Speaker 1: 0:21

So welcome to the search for clarity. We're at episode two with the incredible Professor, david Kletterbach. We are focusing on the power playbook winning in organizational politics, and if you're joining today, you haven't seen the first part of the episode. Go and check the first part of the episode out. We've really uncovered the definition of what politics is all about, what it would mean to you as a leader and how it's all about being authentic. Just a brief introduction to David, as we gave a nice big one on the first one. David is a tremendous expert on the fields of management, mentoring and coaching, and his expertise extends to team coaching, talent management and board performance. He's got a PhD with King's College London. He's a visiting professor to several universities and the big one, the mind-blowing one for me he's written 80 books. It's going to be 80 books on various cutting-edge management topics, so exceptionally well-informed man David is.

Speaker 1: 1:16

So, david, coming back in, we've discussed politics. We've discussed how it's all about being authentic. It's about aligning your personal values with the organization's values, and that's where that authenticity comes in. You're not self-serving, you're trying to serve the organization. Um, I wanted to find out from you. Getting now to the more practical elements of someone who's uh, who's really interested in getting this right? What are the most effective strategies for using politics to one's advantage without compromising integrity? And again, by using the term politics, I'm talking about the positive influence and impact that people might be trying to drive in a very negative or political environment a political, negative, political environment, should I say I think we cut.

Speaker 2: 2:00

We have two things here, and one of them relates directly to the overall theme of the podcast and that is the clarity. And the second theme is around the system and linking them together. The clarity around the system, but let's start with clarity as an individual level. So what coaching and mentoring both do? They're dialogues to help you understand your internal world, your hopes, your fears, your values, your restrictions that you have and the possibilities you have. And so all the things, the dominant emotions, all those things to understand yourself much more deeply but at the same time, to help you understand the world around you more deeply.

Speaker 1: 2:50

See the blind spots.

Speaker 2: 2:51

Yeah, what's going on? Who are your champions? For example, what's changing in the technology in your environment? What do people value and respect in a leader in this particular context? Um, how do people get noticed in this, in this organization? Those kinds of things. So that's the external um perspective, and and having that conversation that links those internal values and perceptions, or their internal clarity, with the external clarity, that's how we make good decisions. I say that we relate this to coaching and to mentoring, but actually, of course, if we're going to coach or mentor ourselves, that's what we do. We integrate our self-knowledge with our knowledge of the world around us.

Speaker 1: 3:44

Right, I like that.

Speaker 2: 3:49

So then we build on that and we look at the systems. How do the systems around us work? Who's involved in those systems? Every one of us, we are all complex adaptive systems and we live in a world and we're surrounded by other complex adaptive systems our family, our immediate team at work, um, the, the wider organization, um, etc. Etc. I mean, in some of our research we identified 10 levels of complexity in coaching um, each of them, you, each of them, requiring a lot more thinking about what's going on and how things interlink with each other. Right, and so beginning to understand the system, because a lot of the time, the intent of something, particularly in a political context, it turns out, you know, they achieved something completely different which may not have been what was wanted.

Speaker 1: 4:52

I'd say even you know, based on personal experience, you get really teed off because something's happened. You take it so personally and then you know, you get really angry with leadership for taking a certain course of action and then, over time, you then become more aware of the reasoning and the context around those decisions and suddenly it's like, oh okay, you know that makes sense, but you know you're slamming your fists on, really furious about what ended up happening. How could they do that to us? You know, um, it's uh. Yeah, I've seen it very often, I've experienced it very often.

Speaker 2: 5:26

And part of that is because they don't explain their reasoning. They just give you the decisions. You know what were the values we applied in those decisions? How are we trying to get to? And many years ago I could not understand my boss's boss. I work for a big american company as a young man and, um, uh, I thought, I thought his decisions were completely insane. And then I got, I got mentored by his successor. Um right, instead of just talking about my job, I travel around with him and he talked about his job and I got to understand the complexity of those decisions. You know what he had to take into account? Yeah, and it all fell into place for me. And after a while I got promoted and I went to say, well, thank you for your input. He said nothing to do with me. He said you got promoted because you were thinking like a manager at the next level, and I think it was a real revelation to me the different levels of complexity that we're working with.

Speaker 2: 6:32

Part of the problem we have is that things are becoming too complex for any one person to understand what the heck is going on. And I've started recently questioning the role of the board in organizations, because we are very often. Sometimes we talk about the board and the bit of a company being like the headless ghost. You know it's sort of not. There's a head there, but it's actually under the armpit, it's actually attached to the top, and change in organs. Things are moving so fast that a board that meets just once a month or even less frequently yeah, it can't. And so it's becoming more and more divorced from the reality of the complexity of what's going on in the environment underneath it. It can't understand it.

Speaker 2: 7:28

So we have to find better ways of bringing the complexity to the surface and when we start to do that these big political issues, and open them up for for real dialogue within an organization, what's the best way of dealing with this? You've got you, you. You people understand the thinking behind the decisions that have to be made and the factors that have to be taken into account, when people understand that they're much more likely to go along with it. So, even if it's not the decision that have to be taken into account, when people understand that they're much more likely to go along with it. So, even if it's not the decision that they would have made, or if they feel it has negative impacts on them. They at least understand, they can see the reason, yeah.

Speaker 2: 8:12

And it's that thinking things through and explaining things that's so important and doesn't happen in most political environments.

Speaker 1: 8:20

Which can be tricky as well, because I think even communicating something in these complex environments it could be taken in so many different ways. I almost see the over-engineering of quotes that you know the big CEOs would make a quote about something and you'd have about a hundred different perspectives of what they were actually talking about. You know, and I find it a big challenge for for leaders in very big organizations, that clarity, as you know, I believe is also difficult because you've got so many people in other subcontacts that are taking that information and overlaying their context over it, which is not quite what was being intended. So there's that almost appreciation in that self-reflection, that constant reminder of the fact that you're in a complex system. You can't take things at face value.

Speaker 2: 9:13

You always have got to appreciate that whoever's making the decisions, trying to make the best decision for everyone in in the organization, unless there are very clear indications of narcissism or, you know, ill intent, so to speak and unfortunately it offered a lot of that narcissism it's a tricky part, yeah sociopaths are very good at faking gen being genuine, faking authenticity and and and, and they do tend to get to rise to the top by flattering people and, uh, they're very, very, very, very dangerous so what would you say are some practical tools, uh, or frameworks.

Speaker 1: 9:52

I know that this, this publication that we've been we've been working through, which you know been written for coaching and mentoring, but you know, you know reading, written for coaching and mentoring, but you know, you know reading through it, it's, it's a book that I think everyone should be picking up to help better understand their, you know, understanding how to navigate politics and actually, as we discussed before, trying to improve on their naivety of politics. Uh, there's even a wonderful assessment in it, which I happen to do, david and you know, found some some keen insight on. So it would turn out that the assessment is based on, um, political naivety, uh your ability to manage politics, and authenticity. Uses, uh, politics for personal gain, yeah, influences the political landscape and engages with the wider political system. And what I scored we'd say negatively on, was my political naivety.

Speaker 1: 10:45

Even after, you know, going to the book and learning about, I realized it's actually it was sort of medium. You know, I need to really improve my understanding of how to do politics correctly, influence and impact correctly. The other one was I felt a bit guilty about this, I was on the higher end, lower end of the spectrum but uses politics for personal gain. You know when I've got ideas and things I'd really like to be noticed and so forth. You know, with that intent you tend to be trying to lead a personal agenda of sorts and that could be construed, as you know, not a positive trait when it comes to influencing and infiltrating.

Speaker 2: 11:28

Yeah, I mean, am I genuinely being disinterested? Is a very hard thing. It's a good question to ask oneself on a regular basis. But it's a good question to ask oneself on a regular basis and am I being honest with myself? Basically, yeah, absolutely. And yes, we're all human. We can't help with that. It's the degree to which we do this. However, in terms of if somebody has a level of political naivety, I find the starting point is typically just to be able to think about the system that's driving individuals in the immediate chain. So if it's your boss, for example, what are the pressures on the boss? What are the factors that they have to take into account in terms of the rest of the system above them, their own boss, their business, the budget that's available and so forth? So try to understand it from their perspective.

Speaker 1: 12:36

And it's a conversation you have, is it not? It's being vulnerable, it's just trying to learn.

Speaker 2: 12:40

it's yeah, it's, it, it's, but if we could have that conversation with you. So tell, tell me about how the environment is, you know, is what is pushing you in this, this direction, or or the difficult choices that you've got to make, um, um, and then for somebody at the man you, somebody to have the courage to actually share those. Look, these are the things I've got to balance. It isn't easy, and I've got pressure from here and I've got pressure from there and I'm trying to do the best I can. If they can, at the same time, say and these are the values that I'm trying to apply across the board, then that also helps people to understand better.

Speaker 2: 13:27

It's when you feel that your values are being compromised, and particularly if the organization purports to hold values but it's not living those values. That's another good point. Yeah, that that's when things start to be problematic. In those situations, you either have to, you have to have courage to do uh, well, you have the choice to be courageous or not. If you're courageous, you can raise the issue, can um sort of go, go for it and be prepared to be be batted back down again and and and the negative um outcomes.

Speaker 1: 14:08

But I suppose it's also in the messaging, if you're. I mean, there's always that risk, but if you've got the right intent and you're not raising them up in an accusationary fashion but more of a. You know, I've observed the following um it for my own learning, or understanding what? What's your take on x, y and z happening? You know it's yeah, yeah, I found that to be helpful for myself personally when trying to address those same kind of challenges. It's just trying to act. A very ignorant mirror, you know, around what you're seeing, totally, totally naive. Oh, I don't, you know, is that normal behavior?

Speaker 2: 14:42

Yes, yes, and so just the curiosity, trying to discover Curiosity, lovely, yes, co-discovery, if the other person is open to that. Now, very often they're not, because their motivations are not pure Right and so they want to shut things down. So your choice, in that case, your choice is yes, I can be courageous, I can call this, but I know there are negative consequences to this which I may not want. I may not want to lose my job, sure, or you can basically knuckle under and just accept it, which causes immense stress. A lot of the stress in large organizations comes from people doing things which are contrary to their values.

Speaker 1: 15:38

But faith, but no choice of course being for, yeah, absolutely being forced into that. You know the publication that you've got. It's got some really great um. I wouldn't say it's a bit more than tips and tricks around how to deal with, um. You know difficult, unethical people. Um, you know how to remain authentic in. You know difficult, unethical people. You know how to remain authentic in.

Speaker 1: 15:59

You know these negative environments talking about facts and leaving out emotions, taking time out to reflect and then respond, staying true to core values at all costs, stay curious, engage in open dialogue and so on and so on and really good stuff that if you take away and reflect on, you know you almost become a beacon of light, if you will. A bit of a corny analogy, but it's. You know, if everyone else is, you know, stabbing each other in the back discussion we had in our previous podcast was, you know you can make that choice to be that ground, that fertile ground. Where you're trying to do the right thing, it shouldn't go unnoticed. Where you're trying to do the right thing, it shouldn't go unnoticed, you know, and if you're in the correct culture and organization, perhaps that gets noticed, et cetera. But I guess it comes to a point at some point in time where you have to question whether or not you're in the right fit as well.

Speaker 2: 16:52

Is that right, dave? Exactly so. So if you're under that kind of stress, if you're unhealthy, you should get out of it, basically. But you do have another choice, and the alternative choice is basically to influence the system. Right, yeah, okay.

Speaker 2: 17:06

So, um, you know, you see, you see something's going to be damaging, um to to, to the organization, or to people, or to people, but you see, something is wrong. You'll feel it's wrong. So, um, you, you, you can't influence upwards, do not going to be listened to. You'll be shouted down or you get fired or whatever. So you influence sideways. Um, you, you look at the system and say so, who's going to be damaged by this? Um, or who? Um, you know what is the impact of this going to be on X and Y? And you say, okay, well, what information would help them to take a position on this?

Speaker 2: 17:45

So, instead of trying to influence below, or sometimes even from above, you influence from multiple directions, building coalitions. So it's other people that put the pressure to bear, and people who are acting in a negative political way will almost invariably go with the flow because they don't want to be seen to be an obstruction. Absolutely, yeah. So the whole Me Too movement was based upon people connecting, and when you've got enough people saying this isn't right, then it doesn't take much to shift the system. I mean, the dominoes all fall very quickly. Any Carry on, david, sorry, I was going to say so. Building coalitions, building coalitions yeah, quiet coalitions.

Speaker 1: 18:36

But I think that could also be seen as a negative political element, the difference being the it's still aligned with organizational values and your own values, it's done with authenticity, it's done in the best interest of the organization, then it would be you know an appropriate technique to use. But if it's to, it's that questions. You know asking yourselves those important questions why are you doing it? Is it? Is it because you've got a hidden sense of self-gain involved? You know, those are the kinds of questions you should be asking, to see whether or not, again, that kind of maneuver is a is is of the correct political influence, or if it is the yes you know, stabbing in the back kind of influence.

Speaker 2: 19:17

I think always to remember is if you are not exerting positive political influence, you are opening the gaps for somebody to exercise negative political influence. Sure, so your failure to act in a positive political way is actually likely to create negative politics, right?

Speaker 1: 19:43

And I hear lots of people say and again, looking at the negative aspect, that they find politics exhausting, and that's many senior leaders. They're exhausted. I'm assuming it doesn't need to be that way, david. Even if you're in a system that's potentially in a bit more of a negative culture of politics, you know when you're trying to make these influences and stuff, is that a natural experience, that it's an exhausting thing to do? Um, what are your thoughts on that?

Speaker 2: 20:11

well, I think, if you've got all your energy invested in manipulating other people to a particular end, it is exhausting and it means you're not going to be actually doing the things you should be doing, which means you're now, you're now having to, you've got all the fear of things, but I'm not doing my job, my real job, properly, um, and so that just creates the machine that goes round and round, right yeah um, and so it is exhausting.

Speaker 2: 20:39

But what you can do instead is actually again go back to the system and say let's just spend the energy understanding the system. Who are the people who have the influence? What is the information that they need to make good decisions? What is the information that they need to make good decisions? And so you influence the system by making sure that the people who are sort of nexuses of power, if you like, understand the implications of the decisions they're going to make. And you can be just a small part of that, providing some of that information. But if enough people like yourself are doing it, then the organization will move in this direction rather than that direction so what's carry on?

Speaker 2: 21:29

david, yeah, as I say, we've been doing some wonderful experiments, um with organizations in looking at diversity and inclusion Right, and here we've been. We've had reverse mentoring for a long time, and reverse mentoring can be very helpful but it has limited impact because it's only about two people. And in reverse mentoring you've got a junior person from a black and minority ethnic group, for example, mentoring a very senior person from a majority Right, and the idea is this both this co-learning goes on, but the senior person gets to understand the world through the eyes of the more junior and that affects the way that they behave towards their black and minority ethnic staff Right, and in return, the more junior person gets to understand how the politics work in the organisation, which means how do you manage your career and steer your way through Right? So it's got a very strong political element as well. The problem is it's just these two individuals who affect it.

Speaker 2: 22:27

Basically, it's a little bit of run-on from the way the senior person treats other people around them, but it's very limited. So what we're doing is putting together pairs of people with the remit that they will together try and understand the systemic factors that influence or create discrimination Right, and then they come together as a cohort and the cohort defines strategies that will address those from a systemic perspective, and because you're addressing that from the top and from the bottom both part you're meeting the middle. You're creating things that are going to work, or more likely to work, because they're not just poured down from above or they're just not just Compliance from below.

Speaker 1: 23:16

Makes complete sense. Well, that's fascinating. So, sort of coming to the end of our discussion, david, we've talked about a lot of really useful ways in which people can start to get better at understanding and seeing politics within their organization the negative aspects and what it might look like. What are some simple and sort of very practical steps someone can take today to improve their ability to influence and drive impact? Cheat sheets, so to speak, that you would give to someone.

Speaker 2: 23:45

So I think the simplest thing is to look at just how a decision is made and just go and talk to people at a more senior level about the complexity of decisions and to try and educate yourself about who gets involved. What makes some people more listened to than others? And it's not necessarily the level in hierarchy you are that gets you listened to. There are all sorts of other factors that mean that people are that other people will come to that to a particular person and seek their opinion and input into a decision. So just look at how decisions are made and then say what talents do I have that could take where I could actually be seen as a useful part of the decision-making framework. So why would people come to me and ask me for my opinion?

Speaker 1: 24:43

Thanks, david, and I think it goes without saying you have to. I found tremendous value in this publication. There's lots of tools, there's lots of good understanding. This book, I think, will drastically improve your ability to see and grasp the elements of politics within the organization. The political awareness tool, the organizational political awareness tool I found very, very interesting and, as you mentioned, I think that self-reflection potentially seeking a coach to help you understand your values better and get that self-reflection both within yourself as well as the system that you're in, is also a pivotal step to trying to best understand and navigate the world of politics. With your years of wisdom across 80 publications, what is the single most impactful piece of advice you think leaders should hear today, david Just?

Speaker 2: 25:40

shut up and listen, because if you listen to other people, you will hear the messages, the real messages, the authentic stuff. I love to ask the question, get people to ask the question at meetings. So what should have been said that hasn't been said, it's a good question. It's always a great question.

Speaker 1: 26:06

Well. Thank you, David. It's been an honor to have you on the Search for Clarity. This brings an end to our two-part episode. It's been highly informative. I've learned a lot. So we've learned about authentic leadership. We've learned about that being a key to driving positive politics, or influence and impact, as we've named it. Being able to be vulnerable is a really important piece of it. We've talked about a lot of tricks and techniques around how to best become less naive about politics, networking being a really important factor for being successful in exerting positive influence and impact. And so much wisdom that was shared. Thank you very much, David, and to everyone else. I hope you've enjoyed the search for clarity and looking forward to seeing you all soon. All the best, David. That was wonderful. Thank you very much.