The Jolly Contrarian

Office politics: Difference between revisions

Page Discussion

Office politics (view source)

Revision as of 21:19, 12 December 2022

2,380 bytes added ,  12 December 2022
no edit summary
(Created page with "{{a|work|}}If we take it that office politics is basically an means for the neurotic to express themselves, there is a simple rule. The more important and measurable your cont...")
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
 
No edit summary
 
(5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|work|}}If we take it that office politics is basically an means for the neurotic to express themselves, there is a simple rule. The more important and measurable your contribution to the bottom line, the less scope there is for office politics: the less time, interest or inclination you will have for it and the more naturally immune you will be it.
{{a|work|{{image|Machiavelli|jpg|}}}}{{D|{{PAGENAME}}|/ˈɒfɪs ˈpɒlɪtɪks/|n|}}


It follows, therefore, that you can measure the degree of office politics by reference to the significance of the function comma and ''vice versa''. It is a bi-directional causal chain.
A means for the neurotic to express themselves.


The general proposition is that sales and trading will be the least political. Here you eat what you kill, all can be measured in in a p&L statement, bullshit artists are quickly found out, and there is little to be gained from passive-aggressive internal jiggery-pokery. What what internal manoeuvring there is will be swift and brutal. Expect to find its victims dumped in cupboards doubled over with a double-tap to the base of the skull, or wearing concrete sneakers and swimming with the fishes.
The rules is simple: the more ''measurable'' your contribution to the bottom line, the less scope there is for office politics: the less time, interest or inclination you will have for it; the more natural immunity you will have ''to'' it.


Important middle office and risk functions like [[operations]], [[credit risk]] and [[compliance]] will be next. Here there ''is'' scope for ineffectual grandstanding, especially if you can attract enough attention to be promoted to [[managing director]] while avoid proper scrutiny while you do  — but in the main, fundamental weaknesses will be quickly found out.
Office politics corresponds to the economic significance of your function, and ''vice versa'': the causal arrow is bi-directional. Just as relative worth sits on a continuum, so does angsty behaviour.  


Then [[marketing]], [[legal]] and [[financial reporting]] — functions you can’t really avoid in this day and age but are not part of the front-line generation, and preservation, of money. (Sorry, [[legal eagle]]s, but it is true.)  Here [[subject matter expert]]s will suffer at the hands of those with a taste for the game, so that the “lions led by donkeys” syndrome is somewhere between prevalent and inevitable. If you want a job punching through equity derivative confirms, expect to need 5 years at a crack Freshfields special ops unit on your CV. If you want to be [[GC]] of a global universal banking group these days, D&I fit is imperative; financial services experience preferred but not essential.
=== The Machiavellian continuum ===
==== Revenue generators ====
Generally, in a bank, those who bring in business — [[sales]] — and those who extract revenue from it — [[trading]] — will be the ''least'' political. Here, violence exists in plain sight, so there is least scope for dark arts: you eat what you kill, all can be measured in in a [[Profit and loss|P&L]] statement, bullshit artists are quickly found out and liquidated: there is little to be gained from [[passive-aggressive]] jiggery-pokery: you do your talking on the pitch. You get out and ''sell''.


Last of all — on the spectrum but so far along it as to be all but out of sight will [[human resources]], which will be a vipers’ nest of nettlesome fear and loathing.  
What manoeuvring there is will be swift and brutal. 
 
Expect to find its victims bent double and stuffed in a cupboard, with a double-tap to the base of the skull. 
 
Expect to find them wearing concrete sneakers, swimming with the fishes.
 
Expect, one day, to just ''not'' find them: to learn through terse looks and pursed lips, with no words spoken, that the internal client you’ve been cultivating for seven years is no more. [[Emmanuel Goldstein|Gone]].
 
Expect no lamentations.
 
==== Middle office engineers ====
Next least political will be key middle office and risk functions like [[operations]], [[credit risk|credit]] and [[compliance]]. Here there ''is'' scope for ineffectual grandstanding, especially for those who can tread the line between attracting enough attention for promotion, and but not enough to be found out, while you ascend the greasy pole. There are plenty of vacuous [[Thought leader|thought-leader]]<nowiki/>s in [[operations]] and [[Credit officer|credit]], but they tend to be dull rather than outright malicious. 
 
Still, in the main, fundamental weaknesses will be quickly found, and rooted, out.
 
 
==== Grandstanders ====
There is sure to be a solid heft of perfidious manoeuvring among the softer, less effable back-office functions like [[marketing]], [[legal]]<ref>Sorry, [https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php%3Ftitle=Legal_eagle legal eagles], but it is true: the [https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php%3Ftitle=Roll_of_honour roll of honour] refers.  </ref> and [[financial reporting]] — functions you can’t really not have, in this day and age, but whose positive impact on the organisation is hard to measure or, directly, even detect. These groups are not part of front-line generation, or retention, of revenue. They do the form part of the operational stack. 
 
Here, earnest [[subject matter expert]]s will inevitably suffer at the hands of those with a taste for ''the game''. The “lions led by donkeys” effect will be somewhere between prevalent and inevitable.
 
The skillsets required of an [[Subject matter expert|SME]] are so different those needed by a [[General counsel|legal leader]] as to be contradictory: if you want a job as a junior transaction lawyer, supporting a desk, structuring deals or just punching out structured [[equity derivative]] confirms, expect to need at least 5 years service with a crack [[Freshfields]] special ops unit embedded behind enemy lines before a bank will so much as look at you.
 
But if you want to be [[GC]], to get that seven million buck sign-on bonus just make sure your [[Diversity and inclusion|D&I]] fit is immaculate, you look good in a power wardrobe and you enjoy presenting at town halls. Financial services experience of any kind? Preferred; not essential.
 
==== [[HR]] ====
Last of all — still ''on'' the [[Machiavellian continuum]], but so far along it as to be all but out of sight from any other vantage point — is [[human resources]]. HR will be a vipers’ nest of nettlesome, and ''supremely'' [[passive-aggressive]]g, fear and loathing, because HR’s main reason for existing is to persuade other parts of the bank it is needed.  It can only do this by a campaign of terror, espionage and misinformation. HR rules are accordingly more formalistic and less flexible than any other policies in the organisation, and the consequences for transgression all the more gruesome. The only thing that saves the rest of the bank from this unspoken viciousness if how much of it is internally directed.


Now these divisions are not necessarily absolute —  and you can therefore rank which is the more important between department and roles by the relative degree of office politics in evidence.
Now these divisions are not necessarily absolute —  and you can therefore rank which is the more important between department and roles by the relative degree of office politics in evidence.
Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Special:MobileDiff/69870...69968"