21 Dirty Tricks at Work Again: More Lessons on Office Politics

An agenda looks administrative, but it can be political. If the important item is placed too late, buried under minor points or excluded altogether, the decision is being controlled before the meeting begins. In professional services this applies to client meetings, board calls, project reviews and tax or legal discussions. The defence is early clarity: which issues are critical, how much time they need and what decision must be made.

This game creates the feeling that you are tied to a person, project, client or promise that no longer serves the real goal. In small business this may be a toxic client, unfavourable contract, old supplier or internal person everyone believes is indispensable. Ask whether loyalty is protecting value or simply maintaining a dependency that blocks better decisions.

The surface message is warm, supportive and friendly, but the later action is damaging. In client work this may look like “we are very happy”, followed by sudden pressure on price, timing or quality. The professional response is not to rely on mood alone. Important agreements must be specific, checked and confirmed in writing.

A person or idea can be renamed with a convenient label that distorts reality. “Difficult”, “not commercial”, “too detailed” or “expensive” may be political labels rather than accurate assessments. In professional services, this is risky when quality control or legal caution is presented as obstruction. Return the label to facts: what exactly is the problem?

This tactic moves below the surface. Nothing looks dramatic, but someone quietly prepares a position, alliance or decision that later appears as a natural development. In client projects this may be quiet scope movement, a changed decision-maker or an alternative communication channel. The defence is regular checking: who is involved, who decides and what has changed?

Important information can be hidden not only in a contract, but also in a note, appendix, comment or technical aside. For accounting, tax, law and financial analysis, this is critical. If a material risk is treated as a footnote, the client may make a poor decision. Important risks should be brought forward, not left at the edge of the document.

This is the game of confusion: many words, little clarity, blurred responsibility and constant movement of focus. In business services it appears as meetings without decisions, emails without specifics and conversations after which nobody knows who is doing what. Reduce the fog to a list: decision, owner, deadline, risk and next step.

This game concerns taking, redistributing or controlling credit. In professional services, the credit may involve an idea, a won client, a strategy, a completed project or a resolved issue. If contribution is not visible, it can become someone else’s political currency. The protection is clear communication about who did what, without turning every contribution into an ego battle.

“Any other business” can look harmless, but important matters may be introduced there when people are tired, unprepared or in a hurry. This is risky in partner meetings, management decisions, compliance issues and client changes. Important decisions should not be made as surprises at the end of a meeting. If the topic is important, it deserves its own agenda.

Someone can direct an action without leaving a clear trace, so later they can say they never gave such an instruction. In legal, accounting, HR and consulting work, this is especially dangerous. If an expectation is informal but the risk is real, return the conversation to written clarity: who requested what, on what basis and with what responsibility?

One mistake may be a mistake. A repeated mistake that consistently harms one side and helps another is a pattern. In client work this may be late information, missed deadlines, incomplete documents or “accidental” last-minute changes. Stop treating the pattern as an incident and discuss it as a management risk.

Someone uses another authority — a committee, board, legal, finance or management — as a stamp of legitimacy. Sometimes the approval is real; sometimes it is political cover. The key question is whether there is an official decision, document, minute or specific person taking responsibility for that approval.

Political games are not always cold and rational. Sometimes a person ignores emotional effects or uses them deliberately. In business this appears through shame, fear, guilt and pressure. Ethical influence does not mean emotion disappears. It means emotion is not used as a weapon and does not replace facts.

Sometimes a person is placed in a team without the capability, support or real chance to succeed. The later failure then looks personal. In small business this may be a project without the right people, budget or leadership. Before accepting such a role, check the team quality, mandate and resources.

Decisions can be made not on facts, but under the influence of a strong personality, group pressure, personal loyalty or invisible interest. In professional services this can distort tax, legal, financial or contractual decisions. Return the conversation to criteria: what is correct, what is provable, what is the risk and who is responsible?

A strong leader can inspire, but can also create an environment where critical thinking disappears. When everyone repeats the vision and nobody asks difficult questions, risk increases. In small firms this appears around charismatic founders and dominant partners. A healthy culture allows disagreement because without it, poor decisions look like loyalty.

This is the pressure to join because “everyone is already on board” or because “if you do not decide now, you will miss the opportunity”. In sales, investments, partnerships and internal projects, it reduces critical thinking. Ask what you truly lose if you pause long enough to check the facts.

Dividing people, teams or partners allows one player to control the process. In client work this happens when advisers receive different information or when the owner speaks separately to each party to avoid a shared position. The defence is synchronisation: common records, common meetings and clear sharing of key facts.

Compliance and procurement are important functions, but they can be used as political shields: “the procedure does not allow it”, “these are the rules”, “we have no choice”. Sometimes that is true. Sometimes it is convenient. Understand the real rule, who interprets it and whether there is a transparent process for exceptions, review or escalation.

Absence may be completely legitimate, but it can also be used to avoid a difficult conversation, responsibility or decision. In a small team the effect is large: work transfers, deadlines move and someone else carries the pressure. The response must be humane, but structured: how is the work covered, what remains accountable and how is the project protected?

One of the strongest games is simply making someone invisible: not included, not mentioned, not informed, not present. For external consultants, accountants, lawyers or specialists, this is a major risk because decisions are made without required expertise. Agree in advance when and where your presence is required, not merely optional.