21 Dirty Tricks at Work: How to Recognise Office Politics

This is the situation where someone receives a project or responsibility that is already close to failure, so the failure can later be attributed to them. In professional services, the equivalent is an unclear engagement accepted too late, without budget, documents or real management mandate. The defence is to ask for history, resources, realistic timing and written criteria for success.

Some assignments are sold as “development opportunities” when they are actually risks that someone else wants to avoid. For a junior professional, consultant or new manager, this can be tempting. The practical question is simple: if it is such a strong opportunity, why is there so little clarity, support and resource behind it?

Support is publicly shown while a different move is being prepared behind the scenes. In business, this often appears as “we are behind you”, followed by quiet distancing when the first problem appears. The ethical response is not to rely on warm words alone. Ask for concrete commitment: who supports, how, when and in front of whom?

People may see the problem but stay silent because they do not want to take a risk. This is a quiet form of politics: nobody attacks directly, but nobody helps. In small businesses, it is dangerous in client conflict, internal dispute or difficult projects. The answer is to turn silence into choice: who agrees, who objects and who carries responsibility?

Ideas, work or contribution are taken and presented as someone else’s achievement. In consulting, marketing, legal and accounting work, this may happen with strategy, presentation, client solution or technical opinion. The protection is to document authorship, share ideas in the right format and leave a visible trail of key contributions.

Friendly curiosity can be used to extract information that is later used politically. In professional services, this is a risk in informal conversations, meetings without records or “just between us” comments. Ask why the information is requested, who will use it and in what context.

Instead of saying directly what they want, people use hints, loaded remarks and ambiguous signals. This creates confusion but allows escape through “that is not what I meant”. The practical response is to ask for clarity: “What exactly are you proposing?” and “What do you specifically expect from me?”

Someone is motivated to accept inconvenience today in exchange for a future reward: a position, bonus, larger client, equity stake, promotion or “next project”. In small business, the equivalent is working at a loss for future volume. The protection is specificity: what, when, under which conditions and how will it be confirmed?

Someone appears to be a protector or mentor, but their help may create dependency. If access to information, clients or decisions passes through one person only, influence becomes fragile. Value allies, but do not build your entire position on one relationship.

An email suddenly includes senior people to create pressure, embarrassment or political weight. In client work, such an email can change the tone of a whole project. The defence is calm: answer the facts, not the drama; clarify the issue, the decision and the next step.

A powerful name is used to imply that a decision is already politically approved. This can block normal analysis because nobody wants to appear opposed to “the important person”. The practical question is: is this an official decision or merely someone’s interpretation of a conversation?

Someone is publicly placed in an uncomfortable position to weaken, discipline or force them into concession. In professional settings this may happen in meetings, in front of clients or by email with a large audience. Do not answer theatre with theatre. Ask for the facts to be discussed in the proper format.

Important information is buried in a report, presentation, contract or small print so that another person makes a poor decision. This applies directly to contracts, proposals, scope documents, tax analysis and financial reports. The defence is systematic: read the detail, bring key risks to the first page and do not sign what you do not understand.

Feedback can be useful, but it can also be used as a weapon – especially if delivered at a moment designed to weaken confidence or distract attention. In professional services, this may occur before a presentation, negotiation or important meeting. Ask: what is the fact, what is the example and why is this being said now?

Fake overload or artificial urgency can be used to avoid work, review or responsibility. In client environments, this leads to mistakes: “there is no time for a contract”, “no time for analysis”, “just send it”. Separate urgent from important and do not allow speed to replace control.

Sometimes the strongest political move is simply not being invited to the meeting where your issue is decided. This is especially dangerous for external advisers when key decisions are made without their expertise. Clarify in advance which meetings are critical and how decisions will be confirmed.

A small group aligns before the formal meeting and enters with a prepared position. This is not always improper, but it can distort the process if others believe the discussion is genuinely open. Understand which conversations happen before the meeting and do not rely only on the official stage.

The choice is framed so that every option creates a loss. In professional services this may be pressure to choose between quality and deadline, client and law, partner and professional responsibility. Do not accept the false frame. Look for a third option, new deadline, revised scope or clear escalation of risk.

Someone presents themselves as powerless because of policy, process or higher authority, although in other circumstances they would find a solution. This appears in negotiations, HR decisions, payments, contracts and internal disputes. Ask who truly has authority to make an exception and under what conditions.

A person is encouraged to take risk as spokesperson or initiator, but support disappears at the first sign of conflict. This is dangerous for new managers, external consultants and ambitious professionals. Do not treat verbal support as protection. Ask for a real sponsor, public mandate and clear distribution of responsibility.

Organisational change may be necessary, but it can also be used as an elegant way to remove an inconvenient person. In small firms this appears as “new roles”, sudden access changes or quiet transfer of responsibilities. For Al Hathaway, the lesson is to examine not only the form of the decision, but its business logic, process and consequences.