace the political realities of the organization.’’ That is, do not put your head in the sand and focus on ‘the job’, on the technical, but learn how to work on the relational, the politics.

Every organisation has what I’d call a ‘’benevolent politician,” someone with high levels of EQ who knows the OQ (organisational intelligence, how it really works). These people can navigate internally and know how build coalitions for the greater good of the firm. (The opposite, more stereo-typically negative, is the manipulative or “self-centered politician.”)

In this past year, leadership has undergone some visible changes; we now see a greater focus on kindness and compassion, leaders more resilient in the face of setbacks, able to with connect and collaborate across diverse networks.

That’s a lot in 18 months.

Lominger Competency calls this ‘’maze-bright”, those who can focus on social influence with a more balanced view of power and intuition, knowing the interconnections within the organization, able to decipher the organizational dynamics. When we talk about benevolence or kindness, what we really mean is a combination of these qualities which make a good — and ethical — leader.

Politics, in other words, can easily be a force for good, so let’s define ‘workplace politics’ before coloring it as evil. When someone is labelled ‘’political’’, is it that coalition builder, the scheming Machiavellian or an Aristotelian, focusing on what’s good for the state?

As mentioning “politics” often produces discomfort, let’s move from ‘’politics” to “political savvy”. Political savvy is where the coalition building begins, for that greater good.

At its essence, politics is shaping and building internal and external stakeholders who can drive change, set agendas, and deliver results.

Thus, a politically savvy manager will combine ethics and motivation, adjusting behaviors to gain interest from others to achieve collective goals. And here’s the irony: when the positive side comes into the fore, the negative side is exposed and loses power. As Louis Brandeis said, ‘Sunshine is the best disinfectant.’

To engage in positive corporate politics is to also know how to retain talent. Organisations now must better understand the high cost of political innocence, from talent churn and disengagement to losing innovation. As the Great Resignation is nigh, organisations must increasingly rely on their human capital strategies — leadership development, inclusive environments and building career paths.

The cost of lost talent is approximately 2 x annual salary, but the true cost is much higher. It’s not only the replacement, but diminished time of productivity and engagement if the turnover is high. Every day, somewhere, someone walks out the door, vowing never to return to “that place” because of the toxicity of politics. I don’t know where, but I know it happens all the time.

Joss Bersin at Deloitte Consulting said “Our job in HR is to attract the ‘right people’ and move them up this curve as rapidly and effectively as possible.” Which is true.

But it is everyone’s job, not just HR’s.

Moving talent up the curve requires that ‘maze bright’ political astuteness, combined with ethics and values.

Political savvy is a must-have management skill along with strategic thinking, driving results, and team building. To view politics as Machiavellian or negative can only breed mistrust and hinder collaboration. On the other side of the spectrum is to follow Aristotle, investigate what’s good for the organization, and identify favorable (or yes, unfavorable) ways to sustain the firm. Shift from the confrontational or coercive to the constructive and collaborative. Not only is it smarter, but healthier to work and attract talent.

I understand the reasons underlying Danko’s ‘’no approach” to politics, but it’s better to have politics work for you, not against you. Once we view politics as positive and productive (which is most of the time) the negative and self-centered side (how we usually associate politics) diminishes.

To be political is a plus, a benefit, not a detriment. Put another way, politics at work should boost collective performance, not promote individual agendas. As James daSilva mentions in his article,

“Office politics is a part of life…But the office doesn’t have to be a nasty and binary place. These lessons take time to learn and apply, and you might need to relearn them many times over.”

Forgot to mention, I wrote a book on this, I Wish I’d Known that Earlier in My Career; the power of positive workplace politics