Innocence and Corporate Politics

Lose Your Innocence and Become a Political Animal

Professor Adrian Furnham’s weekly piece in The Sunday Times comes to my aid yet again this month with an article entitled: “Lose Your Innocence and Become a Political Animal".

I remember when I was made redundant from my career job a few years back, the person who had been brought in as a temporary replacement saying to me: “you don’t like the politics do you?”

He was right of course. What he didn’t know of course either was about my Asperger syndrome (AS) and the effect that this had on my propensity to deal with this all important – and unavoidable – facet of corporate life.

Because it is so critically important an issue I have written extensively about it. It is also, therefore, a subject that I come back to again when I see any text or commentary about it.
My experience in the corporate world has taught me that political, and not just technical, skills are the key to success in the business world. A previous bête noire (identified as “Bill” in my book Managing with Asperger Syndrome”) had acutely defined political acumen and associated political talent. It enabled him to not only survive but also prosper; not always, in my opinion, by demonstrating an acceptable ethical stance.

Looking back on my own experience, I was certainly an “innocent”. Part of this was due simply to my lack of experience in the business world, something that can only really be accrued with time. However, a great deal was also down to my innocence, good nature, naivety or what you want to call it, that emanated directly, in part, from my AS.

Professor Furnham’s piece starts by saying that people often map out the territory with various typologies, but that there are problems with these: they are crude and people at extremes can be quite different. It may also be unclear how people end up in a particular box or category.

The favoured dimensions for politics at work are: “politically aware or politically unaware” and “acting with integrity or without integrity”. Bill was certainly politically aware – indeed very much so – and also, to my [AS] mind limited in terms of integrity; at least, in a business context.

The latter relates to, perhaps, to what Professor Furnham describes as “psychological game-playing”. I have heard the term “playing the game” numerous times over the years. It relates to the necessity of doing whatever is required in the corporate world to thrive and survive.

As this often means being something that my Asperger innately dictates I cannot - being less than totally honest for example - it has presented real challenges for me; or as the article interestingly and usefully states: “the boxes are given labels that are far from value free!”

Politically Professor Furnham states that the four political types are:

• Wise: politically savvy, has integrity;
• Clever: savvy, no integrity;
• Innocent: not savvy, but has integrity and;
• Inept: not savvy, no integrity

Bill, to my mind satisfied category number two; I, on the other hand, fitted into category number three perfectly! From a corporate and career perspective, guess who came out on top!

The “Wise”-owl is an emotionally-intelligent, ethical and insightful leader – the selfless, servant leader. He is tactful and loyal, open (honest to a fault?), is not defensive and willing to be disliked and knows how to get the best out of people whilst having a win-win mentality. In short, he understands that foibles of the human condition. I don’t believe that an Asperger-manager can fit with/into this category.

The “Clever” types are slightly dodgy and rather power hungry: their descriptors put themselves somewhere between a psychopath and Machiavellian beast. They have a veneer of charm and leave a job before their mistakes are discovered. They can also make the procedures work for them and are happy to exploit weaknesses and setbacks in not only opponents but also in allies. They know when to bargain, ingratiate, simulate and manipulate – ergo Bill!!!

However, as “Lose Your Innocence and Become a Political Animal” goes on to assert: “they [“Clever’s”] are not so successful without reason” and posses much of what is needed to get to the top. They know want makes an organisation and people tick and innately have the skills that enable them to influence and negotiate. If they have ambition, intellectual ability and good looks, they are CEO material.

Professor Furnham describes “Innocents” as, perhaps the most interesting – i.e. to my mid, this is me. These people play by the rules – (I certainly did). They are respectful – (I am usually, though not always – of rank and position); they also believe what they are told – (I need to question both data and people more aggressively); and pride themselves in their rationality (literal interpretation, logical thought i.e. the Asperger mindset).

As the article also goes on to say, “Innocents” don’t gossip or network and they don’t read between the lines. They are neither interested in nor adept at understanding the dark motives of others.

Why is this? Well the article provides an analogy which, for me, provides the answer; “just as autistic people can’t read emotions in others, then “Innocents” can’t seem to understand motives either”.

Looking back many years later, I can understand precisely what Bill’s motive was; something that I intuitively (unlike others) sensed (because of my AS) soon after I met him: play the game and get to retire early on a large pension prematurely – which he did.
What I failed to do was prevent him from using me – or to use one of my ex-colleagues words - as a “whipping-boy” to deflect potential criticism away from him, or, to use my colleagues words: “if it is your fault it can’t be his!”

The solution? Well, for me, it largely lies in the preceding explanation in the text. Don’t exude and demonstrate a childlikeness with respect to your fellow man and so get left behind (which according to the article “Innocents” do) at work – or be easy targets for Machiavellians.

These are hard lessons for someone like myself with Asperger syndrome, i.e. an “Innocent” who has worked as a senior manager and who both wants and aspires to continue to do so, to face; indeed, I believe they have to be faced. My lack of innate understanding - because of my AS - and intuition of the playground jungle and the school of hard knocks has meant that I have had to learn the hard way.

But learn I do, and the more I do so the more confident and capable I become. Taking on-board some of Professor Funrham’s suggestions that are cited next can certainly play a part in this process.

The playground is often the first setting for learning how to be politically savvy as mention above. Part of this for me, is not allowing the knocks or the past to dissuade you from continuing to face difficult situations and circumstances - the ones that provide the real learning opportunities in this area.

Next, accept and programme yourself to accept that “people do not always tell the truth; they are often selfish and cruel”. In others words, don’t be as innately trusting in a corporate context as you are likely to be because of your AS. It is best to be part of a gang, a group, a support network that can provide mutual help. In other words, mix, socialise and do not allow yourself to become an outsider.

In addition, it is also important to know how to deal with (“Bill” and “Tom”) difficult/problematic and how to avoid situations and/or deal with them.

As the article outlines, there are courses available that one can undertake which aim to develop political skills, but some organisations will have nothing to do with them as politics is seen as underhand and devious – which Professor Furnham states: “it is!”

Instead he asserts that people who need to develop political skills require two courses: one on motivation and the other on persuasion. They need to understand how basic human motives for power, recognition or pleasure manifest themselves and how they can be highly complicated.

Tell me about this as someone with Asperger syndrome - especially in a work or corporate context. That is why I have worked so hard to learn about subjects such emotional intelligence, empathy, human emotion among others or, as Professor Furnham states: “learn a few skills and techniques of influence”.

Additional techniques that I have developed and deployed are:

• Trying not to do doing anything that may antagonise people or exacerbate a situation initially (or, as the philanthropist Andrew Carnegie once said: if you want to avoid an argument, don’t get into one in the first place) by moderating my discourse and contributing to tangible outcomes that ensure that I am seen to be adding-value to corporate objectives;

• Understanding the politics that prevail in a work environment to try and prevent myself being drawn into the negative aspects of it;

• Identifying the key players or “Important Others” and winning them over so as to ensure that they are on my side;

• If difficulties do appear then address them immediately by “moving to the sound of guns” or the source of the problem immediately and preventing them from escalating;

• Building a network of supporters whom I can draw on to provide factual and emotional support if I am being targeted by a protagonist, i.e. people who will support my views and stance;

• Evaluating developments higher up and analysing how they may (or may not) affect my personal position.

Encouragingly, the article concludes with the assertion that being political does not mean being corrupt (necessarily); indeed, it [being political] is a crucial skill-set. From an Asperger perspective this is re-assuring: I know, as I have often stated, that I cannot be something that I am not.

As the final sentence in “Lose Your Innocence and Become a Political Animal” says: those that can’t or who won’t acquire political skills, are usually condemned to be, at best, observers of the game of life – or victims of those who know how to play it.

I learnt to my cost the latter at one stage of my career; I won’t be doing it again.