Manipulation 101

Dear Bob,

We have corresponded several times in the past. I always appreciate your insights and provocations. But the 7/23 Advice Line [The 7/14 weblog entry, mailed out 7/23 – Bob] is giving me apoplexy, mainly the first two paragraphs in your response to “Becoming.” Even though my situation is markedly different, I’m convinced you had me in mind when you wrote those words. Pardon me if I take it personally.

You said that as smart as I am, I should be able to manipulate them without their ever knowing it. You told me that facts and logic won’t work with stupid people–or that I am too impatient to manipulate them. Then you go on and talk about social engineering, something to me that has connotations more akin to hacking than management. I was taught and always believed in the direct, straighforward approach. Politics, saying what other people want to hear, was always sleazy, dishonorable.

Then all of a sudden I’m a grownup and the world isn’t so black and white. Can I do it? Should I? Must I? Ok. Enough soul searching. I will–and it’s not just for selfish gain. But how? Somehow I seem to have bypassed Manipulation 101 at both undergraduate and graduate levels. I really need some help. The stumbling trial-and-error approach I’ve been using the past year or so has not been totally fruitless, either with my peers in other departments or the CEO. But there are no decisive victories, and at times progress is barely discernable. Often it’s +1, -2. Is there a concise primer? Is there a “… for Dummies” guide that gives deep, core principles and some examples? Machiavelli helps, but something less tied to medieval Italy would be greatly appreciated, I’m sure, by many.

– Miserable in Michigan

Dear Miserable …

The direct, straightforward approach certainly is better, so long as everyone involved in the giant cage match called the typical large corporation adheres to the Marquis of Queensbury rules, and passed Logic 101 in college. Oh … and, so long as everyone is thoroughly aligned to a common goal, which is to say that the corporation itself, along with shareholders, executives, managers, staff and customers will all benefit from the same course of action.

But on this planet, leaders generally need to be more subtle than that, especially when they’re “managing up.”

The full answer to your question would take much more than I can manage in an e-mail. The bare bones version:

1. Understand them. Learn each individual’s hot buttons, personal agendas, style (some really are persuaded by facts and logic, for example), appetite for risk, active initiatives … whatever you can about what makes each one tick.

2. Develop plausible logic that connects your goals to the above for each of the individuals you’re trying to influence. Make sure you can present it in an “elevator speech,” which means no more than a few short bullets.

3. Also develop your official logic – the version that explains how what you want to do is for the good of the organization. You’ll need the elevator speech for this as well.

4. Buttonhole each of the people you’re trying to influence (it doesn’t have to be in a real elevator). Describe what you’re trying to do. Casually. Even better, ask for their help. “I’m putting a proposal together for thusandsuch. I wonder if you could give me a quick reaction. Here’s what it is.” Explain the official logic. Attach the “real” logic (the version targeted to the individual you’re talking to) at the end by saying something like, “And of course, a fringe benefit would be that we could staff up and down more quickly, because the way this would play out, HR wouldn’t have to get involved.” Assuming one of the hot buttons is having to follow HR’s policies and procedures.

5. Repeat with the next person on your list.

Sincerity is everything. As Daniel Schorr pointed out, “If you can fake it, you’ve got it made.”

Okay, so it sounds weasily. It isn’t as bad as it sounds in practice, so long as you don’t cross the line that separates tailoring your sales pitch for each prospect from just plain pandering. And where exactly is that line?

That’s your call. My version is that so long as everything I say is truthful, I’m keeping the ball in bounds. You may have a different boundary. So long as you have one, you’re probably okay.

Just remember: People have different goals and objectives for entirely legitimate reasons. Politics doesn’t have to be backstabbing. It’s also the art of finding a way to move forward anyway. In the end, that’s what this is about.

– Bob

——–