(Jan 5, 2008) Power games: an inescapable truth or a sign of unimaginativeness
Politics has come to be a dirty word but is it something we can live without? History appears to demonstrate that those who've mastered the intricacies of political maneuvering get ahead, while those who refuse to stoop to that level end up unsuccessful, if not totally despised or forgotten.
Robert Greene's The 48 Laws of Power lays down 48 rules of getting ahead politically, illustrating each rule with examples from various events in world history and literature. The laws go along the lines of "Never outshine the master... get others to do the work for you but always take the credit... pose as a friend but work as a spy... keep your hands clean... play to people's fantasies..." among others.
I've read some chapters of the book and I must say that I find the examples fascinating, abhorrent at times, and usually closer to home than I'd like to admit. I find some of the laws practical, like "Never outshine the master." No boss or superior wants to feel that his/her underlings are upstaging him/her, even if the upstaging only exists in an extremely insecure boss' mind. However, I find some of the rules rather over the top. Take "Get others to do the work for you but always take the credit," for instance. I haven't read this chapter yet but the law itself seems blatantly power-greedy. I don't mind taking credit if I know I deserve it but taking the sole credit for something other people worked hard on is just plain dishonest. At least acknowledge everyone who contributed to the project's success.
Here's a blogger's review of the book. It's interesting to see his thoughts as well as the comments of those who replied to his post. Some of those who responded lauded the book while others said it "depressed them" because of its outright amorality and naked power-hunger. (For other reviews, see the comments on Amazon.com)
This makes me wonder: are power games inevitable in any organization? Are they necessarily unethical? Granted, each organization has its own unique culture and it's important to understand the codes in order to operate successfully within the group. But at what point does an organization's political weather become self-destructive, instead of fostering harmony and a drive for success? Is meritocracy just a myth after all? Or does the act of resorting to power games reveal a lack of imagination, or people's inability to imagine ways to success aside from gaining the favor of those in power?
Personally, I think that it's important to be aware of how people use power games to get ahead. There WILL be people who want to get ahead via the political route and it's important to stay out of their reach when they're looking for potential pawns. I don't think using these rules is necessarily immoral, either--each case would have to be evaluated according to the context. Intent would have to be considered as well. Do you do what you do for the sole purpose of gaining power? Is gaining power the end? Or do you do what you do because you believe it's right and honorable, regardless of what other people will think? One can only go so far in managing perceptions, and essentially that is what power's all about, is it not--the preservation of a favorable perception that would lead to other gains? Years later, can you recount those moments to your kids with pride? Or would you hide these from them out of shame?
What do you think?
Robert Greene's The 48 Laws of Power lays down 48 rules of getting ahead politically, illustrating each rule with examples from various events in world history and literature. The laws go along the lines of "Never outshine the master... get others to do the work for you but always take the credit... pose as a friend but work as a spy... keep your hands clean... play to people's fantasies..." among others.
I've read some chapters of the book and I must say that I find the examples fascinating, abhorrent at times, and usually closer to home than I'd like to admit. I find some of the laws practical, like "Never outshine the master." No boss or superior wants to feel that his/her underlings are upstaging him/her, even if the upstaging only exists in an extremely insecure boss' mind. However, I find some of the rules rather over the top. Take "Get others to do the work for you but always take the credit," for instance. I haven't read this chapter yet but the law itself seems blatantly power-greedy. I don't mind taking credit if I know I deserve it but taking the sole credit for something other people worked hard on is just plain dishonest. At least acknowledge everyone who contributed to the project's success.
Here's a blogger's review of the book. It's interesting to see his thoughts as well as the comments of those who replied to his post. Some of those who responded lauded the book while others said it "depressed them" because of its outright amorality and naked power-hunger. (For other reviews, see the comments on Amazon.com)
This makes me wonder: are power games inevitable in any organization? Are they necessarily unethical? Granted, each organization has its own unique culture and it's important to understand the codes in order to operate successfully within the group. But at what point does an organization's political weather become self-destructive, instead of fostering harmony and a drive for success? Is meritocracy just a myth after all? Or does the act of resorting to power games reveal a lack of imagination, or people's inability to imagine ways to success aside from gaining the favor of those in power?
Personally, I think that it's important to be aware of how people use power games to get ahead. There WILL be people who want to get ahead via the political route and it's important to stay out of their reach when they're looking for potential pawns. I don't think using these rules is necessarily immoral, either--each case would have to be evaluated according to the context. Intent would have to be considered as well. Do you do what you do for the sole purpose of gaining power? Is gaining power the end? Or do you do what you do because you believe it's right and honorable, regardless of what other people will think? One can only go so far in managing perceptions, and essentially that is what power's all about, is it not--the preservation of a favorable perception that would lead to other gains? Years later, can you recount those moments to your kids with pride? Or would you hide these from them out of shame?
What do you think?