Is there a way to NOT participate in office politics and still be successful?Why is it important to gain “visibility” in the workplace?How to get better at office politics?How to advocate a different approach to a project when office politics are involved in the decisions?Are there examples of workplace politics that are not dishonest or deceptive?How to perform well at work when I am discouraged and demoralized by company politics?How to get better at office politics?My boss frequently calls me aside for long private conversations about office politics. I'm unsure how to reactIs it okay for a secretary to not greet everyone in the morning when there are around 100 people in the office?Manager trying to drag team into office politicsPolitics and promotion after angering now-retiring senior employeeHow to handle senior member of my organization who seems to think I'm not very smart after conversations at team lunchesFeels like I am getting dragged into office politics

How do I gain the trust of other PCs?

How to prevent cables getting intertwined

Someone who is granted access to information but not expected to read it

Is this set open or closed (or both?)

How to write a nice frame challenge?

Can you cover a cube with copies of this shape?

100-doors puzzle

The instant an accelerating object has zero speed, is it speeding up, slowing down, or neither?

Using roof rails to set up hammock

Manager wants to hire me; HR does not. How to proceed?

My husband's visa refused but mine wasn't -- can I travel?

How can I maintain game balance while allowing my player to craft genuinely useful items?

Why are almost all the people in this orchestra recording wearing headphones with one ear on and one ear off?

Positive cumulative sum of difference

what is "dot" sign in the •NO?

Schedule Batch Apex too many rows

Digital signature that is only verifiable by one specific person

Having some issue with notation in a Hilbert space

Huge Heap Table and table compression on SQL Server 2016

What do I put on my resume to make the company i'm applying to think i'm mature enough to handle a job?

How to make all magic-casting innate, but still rare?

Print the phrase "And she said, 'But that's his.'" using only the alphabet

How to ask if I can mow my neighbor's lawn

What is this plant I saw for sale at a Romanian farmer's market?



Is there a way to NOT participate in office politics and still be successful?


Why is it important to gain “visibility” in the workplace?How to get better at office politics?How to advocate a different approach to a project when office politics are involved in the decisions?Are there examples of workplace politics that are not dishonest or deceptive?How to perform well at work when I am discouraged and demoralized by company politics?How to get better at office politics?My boss frequently calls me aside for long private conversations about office politics. I'm unsure how to reactIs it okay for a secretary to not greet everyone in the morning when there are around 100 people in the office?Manager trying to drag team into office politicsPolitics and promotion after angering now-retiring senior employeeHow to handle senior member of my organization who seems to think I'm not very smart after conversations at team lunchesFeels like I am getting dragged into office politics






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








105















The question pretty much speaks for itself. I am a hard worker, very productive, and usually the one everyone turns to when they have a problem.



However, I work in a privately owned company, and several times have been told by my supervisor "don't agree to help (person) without my approval, that request is just a power play" after (person) has asked me to implement something to help their productivity and I agreed to because I could see the benefit in it.



I'm capable of playing the office politics game, I just detest it and feel it is a waste of energy. I also want to keep myself as accessible as possible to everyone in the company without anyone having to wonder if what they say to or around me will come back to bite them. I also have little patience for subterfuge and doublespeak.



Is there a professional way to cut through the red tape and office politics without stepping on too many toes?










share|improve this question



















  • 10





    Who usually decides what you work on? Your manager, a (separate) project manager, you? If somebody other than the person who assigns your work asks you to do something, it's generally safe (in my experience) to tell that person to ask so-and-so. But I wouldn't normally think of that as politics. Is there something more complicated going on here?

    – Monica Cellio
    Aug 17 '15 at 18:21






  • 2





    workplace.stackexchange.com/q/11816/10008

    – Raystafarian
    Aug 17 '15 at 19:00






  • 9





    To clarify, I am not making the assumption that office politics gets you ahead. The question clearly states I do NOT want to participate in office politics, AND I want to head off any conflicts that might arise from my refusal to join in. Please don't assume my assumptions.

    – Bardicer
    Aug 17 '15 at 21:00






  • 4





    I don't see anything wrong with this question, even though some people seem to want to twist it to be based on whatever...false assumptions? First, office politics would not even exist in a workplace unless those who play it assumed that it helps them to be "successful" (however they now define their "success").

    – user100487
    Aug 17 '15 at 21:53






  • 5





    Second, to me this question is not so much about whether Nick should redirect some requests elsewhere, but rather about a more generic case of how to help solve legitimate business needs when one has been given right to choose what to work on BUT ones manager views certain requests as "power play". Although admittedly the manager may have had underlying (legitimate) reasons for calling it "power play".

    – user100487
    Aug 17 '15 at 21:54


















105















The question pretty much speaks for itself. I am a hard worker, very productive, and usually the one everyone turns to when they have a problem.



However, I work in a privately owned company, and several times have been told by my supervisor "don't agree to help (person) without my approval, that request is just a power play" after (person) has asked me to implement something to help their productivity and I agreed to because I could see the benefit in it.



I'm capable of playing the office politics game, I just detest it and feel it is a waste of energy. I also want to keep myself as accessible as possible to everyone in the company without anyone having to wonder if what they say to or around me will come back to bite them. I also have little patience for subterfuge and doublespeak.



Is there a professional way to cut through the red tape and office politics without stepping on too many toes?










share|improve this question



















  • 10





    Who usually decides what you work on? Your manager, a (separate) project manager, you? If somebody other than the person who assigns your work asks you to do something, it's generally safe (in my experience) to tell that person to ask so-and-so. But I wouldn't normally think of that as politics. Is there something more complicated going on here?

    – Monica Cellio
    Aug 17 '15 at 18:21






  • 2





    workplace.stackexchange.com/q/11816/10008

    – Raystafarian
    Aug 17 '15 at 19:00






  • 9





    To clarify, I am not making the assumption that office politics gets you ahead. The question clearly states I do NOT want to participate in office politics, AND I want to head off any conflicts that might arise from my refusal to join in. Please don't assume my assumptions.

    – Bardicer
    Aug 17 '15 at 21:00






  • 4





    I don't see anything wrong with this question, even though some people seem to want to twist it to be based on whatever...false assumptions? First, office politics would not even exist in a workplace unless those who play it assumed that it helps them to be "successful" (however they now define their "success").

    – user100487
    Aug 17 '15 at 21:53






  • 5





    Second, to me this question is not so much about whether Nick should redirect some requests elsewhere, but rather about a more generic case of how to help solve legitimate business needs when one has been given right to choose what to work on BUT ones manager views certain requests as "power play". Although admittedly the manager may have had underlying (legitimate) reasons for calling it "power play".

    – user100487
    Aug 17 '15 at 21:54














105












105








105


24






The question pretty much speaks for itself. I am a hard worker, very productive, and usually the one everyone turns to when they have a problem.



However, I work in a privately owned company, and several times have been told by my supervisor "don't agree to help (person) without my approval, that request is just a power play" after (person) has asked me to implement something to help their productivity and I agreed to because I could see the benefit in it.



I'm capable of playing the office politics game, I just detest it and feel it is a waste of energy. I also want to keep myself as accessible as possible to everyone in the company without anyone having to wonder if what they say to or around me will come back to bite them. I also have little patience for subterfuge and doublespeak.



Is there a professional way to cut through the red tape and office politics without stepping on too many toes?










share|improve this question
















The question pretty much speaks for itself. I am a hard worker, very productive, and usually the one everyone turns to when they have a problem.



However, I work in a privately owned company, and several times have been told by my supervisor "don't agree to help (person) without my approval, that request is just a power play" after (person) has asked me to implement something to help their productivity and I agreed to because I could see the benefit in it.



I'm capable of playing the office politics game, I just detest it and feel it is a waste of energy. I also want to keep myself as accessible as possible to everyone in the company without anyone having to wonder if what they say to or around me will come back to bite them. I also have little patience for subterfuge and doublespeak.



Is there a professional way to cut through the red tape and office politics without stepping on too many toes?







relationships politics office-politics






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 41 mins ago









tuskiomi

19412




19412










asked Aug 17 '15 at 17:01









BardicerBardicer

696259




696259







  • 10





    Who usually decides what you work on? Your manager, a (separate) project manager, you? If somebody other than the person who assigns your work asks you to do something, it's generally safe (in my experience) to tell that person to ask so-and-so. But I wouldn't normally think of that as politics. Is there something more complicated going on here?

    – Monica Cellio
    Aug 17 '15 at 18:21






  • 2





    workplace.stackexchange.com/q/11816/10008

    – Raystafarian
    Aug 17 '15 at 19:00






  • 9





    To clarify, I am not making the assumption that office politics gets you ahead. The question clearly states I do NOT want to participate in office politics, AND I want to head off any conflicts that might arise from my refusal to join in. Please don't assume my assumptions.

    – Bardicer
    Aug 17 '15 at 21:00






  • 4





    I don't see anything wrong with this question, even though some people seem to want to twist it to be based on whatever...false assumptions? First, office politics would not even exist in a workplace unless those who play it assumed that it helps them to be "successful" (however they now define their "success").

    – user100487
    Aug 17 '15 at 21:53






  • 5





    Second, to me this question is not so much about whether Nick should redirect some requests elsewhere, but rather about a more generic case of how to help solve legitimate business needs when one has been given right to choose what to work on BUT ones manager views certain requests as "power play". Although admittedly the manager may have had underlying (legitimate) reasons for calling it "power play".

    – user100487
    Aug 17 '15 at 21:54













  • 10





    Who usually decides what you work on? Your manager, a (separate) project manager, you? If somebody other than the person who assigns your work asks you to do something, it's generally safe (in my experience) to tell that person to ask so-and-so. But I wouldn't normally think of that as politics. Is there something more complicated going on here?

    – Monica Cellio
    Aug 17 '15 at 18:21






  • 2





    workplace.stackexchange.com/q/11816/10008

    – Raystafarian
    Aug 17 '15 at 19:00






  • 9





    To clarify, I am not making the assumption that office politics gets you ahead. The question clearly states I do NOT want to participate in office politics, AND I want to head off any conflicts that might arise from my refusal to join in. Please don't assume my assumptions.

    – Bardicer
    Aug 17 '15 at 21:00






  • 4





    I don't see anything wrong with this question, even though some people seem to want to twist it to be based on whatever...false assumptions? First, office politics would not even exist in a workplace unless those who play it assumed that it helps them to be "successful" (however they now define their "success").

    – user100487
    Aug 17 '15 at 21:53






  • 5





    Second, to me this question is not so much about whether Nick should redirect some requests elsewhere, but rather about a more generic case of how to help solve legitimate business needs when one has been given right to choose what to work on BUT ones manager views certain requests as "power play". Although admittedly the manager may have had underlying (legitimate) reasons for calling it "power play".

    – user100487
    Aug 17 '15 at 21:54








10




10





Who usually decides what you work on? Your manager, a (separate) project manager, you? If somebody other than the person who assigns your work asks you to do something, it's generally safe (in my experience) to tell that person to ask so-and-so. But I wouldn't normally think of that as politics. Is there something more complicated going on here?

– Monica Cellio
Aug 17 '15 at 18:21





Who usually decides what you work on? Your manager, a (separate) project manager, you? If somebody other than the person who assigns your work asks you to do something, it's generally safe (in my experience) to tell that person to ask so-and-so. But I wouldn't normally think of that as politics. Is there something more complicated going on here?

– Monica Cellio
Aug 17 '15 at 18:21




2




2





workplace.stackexchange.com/q/11816/10008

– Raystafarian
Aug 17 '15 at 19:00





workplace.stackexchange.com/q/11816/10008

– Raystafarian
Aug 17 '15 at 19:00




9




9





To clarify, I am not making the assumption that office politics gets you ahead. The question clearly states I do NOT want to participate in office politics, AND I want to head off any conflicts that might arise from my refusal to join in. Please don't assume my assumptions.

– Bardicer
Aug 17 '15 at 21:00





To clarify, I am not making the assumption that office politics gets you ahead. The question clearly states I do NOT want to participate in office politics, AND I want to head off any conflicts that might arise from my refusal to join in. Please don't assume my assumptions.

– Bardicer
Aug 17 '15 at 21:00




4




4





I don't see anything wrong with this question, even though some people seem to want to twist it to be based on whatever...false assumptions? First, office politics would not even exist in a workplace unless those who play it assumed that it helps them to be "successful" (however they now define their "success").

– user100487
Aug 17 '15 at 21:53





I don't see anything wrong with this question, even though some people seem to want to twist it to be based on whatever...false assumptions? First, office politics would not even exist in a workplace unless those who play it assumed that it helps them to be "successful" (however they now define their "success").

– user100487
Aug 17 '15 at 21:53




5




5





Second, to me this question is not so much about whether Nick should redirect some requests elsewhere, but rather about a more generic case of how to help solve legitimate business needs when one has been given right to choose what to work on BUT ones manager views certain requests as "power play". Although admittedly the manager may have had underlying (legitimate) reasons for calling it "power play".

– user100487
Aug 17 '15 at 21:54






Second, to me this question is not so much about whether Nick should redirect some requests elsewhere, but rather about a more generic case of how to help solve legitimate business needs when one has been given right to choose what to work on BUT ones manager views certain requests as "power play". Although admittedly the manager may have had underlying (legitimate) reasons for calling it "power play".

– user100487
Aug 17 '15 at 21:54











6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes


















121














I think that in this situation, honest communication will do wonders for you. Typing up this question shows that you've thought through the problem in enough detail to express it to both your coworker and your supervisor.



  1. Tell coworkers that you have to get approval. You can say, "This looks like a great project, I'd like to devote some time to work on it; let me run it by [supervisor] first." If they ask why, tell them it's what your supervisor wants. Ignore what your supervisor said about "power play" because you don't care and it doesn't matter. Part of supervising employees may be managing their workload so it's not odd or unprofessional to comply with your supervisor's request.


  2. Tell your supervisor that you don't like red tape and office politics and you want to keep yourself and your skills accessible to any project that benefits the company, no matter who's running it. Try not to take a tone that suggests you're entitled to this, because you're not—this is your preference as an employee. Hopefully your supervisor will ease up a bit or at least explain to you the costs of your request and benefits of their time management policy.


Being subjected to micromanagement can be very onerous. By communicating the conditions under which you feel you work best, you associate your preferences with your productivity. This gives your supervisor an incentive to cooperate and a way to justify it with their superiors, if necessary.






share|improve this answer




















  • 10





    That sounds perfectly reasonable to me and I can't see any negatives to it.

    – Bardicer
    Aug 17 '15 at 17:30






  • 4





    Huge emphasis on the "Part of supervising employees may be managing their workload" section. Regardless of whether you want to help, it is your manager's responsibility to decide whether you take time away from your core projects to assist your coworkers. This takes all office politics away from you, and lets you just get on with your job. It also lets you see it as a time management issue, not a politics issue.

    – Jon Story
    Aug 18 '15 at 15:28






  • 3





    I'm not sure #2 will be useful, at least not as phrased. Firstly, many might not consider getting (informal?) approval to work on something as either red tape or office politics. As you mentioned, it's perfectly reasonable to expect that you get approval to work on something first (so it could be non-negotiable). The supervisor has already brought this up a few times - if it were acceptable, why would he/she have brought it up in the first place? You instead might be able to go with the argument of it not interfering with your "regular" work (if this is true).

    – Dukeling
    Aug 18 '15 at 15:49






  • 1





    I'm with @Dukeling on whether the second part is useful. I think it would be more effective to go to the supervisor and explain the value the OP sees in the project. (In other words, make a business case for it. Show the supervisor it's not just a power play.)

    – jpmc26
    Aug 19 '15 at 0:53











  • hat the supervisor is asking for is not micromanagement, it is management. It is not unreasonable to decide which projects outside of your own group a person can take on.

    – HLGEM
    Oct 10 '17 at 13:37


















27














You have an unrealistic view of office politics. You do need to play the game to some extent, you don't need to be duplicitous or use doublespeak. But making sure people know your achievements, making sure people want to cooperate with you are all good things and they are all office politics. You need to expand your view of office politics, no one can afford to ignore them.



If you aren't playing, people will find you easy to defeat. They will find it easy to give you less than you deserve. They will find it easy to get rid of you. You ignore politics at your own peril and many a person has found themselves fired because they thought the game was beneath them.



For instance in the case above, you might be making it harder to do something organizationally that you don't know about because you are helping out an organizational opponent. Perhaps your boss has more critical things he wants you to work on as well which is part of why he doesn't want you doing such things. And maybe the person is trying to get you assigned to him or to do something else to undermine your boss. You never help people who are trying to undermine your boss. Perhaps someone thinks you are not necessary because you have time for all this extra unapproved work. Your boss may be trying to protect you.



That said, you don't have to be nasty to refuse the work. Nor do you have to be a snake to play office politics.



All work above the first level of supervision is political. If you aren't helping your boss succeed, then you are harming him and he is the one who decides on your performance. Think about that.






share|improve this answer




















  • 17





    What you describe is an unhealthy, inefficient, and honestly terrifying workplace, and an extremely pessimistic two-wrongs-make-a-right world-view, and I've never worked anywhere where this is the case.

    – AlbeyAmakiir
    Aug 17 '15 at 23:05






  • 13





    I'm not saying there's no politics - you can't have people without politics - but if people in your workplace are actively working to undermine each other, then it's bad for co-operation, will damage and weaken the business, and is terrible for the mental health of everyone to be around that all the time. It's not something you should just put up with.

    – AlbeyAmakiir
    Aug 18 '15 at 0:26






  • 4





    It tends to happen more in bigger companies. Entire departments are too busy fighting each other to actually get on with the job. One company I was working at nearly collapsed because some new senior management came in who were so busy playing each other against each other they never actually did their job.

    – Tim B
    Aug 18 '15 at 7:50






  • 5





    "You never help people who are trying to undermine your boss" seems to be a rather harsh army-like statement. I wouldn't generalize this that much.

    – dirkk
    Aug 18 '15 at 8:34






  • 2





    I don't think getting manager approval for things to work on involves you in office politics - doing this is just a very basic part of most jobs. But sure, the request itself may be filled with office politics (but being given that request has already pretty much put you in the middle of it, regardless of what you do with it) and the manager may take office politics into account when deciding what to make of these requests (but you don't have to get involved in that).

    – Dukeling
    Aug 18 '15 at 16:03


















14














The simple answer is: No. You cannot completely avoid office politics.



However, you can avoid a lot of the worst of it. Don't worry about what other people are doing, don't try and undermine them or bring them down. Just focus on your own image.



If you build up your own reputation to be good at your job, perform well, be reliable, etc then you are not a tempting target for people to use as a scapegoat. So long as you are then careful not to get pulled into things you can remain mostly free of the fray.



The problem with avoiding all politics though is that it doesn't take two to tango in this case. If someone decides to target you then you are now involved whether you like it or not.



The key to success is making your own position strong enough that you are not likely to be attacked, while at the same time not making any enemies of your own. Which is a form of office politics again.



By making sure that my contributions are visible, that I'm helpful and friendly, and that I don't ever pull other people down then in most places I've worked I've been able to remain completely free of the political side. That only hasn't worked in one company where everything was going to hell and everyone from upper management on down was desperately finding someone to blame but the culture there was so toxic that I didn't want to stay long and I moved on.






share|improve this answer
































    6














    I see no "office politics" here; I see only you going out of your chain of command and spending company time performing tasks that you are not paid to perform. You are there to do what your manager instructs, not what some other person asks.



    You cannot be "successful" if you continue doing this. Your manager will eventually have to drop you.






    share|improve this answer

























    • I know it's been a while since this was posted. But... my manager was quite upset when I left the company for 10k a year more than he told me I was worth and a commute that is only 1/4 what my previous commute was. And I'm about to hire one of my former coworkers away from him. So apparently I'm doing something right.

      – Bardicer
      Nov 3 '16 at 21:15






    • 1





      @Bardicer: Perhaps I should have said "you cannot be successful at that company". You'll never be able to disprove that, since you left.

      – Lightness Races in Orbit
      Nov 4 '16 at 10:02











    • That would probably be a much more accurate observation. Your answer came across with a much more negative impression.

      – Bardicer
      Nov 4 '16 at 13:17











    • @Bardicer: The scope of the answer is pretty clear.

      – Lightness Races in Orbit
      Nov 4 '16 at 14:48


















    1














    This is a no brainer. What politics? Economics.
    Who pays you're wages and who are you accountable to? If you're supervisor is you're immediate superior, it is his departments budget that is paying for your efforts to help someone else, who may be in a different department or work under a different budget. End of.
    If you've got time within your working day to do something for someone else, you could be being so much more productive for your own dept/group.






    share|improve this answer























    • My department is a sub department of the other one. The owner of the company pays my wages, not my supervisor. Technically I was hired by my supervisor AND a vp who is over all of the departments. My job duties are to provide solutions to increase the productivity of the company by four times with the current employees (that's the target goal). As such it WAS a no brainer for me. There have been other mentions of other people making power grabs, this was just the example I used.

      – Bardicer
      Aug 19 '15 at 16:35











    • @Nick: Doesn't matter; you're still doing something on the instructions of someone who is not your supervisor, instead of what you were already doing on the instructions of your supervisor. And you can't do that. End of story.

      – Lightness Races in Orbit
      Aug 21 '15 at 10:53



















    -1














    "Office politics" are avoidable. Actually the situation is not political so much as it is unprofessional and semi-bullying.



    I have been a contract engineer for decades. Some contracts call for a year or two of onsite work; other contracts range from a day to a few months. The shorter contracts are quite easy to avoid feuds and power plays: Just don't participate.



    In longer contracts, when it may seem to many that I am just another employee, it is usually sufficient to ask if they really want me—an hourly contractor—to do whatever it is.






    share|improve this answer


















    • 2





      The OP appears to be a permanent employee, not a contractor. While your advice applies to contractors (I am one myself and I use the same mentality as you advocate), it's not so useful for the OP's current situation.

      – Jane S
      Aug 19 '15 at 3:46












    • @JaneS: While I didn't explicitly write it, the mindset is easily adopted by employees.

      – wallyk
      Aug 19 '15 at 3:59












    • Perhaps you could edit your answer to make it apply to any employee, not just contractors.

      – Jane S
      Aug 19 '15 at 4:00






    • 2





      I don't think it's fair to compare OP's situation to bullying at all.

      – Air
      Aug 19 '15 at 4:10











    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "423"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: false,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f52226%2fis-there-a-way-to-not-participate-in-office-politics-and-still-be-successful%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown




















    StackExchange.ready(function ()
    $("#show-editor-button input, #show-editor-button button").click(function ()
    var showEditor = function()
    $("#show-editor-button").hide();
    $("#post-form").removeClass("dno");
    StackExchange.editor.finallyInit();
    ;

    var useFancy = $(this).data('confirm-use-fancy');
    if(useFancy == 'True')
    var popupTitle = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-title');
    var popupBody = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-body');
    var popupAccept = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-accept-button');

    $(this).loadPopup(
    url: '/post/self-answer-popup',
    loaded: function(popup)
    var pTitle = $(popup).find('h2');
    var pBody = $(popup).find('.popup-body');
    var pSubmit = $(popup).find('.popup-submit');

    pTitle.text(popupTitle);
    pBody.html(popupBody);
    pSubmit.val(popupAccept).click(showEditor);

    )
    else
    var confirmText = $(this).data('confirm-text');
    if (confirmText ? confirm(confirmText) : true)
    showEditor();


    );
    );






    6 Answers
    6






    active

    oldest

    votes








    6 Answers
    6






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    121














    I think that in this situation, honest communication will do wonders for you. Typing up this question shows that you've thought through the problem in enough detail to express it to both your coworker and your supervisor.



    1. Tell coworkers that you have to get approval. You can say, "This looks like a great project, I'd like to devote some time to work on it; let me run it by [supervisor] first." If they ask why, tell them it's what your supervisor wants. Ignore what your supervisor said about "power play" because you don't care and it doesn't matter. Part of supervising employees may be managing their workload so it's not odd or unprofessional to comply with your supervisor's request.


    2. Tell your supervisor that you don't like red tape and office politics and you want to keep yourself and your skills accessible to any project that benefits the company, no matter who's running it. Try not to take a tone that suggests you're entitled to this, because you're not—this is your preference as an employee. Hopefully your supervisor will ease up a bit or at least explain to you the costs of your request and benefits of their time management policy.


    Being subjected to micromanagement can be very onerous. By communicating the conditions under which you feel you work best, you associate your preferences with your productivity. This gives your supervisor an incentive to cooperate and a way to justify it with their superiors, if necessary.






    share|improve this answer




















    • 10





      That sounds perfectly reasonable to me and I can't see any negatives to it.

      – Bardicer
      Aug 17 '15 at 17:30






    • 4





      Huge emphasis on the "Part of supervising employees may be managing their workload" section. Regardless of whether you want to help, it is your manager's responsibility to decide whether you take time away from your core projects to assist your coworkers. This takes all office politics away from you, and lets you just get on with your job. It also lets you see it as a time management issue, not a politics issue.

      – Jon Story
      Aug 18 '15 at 15:28






    • 3





      I'm not sure #2 will be useful, at least not as phrased. Firstly, many might not consider getting (informal?) approval to work on something as either red tape or office politics. As you mentioned, it's perfectly reasonable to expect that you get approval to work on something first (so it could be non-negotiable). The supervisor has already brought this up a few times - if it were acceptable, why would he/she have brought it up in the first place? You instead might be able to go with the argument of it not interfering with your "regular" work (if this is true).

      – Dukeling
      Aug 18 '15 at 15:49






    • 1





      I'm with @Dukeling on whether the second part is useful. I think it would be more effective to go to the supervisor and explain the value the OP sees in the project. (In other words, make a business case for it. Show the supervisor it's not just a power play.)

      – jpmc26
      Aug 19 '15 at 0:53











    • hat the supervisor is asking for is not micromanagement, it is management. It is not unreasonable to decide which projects outside of your own group a person can take on.

      – HLGEM
      Oct 10 '17 at 13:37















    121














    I think that in this situation, honest communication will do wonders for you. Typing up this question shows that you've thought through the problem in enough detail to express it to both your coworker and your supervisor.



    1. Tell coworkers that you have to get approval. You can say, "This looks like a great project, I'd like to devote some time to work on it; let me run it by [supervisor] first." If they ask why, tell them it's what your supervisor wants. Ignore what your supervisor said about "power play" because you don't care and it doesn't matter. Part of supervising employees may be managing their workload so it's not odd or unprofessional to comply with your supervisor's request.


    2. Tell your supervisor that you don't like red tape and office politics and you want to keep yourself and your skills accessible to any project that benefits the company, no matter who's running it. Try not to take a tone that suggests you're entitled to this, because you're not—this is your preference as an employee. Hopefully your supervisor will ease up a bit or at least explain to you the costs of your request and benefits of their time management policy.


    Being subjected to micromanagement can be very onerous. By communicating the conditions under which you feel you work best, you associate your preferences with your productivity. This gives your supervisor an incentive to cooperate and a way to justify it with their superiors, if necessary.






    share|improve this answer




















    • 10





      That sounds perfectly reasonable to me and I can't see any negatives to it.

      – Bardicer
      Aug 17 '15 at 17:30






    • 4





      Huge emphasis on the "Part of supervising employees may be managing their workload" section. Regardless of whether you want to help, it is your manager's responsibility to decide whether you take time away from your core projects to assist your coworkers. This takes all office politics away from you, and lets you just get on with your job. It also lets you see it as a time management issue, not a politics issue.

      – Jon Story
      Aug 18 '15 at 15:28






    • 3





      I'm not sure #2 will be useful, at least not as phrased. Firstly, many might not consider getting (informal?) approval to work on something as either red tape or office politics. As you mentioned, it's perfectly reasonable to expect that you get approval to work on something first (so it could be non-negotiable). The supervisor has already brought this up a few times - if it were acceptable, why would he/she have brought it up in the first place? You instead might be able to go with the argument of it not interfering with your "regular" work (if this is true).

      – Dukeling
      Aug 18 '15 at 15:49






    • 1





      I'm with @Dukeling on whether the second part is useful. I think it would be more effective to go to the supervisor and explain the value the OP sees in the project. (In other words, make a business case for it. Show the supervisor it's not just a power play.)

      – jpmc26
      Aug 19 '15 at 0:53











    • hat the supervisor is asking for is not micromanagement, it is management. It is not unreasonable to decide which projects outside of your own group a person can take on.

      – HLGEM
      Oct 10 '17 at 13:37













    121












    121








    121







    I think that in this situation, honest communication will do wonders for you. Typing up this question shows that you've thought through the problem in enough detail to express it to both your coworker and your supervisor.



    1. Tell coworkers that you have to get approval. You can say, "This looks like a great project, I'd like to devote some time to work on it; let me run it by [supervisor] first." If they ask why, tell them it's what your supervisor wants. Ignore what your supervisor said about "power play" because you don't care and it doesn't matter. Part of supervising employees may be managing their workload so it's not odd or unprofessional to comply with your supervisor's request.


    2. Tell your supervisor that you don't like red tape and office politics and you want to keep yourself and your skills accessible to any project that benefits the company, no matter who's running it. Try not to take a tone that suggests you're entitled to this, because you're not—this is your preference as an employee. Hopefully your supervisor will ease up a bit or at least explain to you the costs of your request and benefits of their time management policy.


    Being subjected to micromanagement can be very onerous. By communicating the conditions under which you feel you work best, you associate your preferences with your productivity. This gives your supervisor an incentive to cooperate and a way to justify it with their superiors, if necessary.






    share|improve this answer















    I think that in this situation, honest communication will do wonders for you. Typing up this question shows that you've thought through the problem in enough detail to express it to both your coworker and your supervisor.



    1. Tell coworkers that you have to get approval. You can say, "This looks like a great project, I'd like to devote some time to work on it; let me run it by [supervisor] first." If they ask why, tell them it's what your supervisor wants. Ignore what your supervisor said about "power play" because you don't care and it doesn't matter. Part of supervising employees may be managing their workload so it's not odd or unprofessional to comply with your supervisor's request.


    2. Tell your supervisor that you don't like red tape and office politics and you want to keep yourself and your skills accessible to any project that benefits the company, no matter who's running it. Try not to take a tone that suggests you're entitled to this, because you're not—this is your preference as an employee. Hopefully your supervisor will ease up a bit or at least explain to you the costs of your request and benefits of their time management policy.


    Being subjected to micromanagement can be very onerous. By communicating the conditions under which you feel you work best, you associate your preferences with your productivity. This gives your supervisor an incentive to cooperate and a way to justify it with their superiors, if necessary.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited Aug 17 '15 at 17:31

























    answered Aug 17 '15 at 17:18









    AirAir

    2,23521417




    2,23521417







    • 10





      That sounds perfectly reasonable to me and I can't see any negatives to it.

      – Bardicer
      Aug 17 '15 at 17:30






    • 4





      Huge emphasis on the "Part of supervising employees may be managing their workload" section. Regardless of whether you want to help, it is your manager's responsibility to decide whether you take time away from your core projects to assist your coworkers. This takes all office politics away from you, and lets you just get on with your job. It also lets you see it as a time management issue, not a politics issue.

      – Jon Story
      Aug 18 '15 at 15:28






    • 3





      I'm not sure #2 will be useful, at least not as phrased. Firstly, many might not consider getting (informal?) approval to work on something as either red tape or office politics. As you mentioned, it's perfectly reasonable to expect that you get approval to work on something first (so it could be non-negotiable). The supervisor has already brought this up a few times - if it were acceptable, why would he/she have brought it up in the first place? You instead might be able to go with the argument of it not interfering with your "regular" work (if this is true).

      – Dukeling
      Aug 18 '15 at 15:49






    • 1





      I'm with @Dukeling on whether the second part is useful. I think it would be more effective to go to the supervisor and explain the value the OP sees in the project. (In other words, make a business case for it. Show the supervisor it's not just a power play.)

      – jpmc26
      Aug 19 '15 at 0:53











    • hat the supervisor is asking for is not micromanagement, it is management. It is not unreasonable to decide which projects outside of your own group a person can take on.

      – HLGEM
      Oct 10 '17 at 13:37












    • 10





      That sounds perfectly reasonable to me and I can't see any negatives to it.

      – Bardicer
      Aug 17 '15 at 17:30






    • 4





      Huge emphasis on the "Part of supervising employees may be managing their workload" section. Regardless of whether you want to help, it is your manager's responsibility to decide whether you take time away from your core projects to assist your coworkers. This takes all office politics away from you, and lets you just get on with your job. It also lets you see it as a time management issue, not a politics issue.

      – Jon Story
      Aug 18 '15 at 15:28






    • 3





      I'm not sure #2 will be useful, at least not as phrased. Firstly, many might not consider getting (informal?) approval to work on something as either red tape or office politics. As you mentioned, it's perfectly reasonable to expect that you get approval to work on something first (so it could be non-negotiable). The supervisor has already brought this up a few times - if it were acceptable, why would he/she have brought it up in the first place? You instead might be able to go with the argument of it not interfering with your "regular" work (if this is true).

      – Dukeling
      Aug 18 '15 at 15:49






    • 1





      I'm with @Dukeling on whether the second part is useful. I think it would be more effective to go to the supervisor and explain the value the OP sees in the project. (In other words, make a business case for it. Show the supervisor it's not just a power play.)

      – jpmc26
      Aug 19 '15 at 0:53











    • hat the supervisor is asking for is not micromanagement, it is management. It is not unreasonable to decide which projects outside of your own group a person can take on.

      – HLGEM
      Oct 10 '17 at 13:37







    10




    10





    That sounds perfectly reasonable to me and I can't see any negatives to it.

    – Bardicer
    Aug 17 '15 at 17:30





    That sounds perfectly reasonable to me and I can't see any negatives to it.

    – Bardicer
    Aug 17 '15 at 17:30




    4




    4





    Huge emphasis on the "Part of supervising employees may be managing their workload" section. Regardless of whether you want to help, it is your manager's responsibility to decide whether you take time away from your core projects to assist your coworkers. This takes all office politics away from you, and lets you just get on with your job. It also lets you see it as a time management issue, not a politics issue.

    – Jon Story
    Aug 18 '15 at 15:28





    Huge emphasis on the "Part of supervising employees may be managing their workload" section. Regardless of whether you want to help, it is your manager's responsibility to decide whether you take time away from your core projects to assist your coworkers. This takes all office politics away from you, and lets you just get on with your job. It also lets you see it as a time management issue, not a politics issue.

    – Jon Story
    Aug 18 '15 at 15:28




    3




    3





    I'm not sure #2 will be useful, at least not as phrased. Firstly, many might not consider getting (informal?) approval to work on something as either red tape or office politics. As you mentioned, it's perfectly reasonable to expect that you get approval to work on something first (so it could be non-negotiable). The supervisor has already brought this up a few times - if it were acceptable, why would he/she have brought it up in the first place? You instead might be able to go with the argument of it not interfering with your "regular" work (if this is true).

    – Dukeling
    Aug 18 '15 at 15:49





    I'm not sure #2 will be useful, at least not as phrased. Firstly, many might not consider getting (informal?) approval to work on something as either red tape or office politics. As you mentioned, it's perfectly reasonable to expect that you get approval to work on something first (so it could be non-negotiable). The supervisor has already brought this up a few times - if it were acceptable, why would he/she have brought it up in the first place? You instead might be able to go with the argument of it not interfering with your "regular" work (if this is true).

    – Dukeling
    Aug 18 '15 at 15:49




    1




    1





    I'm with @Dukeling on whether the second part is useful. I think it would be more effective to go to the supervisor and explain the value the OP sees in the project. (In other words, make a business case for it. Show the supervisor it's not just a power play.)

    – jpmc26
    Aug 19 '15 at 0:53





    I'm with @Dukeling on whether the second part is useful. I think it would be more effective to go to the supervisor and explain the value the OP sees in the project. (In other words, make a business case for it. Show the supervisor it's not just a power play.)

    – jpmc26
    Aug 19 '15 at 0:53













    hat the supervisor is asking for is not micromanagement, it is management. It is not unreasonable to decide which projects outside of your own group a person can take on.

    – HLGEM
    Oct 10 '17 at 13:37





    hat the supervisor is asking for is not micromanagement, it is management. It is not unreasonable to decide which projects outside of your own group a person can take on.

    – HLGEM
    Oct 10 '17 at 13:37













    27














    You have an unrealistic view of office politics. You do need to play the game to some extent, you don't need to be duplicitous or use doublespeak. But making sure people know your achievements, making sure people want to cooperate with you are all good things and they are all office politics. You need to expand your view of office politics, no one can afford to ignore them.



    If you aren't playing, people will find you easy to defeat. They will find it easy to give you less than you deserve. They will find it easy to get rid of you. You ignore politics at your own peril and many a person has found themselves fired because they thought the game was beneath them.



    For instance in the case above, you might be making it harder to do something organizationally that you don't know about because you are helping out an organizational opponent. Perhaps your boss has more critical things he wants you to work on as well which is part of why he doesn't want you doing such things. And maybe the person is trying to get you assigned to him or to do something else to undermine your boss. You never help people who are trying to undermine your boss. Perhaps someone thinks you are not necessary because you have time for all this extra unapproved work. Your boss may be trying to protect you.



    That said, you don't have to be nasty to refuse the work. Nor do you have to be a snake to play office politics.



    All work above the first level of supervision is political. If you aren't helping your boss succeed, then you are harming him and he is the one who decides on your performance. Think about that.






    share|improve this answer




















    • 17





      What you describe is an unhealthy, inefficient, and honestly terrifying workplace, and an extremely pessimistic two-wrongs-make-a-right world-view, and I've never worked anywhere where this is the case.

      – AlbeyAmakiir
      Aug 17 '15 at 23:05






    • 13





      I'm not saying there's no politics - you can't have people without politics - but if people in your workplace are actively working to undermine each other, then it's bad for co-operation, will damage and weaken the business, and is terrible for the mental health of everyone to be around that all the time. It's not something you should just put up with.

      – AlbeyAmakiir
      Aug 18 '15 at 0:26






    • 4





      It tends to happen more in bigger companies. Entire departments are too busy fighting each other to actually get on with the job. One company I was working at nearly collapsed because some new senior management came in who were so busy playing each other against each other they never actually did their job.

      – Tim B
      Aug 18 '15 at 7:50






    • 5





      "You never help people who are trying to undermine your boss" seems to be a rather harsh army-like statement. I wouldn't generalize this that much.

      – dirkk
      Aug 18 '15 at 8:34






    • 2





      I don't think getting manager approval for things to work on involves you in office politics - doing this is just a very basic part of most jobs. But sure, the request itself may be filled with office politics (but being given that request has already pretty much put you in the middle of it, regardless of what you do with it) and the manager may take office politics into account when deciding what to make of these requests (but you don't have to get involved in that).

      – Dukeling
      Aug 18 '15 at 16:03















    27














    You have an unrealistic view of office politics. You do need to play the game to some extent, you don't need to be duplicitous or use doublespeak. But making sure people know your achievements, making sure people want to cooperate with you are all good things and they are all office politics. You need to expand your view of office politics, no one can afford to ignore them.



    If you aren't playing, people will find you easy to defeat. They will find it easy to give you less than you deserve. They will find it easy to get rid of you. You ignore politics at your own peril and many a person has found themselves fired because they thought the game was beneath them.



    For instance in the case above, you might be making it harder to do something organizationally that you don't know about because you are helping out an organizational opponent. Perhaps your boss has more critical things he wants you to work on as well which is part of why he doesn't want you doing such things. And maybe the person is trying to get you assigned to him or to do something else to undermine your boss. You never help people who are trying to undermine your boss. Perhaps someone thinks you are not necessary because you have time for all this extra unapproved work. Your boss may be trying to protect you.



    That said, you don't have to be nasty to refuse the work. Nor do you have to be a snake to play office politics.



    All work above the first level of supervision is political. If you aren't helping your boss succeed, then you are harming him and he is the one who decides on your performance. Think about that.






    share|improve this answer




















    • 17





      What you describe is an unhealthy, inefficient, and honestly terrifying workplace, and an extremely pessimistic two-wrongs-make-a-right world-view, and I've never worked anywhere where this is the case.

      – AlbeyAmakiir
      Aug 17 '15 at 23:05






    • 13





      I'm not saying there's no politics - you can't have people without politics - but if people in your workplace are actively working to undermine each other, then it's bad for co-operation, will damage and weaken the business, and is terrible for the mental health of everyone to be around that all the time. It's not something you should just put up with.

      – AlbeyAmakiir
      Aug 18 '15 at 0:26






    • 4





      It tends to happen more in bigger companies. Entire departments are too busy fighting each other to actually get on with the job. One company I was working at nearly collapsed because some new senior management came in who were so busy playing each other against each other they never actually did their job.

      – Tim B
      Aug 18 '15 at 7:50






    • 5





      "You never help people who are trying to undermine your boss" seems to be a rather harsh army-like statement. I wouldn't generalize this that much.

      – dirkk
      Aug 18 '15 at 8:34






    • 2





      I don't think getting manager approval for things to work on involves you in office politics - doing this is just a very basic part of most jobs. But sure, the request itself may be filled with office politics (but being given that request has already pretty much put you in the middle of it, regardless of what you do with it) and the manager may take office politics into account when deciding what to make of these requests (but you don't have to get involved in that).

      – Dukeling
      Aug 18 '15 at 16:03













    27












    27








    27







    You have an unrealistic view of office politics. You do need to play the game to some extent, you don't need to be duplicitous or use doublespeak. But making sure people know your achievements, making sure people want to cooperate with you are all good things and they are all office politics. You need to expand your view of office politics, no one can afford to ignore them.



    If you aren't playing, people will find you easy to defeat. They will find it easy to give you less than you deserve. They will find it easy to get rid of you. You ignore politics at your own peril and many a person has found themselves fired because they thought the game was beneath them.



    For instance in the case above, you might be making it harder to do something organizationally that you don't know about because you are helping out an organizational opponent. Perhaps your boss has more critical things he wants you to work on as well which is part of why he doesn't want you doing such things. And maybe the person is trying to get you assigned to him or to do something else to undermine your boss. You never help people who are trying to undermine your boss. Perhaps someone thinks you are not necessary because you have time for all this extra unapproved work. Your boss may be trying to protect you.



    That said, you don't have to be nasty to refuse the work. Nor do you have to be a snake to play office politics.



    All work above the first level of supervision is political. If you aren't helping your boss succeed, then you are harming him and he is the one who decides on your performance. Think about that.






    share|improve this answer















    You have an unrealistic view of office politics. You do need to play the game to some extent, you don't need to be duplicitous or use doublespeak. But making sure people know your achievements, making sure people want to cooperate with you are all good things and they are all office politics. You need to expand your view of office politics, no one can afford to ignore them.



    If you aren't playing, people will find you easy to defeat. They will find it easy to give you less than you deserve. They will find it easy to get rid of you. You ignore politics at your own peril and many a person has found themselves fired because they thought the game was beneath them.



    For instance in the case above, you might be making it harder to do something organizationally that you don't know about because you are helping out an organizational opponent. Perhaps your boss has more critical things he wants you to work on as well which is part of why he doesn't want you doing such things. And maybe the person is trying to get you assigned to him or to do something else to undermine your boss. You never help people who are trying to undermine your boss. Perhaps someone thinks you are not necessary because you have time for all this extra unapproved work. Your boss may be trying to protect you.



    That said, you don't have to be nasty to refuse the work. Nor do you have to be a snake to play office politics.



    All work above the first level of supervision is political. If you aren't helping your boss succeed, then you are harming him and he is the one who decides on your performance. Think about that.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited Sep 15 '15 at 16:49

























    answered Aug 17 '15 at 17:50









    HLGEMHLGEM

    136k25234498




    136k25234498







    • 17





      What you describe is an unhealthy, inefficient, and honestly terrifying workplace, and an extremely pessimistic two-wrongs-make-a-right world-view, and I've never worked anywhere where this is the case.

      – AlbeyAmakiir
      Aug 17 '15 at 23:05






    • 13





      I'm not saying there's no politics - you can't have people without politics - but if people in your workplace are actively working to undermine each other, then it's bad for co-operation, will damage and weaken the business, and is terrible for the mental health of everyone to be around that all the time. It's not something you should just put up with.

      – AlbeyAmakiir
      Aug 18 '15 at 0:26






    • 4





      It tends to happen more in bigger companies. Entire departments are too busy fighting each other to actually get on with the job. One company I was working at nearly collapsed because some new senior management came in who were so busy playing each other against each other they never actually did their job.

      – Tim B
      Aug 18 '15 at 7:50






    • 5





      "You never help people who are trying to undermine your boss" seems to be a rather harsh army-like statement. I wouldn't generalize this that much.

      – dirkk
      Aug 18 '15 at 8:34






    • 2





      I don't think getting manager approval for things to work on involves you in office politics - doing this is just a very basic part of most jobs. But sure, the request itself may be filled with office politics (but being given that request has already pretty much put you in the middle of it, regardless of what you do with it) and the manager may take office politics into account when deciding what to make of these requests (but you don't have to get involved in that).

      – Dukeling
      Aug 18 '15 at 16:03












    • 17





      What you describe is an unhealthy, inefficient, and honestly terrifying workplace, and an extremely pessimistic two-wrongs-make-a-right world-view, and I've never worked anywhere where this is the case.

      – AlbeyAmakiir
      Aug 17 '15 at 23:05






    • 13





      I'm not saying there's no politics - you can't have people without politics - but if people in your workplace are actively working to undermine each other, then it's bad for co-operation, will damage and weaken the business, and is terrible for the mental health of everyone to be around that all the time. It's not something you should just put up with.

      – AlbeyAmakiir
      Aug 18 '15 at 0:26






    • 4





      It tends to happen more in bigger companies. Entire departments are too busy fighting each other to actually get on with the job. One company I was working at nearly collapsed because some new senior management came in who were so busy playing each other against each other they never actually did their job.

      – Tim B
      Aug 18 '15 at 7:50






    • 5





      "You never help people who are trying to undermine your boss" seems to be a rather harsh army-like statement. I wouldn't generalize this that much.

      – dirkk
      Aug 18 '15 at 8:34






    • 2





      I don't think getting manager approval for things to work on involves you in office politics - doing this is just a very basic part of most jobs. But sure, the request itself may be filled with office politics (but being given that request has already pretty much put you in the middle of it, regardless of what you do with it) and the manager may take office politics into account when deciding what to make of these requests (but you don't have to get involved in that).

      – Dukeling
      Aug 18 '15 at 16:03







    17




    17





    What you describe is an unhealthy, inefficient, and honestly terrifying workplace, and an extremely pessimistic two-wrongs-make-a-right world-view, and I've never worked anywhere where this is the case.

    – AlbeyAmakiir
    Aug 17 '15 at 23:05





    What you describe is an unhealthy, inefficient, and honestly terrifying workplace, and an extremely pessimistic two-wrongs-make-a-right world-view, and I've never worked anywhere where this is the case.

    – AlbeyAmakiir
    Aug 17 '15 at 23:05




    13




    13





    I'm not saying there's no politics - you can't have people without politics - but if people in your workplace are actively working to undermine each other, then it's bad for co-operation, will damage and weaken the business, and is terrible for the mental health of everyone to be around that all the time. It's not something you should just put up with.

    – AlbeyAmakiir
    Aug 18 '15 at 0:26





    I'm not saying there's no politics - you can't have people without politics - but if people in your workplace are actively working to undermine each other, then it's bad for co-operation, will damage and weaken the business, and is terrible for the mental health of everyone to be around that all the time. It's not something you should just put up with.

    – AlbeyAmakiir
    Aug 18 '15 at 0:26




    4




    4





    It tends to happen more in bigger companies. Entire departments are too busy fighting each other to actually get on with the job. One company I was working at nearly collapsed because some new senior management came in who were so busy playing each other against each other they never actually did their job.

    – Tim B
    Aug 18 '15 at 7:50





    It tends to happen more in bigger companies. Entire departments are too busy fighting each other to actually get on with the job. One company I was working at nearly collapsed because some new senior management came in who were so busy playing each other against each other they never actually did their job.

    – Tim B
    Aug 18 '15 at 7:50




    5




    5





    "You never help people who are trying to undermine your boss" seems to be a rather harsh army-like statement. I wouldn't generalize this that much.

    – dirkk
    Aug 18 '15 at 8:34





    "You never help people who are trying to undermine your boss" seems to be a rather harsh army-like statement. I wouldn't generalize this that much.

    – dirkk
    Aug 18 '15 at 8:34




    2




    2





    I don't think getting manager approval for things to work on involves you in office politics - doing this is just a very basic part of most jobs. But sure, the request itself may be filled with office politics (but being given that request has already pretty much put you in the middle of it, regardless of what you do with it) and the manager may take office politics into account when deciding what to make of these requests (but you don't have to get involved in that).

    – Dukeling
    Aug 18 '15 at 16:03





    I don't think getting manager approval for things to work on involves you in office politics - doing this is just a very basic part of most jobs. But sure, the request itself may be filled with office politics (but being given that request has already pretty much put you in the middle of it, regardless of what you do with it) and the manager may take office politics into account when deciding what to make of these requests (but you don't have to get involved in that).

    – Dukeling
    Aug 18 '15 at 16:03











    14














    The simple answer is: No. You cannot completely avoid office politics.



    However, you can avoid a lot of the worst of it. Don't worry about what other people are doing, don't try and undermine them or bring them down. Just focus on your own image.



    If you build up your own reputation to be good at your job, perform well, be reliable, etc then you are not a tempting target for people to use as a scapegoat. So long as you are then careful not to get pulled into things you can remain mostly free of the fray.



    The problem with avoiding all politics though is that it doesn't take two to tango in this case. If someone decides to target you then you are now involved whether you like it or not.



    The key to success is making your own position strong enough that you are not likely to be attacked, while at the same time not making any enemies of your own. Which is a form of office politics again.



    By making sure that my contributions are visible, that I'm helpful and friendly, and that I don't ever pull other people down then in most places I've worked I've been able to remain completely free of the political side. That only hasn't worked in one company where everything was going to hell and everyone from upper management on down was desperately finding someone to blame but the culture there was so toxic that I didn't want to stay long and I moved on.






    share|improve this answer





























      14














      The simple answer is: No. You cannot completely avoid office politics.



      However, you can avoid a lot of the worst of it. Don't worry about what other people are doing, don't try and undermine them or bring them down. Just focus on your own image.



      If you build up your own reputation to be good at your job, perform well, be reliable, etc then you are not a tempting target for people to use as a scapegoat. So long as you are then careful not to get pulled into things you can remain mostly free of the fray.



      The problem with avoiding all politics though is that it doesn't take two to tango in this case. If someone decides to target you then you are now involved whether you like it or not.



      The key to success is making your own position strong enough that you are not likely to be attacked, while at the same time not making any enemies of your own. Which is a form of office politics again.



      By making sure that my contributions are visible, that I'm helpful and friendly, and that I don't ever pull other people down then in most places I've worked I've been able to remain completely free of the political side. That only hasn't worked in one company where everything was going to hell and everyone from upper management on down was desperately finding someone to blame but the culture there was so toxic that I didn't want to stay long and I moved on.






      share|improve this answer



























        14












        14








        14







        The simple answer is: No. You cannot completely avoid office politics.



        However, you can avoid a lot of the worst of it. Don't worry about what other people are doing, don't try and undermine them or bring them down. Just focus on your own image.



        If you build up your own reputation to be good at your job, perform well, be reliable, etc then you are not a tempting target for people to use as a scapegoat. So long as you are then careful not to get pulled into things you can remain mostly free of the fray.



        The problem with avoiding all politics though is that it doesn't take two to tango in this case. If someone decides to target you then you are now involved whether you like it or not.



        The key to success is making your own position strong enough that you are not likely to be attacked, while at the same time not making any enemies of your own. Which is a form of office politics again.



        By making sure that my contributions are visible, that I'm helpful and friendly, and that I don't ever pull other people down then in most places I've worked I've been able to remain completely free of the political side. That only hasn't worked in one company where everything was going to hell and everyone from upper management on down was desperately finding someone to blame but the culture there was so toxic that I didn't want to stay long and I moved on.






        share|improve this answer















        The simple answer is: No. You cannot completely avoid office politics.



        However, you can avoid a lot of the worst of it. Don't worry about what other people are doing, don't try and undermine them or bring them down. Just focus on your own image.



        If you build up your own reputation to be good at your job, perform well, be reliable, etc then you are not a tempting target for people to use as a scapegoat. So long as you are then careful not to get pulled into things you can remain mostly free of the fray.



        The problem with avoiding all politics though is that it doesn't take two to tango in this case. If someone decides to target you then you are now involved whether you like it or not.



        The key to success is making your own position strong enough that you are not likely to be attacked, while at the same time not making any enemies of your own. Which is a form of office politics again.



        By making sure that my contributions are visible, that I'm helpful and friendly, and that I don't ever pull other people down then in most places I've worked I've been able to remain completely free of the political side. That only hasn't worked in one company where everything was going to hell and everyone from upper management on down was desperately finding someone to blame but the culture there was so toxic that I didn't want to stay long and I moved on.







        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited Aug 18 '15 at 10:24

























        answered Aug 18 '15 at 8:33









        Tim BTim B

        3,5841125




        3,5841125





















            6














            I see no "office politics" here; I see only you going out of your chain of command and spending company time performing tasks that you are not paid to perform. You are there to do what your manager instructs, not what some other person asks.



            You cannot be "successful" if you continue doing this. Your manager will eventually have to drop you.






            share|improve this answer

























            • I know it's been a while since this was posted. But... my manager was quite upset when I left the company for 10k a year more than he told me I was worth and a commute that is only 1/4 what my previous commute was. And I'm about to hire one of my former coworkers away from him. So apparently I'm doing something right.

              – Bardicer
              Nov 3 '16 at 21:15






            • 1





              @Bardicer: Perhaps I should have said "you cannot be successful at that company". You'll never be able to disprove that, since you left.

              – Lightness Races in Orbit
              Nov 4 '16 at 10:02











            • That would probably be a much more accurate observation. Your answer came across with a much more negative impression.

              – Bardicer
              Nov 4 '16 at 13:17











            • @Bardicer: The scope of the answer is pretty clear.

              – Lightness Races in Orbit
              Nov 4 '16 at 14:48















            6














            I see no "office politics" here; I see only you going out of your chain of command and spending company time performing tasks that you are not paid to perform. You are there to do what your manager instructs, not what some other person asks.



            You cannot be "successful" if you continue doing this. Your manager will eventually have to drop you.






            share|improve this answer

























            • I know it's been a while since this was posted. But... my manager was quite upset when I left the company for 10k a year more than he told me I was worth and a commute that is only 1/4 what my previous commute was. And I'm about to hire one of my former coworkers away from him. So apparently I'm doing something right.

              – Bardicer
              Nov 3 '16 at 21:15






            • 1





              @Bardicer: Perhaps I should have said "you cannot be successful at that company". You'll never be able to disprove that, since you left.

              – Lightness Races in Orbit
              Nov 4 '16 at 10:02











            • That would probably be a much more accurate observation. Your answer came across with a much more negative impression.

              – Bardicer
              Nov 4 '16 at 13:17











            • @Bardicer: The scope of the answer is pretty clear.

              – Lightness Races in Orbit
              Nov 4 '16 at 14:48













            6












            6








            6







            I see no "office politics" here; I see only you going out of your chain of command and spending company time performing tasks that you are not paid to perform. You are there to do what your manager instructs, not what some other person asks.



            You cannot be "successful" if you continue doing this. Your manager will eventually have to drop you.






            share|improve this answer















            I see no "office politics" here; I see only you going out of your chain of command and spending company time performing tasks that you are not paid to perform. You are there to do what your manager instructs, not what some other person asks.



            You cannot be "successful" if you continue doing this. Your manager will eventually have to drop you.







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited Aug 19 '15 at 14:39

























            answered Aug 19 '15 at 11:28









            Lightness Races in OrbitLightness Races in Orbit

            9,85141938




            9,85141938












            • I know it's been a while since this was posted. But... my manager was quite upset when I left the company for 10k a year more than he told me I was worth and a commute that is only 1/4 what my previous commute was. And I'm about to hire one of my former coworkers away from him. So apparently I'm doing something right.

              – Bardicer
              Nov 3 '16 at 21:15






            • 1





              @Bardicer: Perhaps I should have said "you cannot be successful at that company". You'll never be able to disprove that, since you left.

              – Lightness Races in Orbit
              Nov 4 '16 at 10:02











            • That would probably be a much more accurate observation. Your answer came across with a much more negative impression.

              – Bardicer
              Nov 4 '16 at 13:17











            • @Bardicer: The scope of the answer is pretty clear.

              – Lightness Races in Orbit
              Nov 4 '16 at 14:48

















            • I know it's been a while since this was posted. But... my manager was quite upset when I left the company for 10k a year more than he told me I was worth and a commute that is only 1/4 what my previous commute was. And I'm about to hire one of my former coworkers away from him. So apparently I'm doing something right.

              – Bardicer
              Nov 3 '16 at 21:15






            • 1





              @Bardicer: Perhaps I should have said "you cannot be successful at that company". You'll never be able to disprove that, since you left.

              – Lightness Races in Orbit
              Nov 4 '16 at 10:02











            • That would probably be a much more accurate observation. Your answer came across with a much more negative impression.

              – Bardicer
              Nov 4 '16 at 13:17











            • @Bardicer: The scope of the answer is pretty clear.

              – Lightness Races in Orbit
              Nov 4 '16 at 14:48
















            I know it's been a while since this was posted. But... my manager was quite upset when I left the company for 10k a year more than he told me I was worth and a commute that is only 1/4 what my previous commute was. And I'm about to hire one of my former coworkers away from him. So apparently I'm doing something right.

            – Bardicer
            Nov 3 '16 at 21:15





            I know it's been a while since this was posted. But... my manager was quite upset when I left the company for 10k a year more than he told me I was worth and a commute that is only 1/4 what my previous commute was. And I'm about to hire one of my former coworkers away from him. So apparently I'm doing something right.

            – Bardicer
            Nov 3 '16 at 21:15




            1




            1





            @Bardicer: Perhaps I should have said "you cannot be successful at that company". You'll never be able to disprove that, since you left.

            – Lightness Races in Orbit
            Nov 4 '16 at 10:02





            @Bardicer: Perhaps I should have said "you cannot be successful at that company". You'll never be able to disprove that, since you left.

            – Lightness Races in Orbit
            Nov 4 '16 at 10:02













            That would probably be a much more accurate observation. Your answer came across with a much more negative impression.

            – Bardicer
            Nov 4 '16 at 13:17





            That would probably be a much more accurate observation. Your answer came across with a much more negative impression.

            – Bardicer
            Nov 4 '16 at 13:17













            @Bardicer: The scope of the answer is pretty clear.

            – Lightness Races in Orbit
            Nov 4 '16 at 14:48





            @Bardicer: The scope of the answer is pretty clear.

            – Lightness Races in Orbit
            Nov 4 '16 at 14:48











            1














            This is a no brainer. What politics? Economics.
            Who pays you're wages and who are you accountable to? If you're supervisor is you're immediate superior, it is his departments budget that is paying for your efforts to help someone else, who may be in a different department or work under a different budget. End of.
            If you've got time within your working day to do something for someone else, you could be being so much more productive for your own dept/group.






            share|improve this answer























            • My department is a sub department of the other one. The owner of the company pays my wages, not my supervisor. Technically I was hired by my supervisor AND a vp who is over all of the departments. My job duties are to provide solutions to increase the productivity of the company by four times with the current employees (that's the target goal). As such it WAS a no brainer for me. There have been other mentions of other people making power grabs, this was just the example I used.

              – Bardicer
              Aug 19 '15 at 16:35











            • @Nick: Doesn't matter; you're still doing something on the instructions of someone who is not your supervisor, instead of what you were already doing on the instructions of your supervisor. And you can't do that. End of story.

              – Lightness Races in Orbit
              Aug 21 '15 at 10:53
















            1














            This is a no brainer. What politics? Economics.
            Who pays you're wages and who are you accountable to? If you're supervisor is you're immediate superior, it is his departments budget that is paying for your efforts to help someone else, who may be in a different department or work under a different budget. End of.
            If you've got time within your working day to do something for someone else, you could be being so much more productive for your own dept/group.






            share|improve this answer























            • My department is a sub department of the other one. The owner of the company pays my wages, not my supervisor. Technically I was hired by my supervisor AND a vp who is over all of the departments. My job duties are to provide solutions to increase the productivity of the company by four times with the current employees (that's the target goal). As such it WAS a no brainer for me. There have been other mentions of other people making power grabs, this was just the example I used.

              – Bardicer
              Aug 19 '15 at 16:35











            • @Nick: Doesn't matter; you're still doing something on the instructions of someone who is not your supervisor, instead of what you were already doing on the instructions of your supervisor. And you can't do that. End of story.

              – Lightness Races in Orbit
              Aug 21 '15 at 10:53














            1












            1








            1







            This is a no brainer. What politics? Economics.
            Who pays you're wages and who are you accountable to? If you're supervisor is you're immediate superior, it is his departments budget that is paying for your efforts to help someone else, who may be in a different department or work under a different budget. End of.
            If you've got time within your working day to do something for someone else, you could be being so much more productive for your own dept/group.






            share|improve this answer













            This is a no brainer. What politics? Economics.
            Who pays you're wages and who are you accountable to? If you're supervisor is you're immediate superior, it is his departments budget that is paying for your efforts to help someone else, who may be in a different department or work under a different budget. End of.
            If you've got time within your working day to do something for someone else, you could be being so much more productive for your own dept/group.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered Aug 19 '15 at 16:28









            RichardRichard

            211




            211












            • My department is a sub department of the other one. The owner of the company pays my wages, not my supervisor. Technically I was hired by my supervisor AND a vp who is over all of the departments. My job duties are to provide solutions to increase the productivity of the company by four times with the current employees (that's the target goal). As such it WAS a no brainer for me. There have been other mentions of other people making power grabs, this was just the example I used.

              – Bardicer
              Aug 19 '15 at 16:35











            • @Nick: Doesn't matter; you're still doing something on the instructions of someone who is not your supervisor, instead of what you were already doing on the instructions of your supervisor. And you can't do that. End of story.

              – Lightness Races in Orbit
              Aug 21 '15 at 10:53


















            • My department is a sub department of the other one. The owner of the company pays my wages, not my supervisor. Technically I was hired by my supervisor AND a vp who is over all of the departments. My job duties are to provide solutions to increase the productivity of the company by four times with the current employees (that's the target goal). As such it WAS a no brainer for me. There have been other mentions of other people making power grabs, this was just the example I used.

              – Bardicer
              Aug 19 '15 at 16:35











            • @Nick: Doesn't matter; you're still doing something on the instructions of someone who is not your supervisor, instead of what you were already doing on the instructions of your supervisor. And you can't do that. End of story.

              – Lightness Races in Orbit
              Aug 21 '15 at 10:53

















            My department is a sub department of the other one. The owner of the company pays my wages, not my supervisor. Technically I was hired by my supervisor AND a vp who is over all of the departments. My job duties are to provide solutions to increase the productivity of the company by four times with the current employees (that's the target goal). As such it WAS a no brainer for me. There have been other mentions of other people making power grabs, this was just the example I used.

            – Bardicer
            Aug 19 '15 at 16:35





            My department is a sub department of the other one. The owner of the company pays my wages, not my supervisor. Technically I was hired by my supervisor AND a vp who is over all of the departments. My job duties are to provide solutions to increase the productivity of the company by four times with the current employees (that's the target goal). As such it WAS a no brainer for me. There have been other mentions of other people making power grabs, this was just the example I used.

            – Bardicer
            Aug 19 '15 at 16:35













            @Nick: Doesn't matter; you're still doing something on the instructions of someone who is not your supervisor, instead of what you were already doing on the instructions of your supervisor. And you can't do that. End of story.

            – Lightness Races in Orbit
            Aug 21 '15 at 10:53






            @Nick: Doesn't matter; you're still doing something on the instructions of someone who is not your supervisor, instead of what you were already doing on the instructions of your supervisor. And you can't do that. End of story.

            – Lightness Races in Orbit
            Aug 21 '15 at 10:53












            -1














            "Office politics" are avoidable. Actually the situation is not political so much as it is unprofessional and semi-bullying.



            I have been a contract engineer for decades. Some contracts call for a year or two of onsite work; other contracts range from a day to a few months. The shorter contracts are quite easy to avoid feuds and power plays: Just don't participate.



            In longer contracts, when it may seem to many that I am just another employee, it is usually sufficient to ask if they really want me—an hourly contractor—to do whatever it is.






            share|improve this answer


















            • 2





              The OP appears to be a permanent employee, not a contractor. While your advice applies to contractors (I am one myself and I use the same mentality as you advocate), it's not so useful for the OP's current situation.

              – Jane S
              Aug 19 '15 at 3:46












            • @JaneS: While I didn't explicitly write it, the mindset is easily adopted by employees.

              – wallyk
              Aug 19 '15 at 3:59












            • Perhaps you could edit your answer to make it apply to any employee, not just contractors.

              – Jane S
              Aug 19 '15 at 4:00






            • 2





              I don't think it's fair to compare OP's situation to bullying at all.

              – Air
              Aug 19 '15 at 4:10















            -1














            "Office politics" are avoidable. Actually the situation is not political so much as it is unprofessional and semi-bullying.



            I have been a contract engineer for decades. Some contracts call for a year or two of onsite work; other contracts range from a day to a few months. The shorter contracts are quite easy to avoid feuds and power plays: Just don't participate.



            In longer contracts, when it may seem to many that I am just another employee, it is usually sufficient to ask if they really want me—an hourly contractor—to do whatever it is.






            share|improve this answer


















            • 2





              The OP appears to be a permanent employee, not a contractor. While your advice applies to contractors (I am one myself and I use the same mentality as you advocate), it's not so useful for the OP's current situation.

              – Jane S
              Aug 19 '15 at 3:46












            • @JaneS: While I didn't explicitly write it, the mindset is easily adopted by employees.

              – wallyk
              Aug 19 '15 at 3:59












            • Perhaps you could edit your answer to make it apply to any employee, not just contractors.

              – Jane S
              Aug 19 '15 at 4:00






            • 2





              I don't think it's fair to compare OP's situation to bullying at all.

              – Air
              Aug 19 '15 at 4:10













            -1












            -1








            -1







            "Office politics" are avoidable. Actually the situation is not political so much as it is unprofessional and semi-bullying.



            I have been a contract engineer for decades. Some contracts call for a year or two of onsite work; other contracts range from a day to a few months. The shorter contracts are quite easy to avoid feuds and power plays: Just don't participate.



            In longer contracts, when it may seem to many that I am just another employee, it is usually sufficient to ask if they really want me—an hourly contractor—to do whatever it is.






            share|improve this answer













            "Office politics" are avoidable. Actually the situation is not political so much as it is unprofessional and semi-bullying.



            I have been a contract engineer for decades. Some contracts call for a year or two of onsite work; other contracts range from a day to a few months. The shorter contracts are quite easy to avoid feuds and power plays: Just don't participate.



            In longer contracts, when it may seem to many that I am just another employee, it is usually sufficient to ask if they really want me—an hourly contractor—to do whatever it is.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered Aug 19 '15 at 3:39









            wallykwallyk

            1494




            1494







            • 2





              The OP appears to be a permanent employee, not a contractor. While your advice applies to contractors (I am one myself and I use the same mentality as you advocate), it's not so useful for the OP's current situation.

              – Jane S
              Aug 19 '15 at 3:46












            • @JaneS: While I didn't explicitly write it, the mindset is easily adopted by employees.

              – wallyk
              Aug 19 '15 at 3:59












            • Perhaps you could edit your answer to make it apply to any employee, not just contractors.

              – Jane S
              Aug 19 '15 at 4:00






            • 2





              I don't think it's fair to compare OP's situation to bullying at all.

              – Air
              Aug 19 '15 at 4:10












            • 2





              The OP appears to be a permanent employee, not a contractor. While your advice applies to contractors (I am one myself and I use the same mentality as you advocate), it's not so useful for the OP's current situation.

              – Jane S
              Aug 19 '15 at 3:46












            • @JaneS: While I didn't explicitly write it, the mindset is easily adopted by employees.

              – wallyk
              Aug 19 '15 at 3:59












            • Perhaps you could edit your answer to make it apply to any employee, not just contractors.

              – Jane S
              Aug 19 '15 at 4:00






            • 2





              I don't think it's fair to compare OP's situation to bullying at all.

              – Air
              Aug 19 '15 at 4:10







            2




            2





            The OP appears to be a permanent employee, not a contractor. While your advice applies to contractors (I am one myself and I use the same mentality as you advocate), it's not so useful for the OP's current situation.

            – Jane S
            Aug 19 '15 at 3:46






            The OP appears to be a permanent employee, not a contractor. While your advice applies to contractors (I am one myself and I use the same mentality as you advocate), it's not so useful for the OP's current situation.

            – Jane S
            Aug 19 '15 at 3:46














            @JaneS: While I didn't explicitly write it, the mindset is easily adopted by employees.

            – wallyk
            Aug 19 '15 at 3:59






            @JaneS: While I didn't explicitly write it, the mindset is easily adopted by employees.

            – wallyk
            Aug 19 '15 at 3:59














            Perhaps you could edit your answer to make it apply to any employee, not just contractors.

            – Jane S
            Aug 19 '15 at 4:00





            Perhaps you could edit your answer to make it apply to any employee, not just contractors.

            – Jane S
            Aug 19 '15 at 4:00




            2




            2





            I don't think it's fair to compare OP's situation to bullying at all.

            – Air
            Aug 19 '15 at 4:10





            I don't think it's fair to compare OP's situation to bullying at all.

            – Air
            Aug 19 '15 at 4:10

















            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to The Workplace Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f52226%2fis-there-a-way-to-not-participate-in-office-politics-and-still-be-successful%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown











            Popular posts from this blog

            Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

            Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

            François Viète Contents Biography Work and thought Bibliography See also Notes Further reading External links Navigation menup. 21Google Bookspp. 75–77Google BooksDe thou (from University of Saint Andrews)ArchivedGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle booksGoogle Bookscc-parthenay.frL'histoire universelle (fr)Universal History (en)ArchivedAdsabs.harvard.eduPagesperso-orange.frArchive.orgChikara Sasaki. Descartes' mathematical thought p.259Google BooksGoogle BooksGoogle Bookspp. 152 and onwardGoogle BooksGoogle BooksScribd.comGoogle Books1257-7979Google BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGallica.bnf.frGoogle BooksGoogle Books"François Viète"Francois Viète: Father of Modern Algebraic NotationThe Lawyer and the GamblerAbout TarporleySite de Jean-Paul GuichardL'algèbre nouvelle"About the Harmonicon"cb120511976(data)1188044800000 0001 0913 5903n82164680ola2013766880073431702w6vt1sb70287374827140948071409480