By Eugene le Roux, FSAIRAC, and Eamonn Ryan
The hidden currents that shape careers and culture.
The solution may lie in transparency rather than defiance. Freepik.com
Workplace politics. The phrase alone can trigger discomfort, cynicism or resignation. Yet politics in organisations is neither new nor avoidable. It is, in many respects, as old as structured work itself.
Politics can be described as the constant push to advance one’s group – or one’s own – agenda and interests. In principle, this need not be unethical. Healthy ambition, strategic positioning and influence are part of leadership and career growth. The danger lies in how those ambitions are pursued. Moral and ethical principles should not be compromised in the process – although one could easily be lured into thinking that bending the truth is simply ‘how the game is played’.
The need for support – and the risk of isolation
To succeed in any company, one must cultivate support and acceptance from colleagues. Advancement rarely happens in isolation. Influence grows through networks of trust, collaboration and mutual benefit. In return for support, individuals often share credit, authority and resources.
If this reciprocal dynamic is ignored, resistance can quietly form. Colleagues who feel excluded or undermined may begin to work against you – sometimes subtly, sometimes overtly.
Every employee wants a share of the pie. However, individuals driven strongly by power or status may pursue it more aggressively than others. It is at this juncture that some cross the line – drifting into dishonesty, selective disclosure and the spreading of half-truths, particularly to higher management.
Speaking the truth but withholding critical context can be just as misleading as outright deception. A statement may be factually accurate yet strategically incomplete – crafted to create a damaging impression.
The mask of modesty
Some political players are not loud or visibly ambitious. On the contrary, they may project humility in informal settings – the colleague who appears unassuming in the staff tearoom, seemingly uninterested in hierarchy or promotion. Yet behind this façade, quiet networking and strategic narrative-building may be underway.
Underestimating such individuals can be costly. Workplace politics often operate beneath the surface.
Refusing to descend
The behaviours described above are clearly unethical. The temptation to retaliate in kind – to fight fire with fire -–can be strong. Yet responding with the same tactics only deepens dysfunction and corrodes organisational culture.
So, what can one do?
A starting point may be deceptively simple: build strong relationships across the board. Proactively cultivate goodwill with colleagues to prevent an ‘us and them’ culture from taking root. Factions thrive where communication breaks down.
Maintaining a constructive relationship with your direct manager is also essential. Alignment, clarity and trust at this level are career stabilisers. Some argue that visibility one level above your manager is equally important – though this must be navigated carefully.
The communication dilemma
What happens when a manager explicitly instructs you not to communicate with those above them?
This situation presents both ethical and political complexity. On one hand, respecting reporting lines is fundamental to organisational structure. On the other, absolute isolation from senior leadership can expose you to narrative manipulation if someone misrepresents your work or intentions.
The solution may lie in transparency rather than defiance. If upward communication occurs, it should be professional, relevant and ideally not perceived as bypassing authority. Context matters.
A simple but powerful practice
A colleague once shared a leadership practice worth noting. When someone approached him with a ‘story’ about another team member, he would pause them and say, ‘Hold your story’. He would then call in the person being discussed and say, ‘Now you can talk’.
This approach eliminates whisper campaigns and forces transparency. It protects individuals from reputational harm and signals that gossip will not be entertained behind closed doors.
Perhaps this is a principle worth encouraging supervisors and managers to adopt.
