Power Moves: The Surprising Truth behind How Things Get Done

When I was stumped on what to write about this month, my partner suggested I formally document my alternative to the Cube Rule food classification system (my theory is that all food is just a type of soup). Because while the Cube Rule was obviously groundbreaking, its claims of unification are clearly overstated.

And any rational being can recognise the simplicity and brilliance of the all food is a type of soup theory. The truth is obvious!

Soup? Obviously soup. A salad is just a raw soup (anyone who claims that it’s dry is just ignoring salad dressing like a fool). A smoothie is just a cold, sweet, soup. A sandwich is just a fairly dry, stacked soup. How we treat steak is dependent on if it is cooked. If the steak is cooked, then it’s a very meaty soup. If the steak is uncooked, then it’s an ingredient and falls out of the scope of the grand unifying soup theory of food along with other ingredients like flour, unpicked herbs, and rice.

ALL edible items are just types of Soup. And I will happily defend my theory. But I also know that I’ll never actually get everyone on board.

Why?

Because I have no power! I have no formal authority in the field of food classification, no real expertise (I’m assuming liking food isn’t enough), and I certainly do not have enough influence to make it happen. Great — even brilliant — ideas like the Grand Unifying Soup Theory are not in and of themselves enough: you need power to make things happen. Power affects everything.

Power is very real. Power is something we should be aware of as it’s the most powerful (hah) influence on what gets done, and how what gets done gets done.

I was chatting to a Business Analyst recently about work stuff and they asked me what I would do if I was asked to facilitate a workshop. Except the requested workshop didn’t have a clear objective, had a ton of people in it, and in general seemed like an utter waste of time.

My answer was: How many brownie points do I have?

And by brownie points, I meant: social credit. I meant: influence. I meant: what is the risk to me if I push back? I meant: how much power do I have?

Because my answer to the workshop question is entirely dependent on this. I’m not insane! If I have no power and you want me to run a workshop that’s pointless, then my response is: Do you think we need three hours or the whole day? Should we get catering? What sort of vibe are you looking for? Should we include Steph and Caleb?

Not only would I not push back, but I’d go out of my way to make it great. Yes, even if it was a complete and utter waste of time.

But if I have a high level of influence, then my answer would be: This sounds like an utter waste of time. And depending on my relationship with the requestor, I might even add a exclamation mark to the end of that sentence.

And there are middle-of-the-road positions here, too. Maybe I’m not under a ton of pressure timewise, and the most important thing that I’m trying to get done is going to take all my influence and I don’t want to waste my social credit on this issue.

In this instance, I’d probably raise some concerns about the approach, but I’d ultimately fall in line and do the dumb workshop because that was the ask. But then I’d actually use it to gain trust and credits: You remember that I called out that this probably wasn’t the best use of time don’t you? i.e., I’m a team player, I’m insightful, but I follow orders, blah, blah, blah.

Now this probably makes me sound like I have no backbone, or that I’m only interested in how something impacts me, but that’s sort of why I wanted to talk about it: because this is how the real world works.

Power is intrinsic to all relationships, and this is especially true for work relationships. So being conscious of the power dynamic in play is just plain sensible.

My first job on any new gig is always to work out how stuff actually works in this place. You want to do this before all the weird processes become normalised. And the biggest ingredient to how stuff works is always power.

Who is making decisions? With whom do they consult? From where do they source information? Who’s got their ear? Who frames the problems? How does information flow? Who sets the agenda?

A system isn’t always what it claims to be on paper. Dysfunction, power, context, and inertia all impact how things actually happen.

How can you change a system if you don’t understand the system? I guess you can try, but I wouldn’t recommend it.

And the one constant with our kind of middle-person roles and responsibilities is that you’re a change agent of some kind. It would be insane to think we don’t work with power.

But we don’t necessarily do that effectively … 

There are plenty of people who are passive actors in the system. They usually adhere to the hierarchy as defined in the org chart and tend to reinforce the existing power structure and processes. Sure, they do good work, but the most effective of us are active participants in the system. We see the system and we work on the system itself to achieve our objectives.

They’re the ones that can navigate the complexity of the workplace to make sure that the right people are across the right details, and that the right connections have been made. And, of course, that Dave in Accounting isn’t going to throw a grenade at the all-hands meeting. We usually call this stakeholder management, but in reality it is much more than that.

It isn’t about keeping Dave informed; it’s about forming strategic relationships to counter any potential negative reactions. It’s managing the game so that even if Dave throws a grenade, it doesn’t do any damage to the objective. It’s smoothing the change process. It’s building alliances.

It’s internal change management!

There are informal power structures in all workplaces. Anyone can gain (or lose) de facto power and influence through relationships, information, and reputation.

Influence is a word that gets bandied around a lot.

Yes, influence is absolutely a skill that you should cultivate. But there are different types of influence, and not all flavours are tasty.

When we use the word influence we usually mean persuasion. Persuasion is convincing someone of something. It’s pointing out the benefits and downsides to a decision. It’s laying out the options, but being compelling about the one that minimises risk and maximises return. Persuasion is considered ethical when it is acting in the best interests of the subject.

Underpinning a lot of the things we associate with being effective is persuasion. Persuasion is the master skill of a trusted advisor and is critical to being influential.

But not all influence is positive.

Manipulation is still considered influence, but it is not considered ethical for good reason! Manipulation seeks to control or deceive someone for your own benefit. The benefit to the subject is a secondary concern, if that. In the category of manipulation is all manner of behaviour from pretty darn evil (outright lying and verbal intimidation), to moderately evil (stealing credit and spreading rumours), to minor league evil (flattery and withholding information).

That last example is a kicker. One of the key things we often are in charge of is framing up information for discussion and decisions. The easiest way for us to manipulate things is simply to not present the facts accurately. And I know I called withholding information minor league in the arbitrary evil scale I created, but compared to lying it is.

That said, being minor doesn’t make it acceptable.

Both intent and methods matter. If you’re acting for your own benefit (i.e. to gain power) and not your subject’s benefit then, you’re in manipulation-land regardless of your methods. And if you’re acting unethically (i.e. you bullied Dave into not speaking up at a meeting so that the correct decision could be made), then it doesn’t matter that the outcome is in the best interests of the organisation.

One of the core purposes of our role is to enable people to make good informed decisions about what to do and how to do it. At the very heart of the skillset is the ability to uncover important information, and to present it in a compelling (i.e. persuasive) way.

I’d like to dig into how to maximise your influence (in an ethical way that only builds your rep), but that feels like a topic for another day. So I’ll simply warn you about falling into the trap of trying to get your own way. Because getting your way is never the point.

So what is the point?

If we accept the premise that there are plenty of politics in all workplaces, then you should be wondering what that means for you.

Well that depends on what is going on in your workplace.

But no matter what is going on, you need to be aware of the power structure in which you’re operating. If you’re not aware, then you could find yourself working in opposition to what the powers-that-be are trying to achieve. And while working in opposition to something might absolutely be the correct thing to do, if you’re going into war, you probably want to know in advance so that you can put on your kevlar vest before the bullets start flying.

The first step to being influential is being aware.

Knowledge is power.

Arm yourself.

Power is a ginormous topic — not something you can unpack in a couple thousand words. There’s obviously a lot more to dig into here, and I intend to do so in later articles.

Sometimes, I start these articles with a clear concept and outline in my head, and the writing process is simply documenting it. At other times, I’m writing to think. This article was the latter. This helps explain the somewhat chaotic nature of the resulting article — these were the loudest thoughts, rather than those thoughts that passed the audition.

For this reason, this was a really interesting article to write. It involved wandering down many paths that ultimately didn’t make the cut for the article. And I’m left with a bundle of threads that all feel like they could lead somewhere really interesting.

So if you have any thoughts on this topic, I’d love to hear them as I think my way through some of the more promising threads.