Livro: Jogos Políticos nas Empresas
Autores defendem que estes jogos podem e devem ser minimizados
Setembro 4, 2009
Lançado no Brasil pela editora Campus-Elsevier, o livro Jogos políticos nas empresas é um guia prático para o mundo dos jogos organizacionais e proporciona uma profunda e acessível discussão sobre os 22 jogos mais comuns no trabalho, suas causas individuais e organizacionais, os custos empresariais e as soluções para o problema.
Especialistas organizacionais, os autores Mauricio Goldstein e Philip Read sustentam que os jogos políticos nas empresas podem e devem ser minimizados. Eles dissecam a dinâmica interpessoal que afeta o desempenho da empresa, proporcionam uma estrutura conceitual para compreensão dos jogos praticados nas empresas e oferecem ferramentas práticas para correção desses comportamentos e aumento da eficiência.
Para os autores, o jogos políticos nas empresas são comportamentos manipuladores que desviam a atenção dos colaboradores do cumprimento de sua missão. "Em nosso papel de líderes, é fundamental sabermos separar a arte do jogo da arte da liderança. Se tivermos preparados para isso, obteremos resultados autênticos e duradouros; caso contrário, os resultados serão devastadores para nós, para nossas equipes e empresas. Alguns lideram por imitação, servindo mais a si mesmos e às suas ambições pessoais", explicam.
Cheio de exemplos reais e divertidos, o livro é um valioso recurso para gestores e todos os profissionais que querem substituir os jogos pela conversa franca em suas empresas e aumentar a produtividade, o comprometimento, a inovação e - em última instância - os resultados financeiros. A obra fornece ferramentas para estarmos atentos aos jogos, a fim de evitá-los. Read e Goldstein fornecem os recursos multidimensionais para a condução das empresas a fim de superar a prática dos jogos, rumo a uma liderança autêntica e geradora de valores.
Jogos políticos nas empresas inspira a criação de uma empresa focada no propósito, apaixonada pelo serviço, conectada pelo relacionamento e capaz de produzir resultados sustentáveis. Trata-se de um mergulho profundo não apenas nos corredores e salas de reunião, mas na "mente" das organizações.
EDITORA CAMPUS- ELSEVIER
Categoria: Profissional Negócios-Administração/Gestão
Formato: 16x23 cm
Preço: R$ 65,00
Mauricio Goldstein é sócio-fundador da Pulsus Consulting Group. Ele já aplicou sua abordagem inovadora a várias empresas Fortune 500, como AstraZeneca, Camargo Corrêa, Cargill, Johnson & Johnson, Natura, Nestlé, Pepsico e Schering-Plough na América Latina, EUA, Europa e África.
Philip Read vem realizando, ao longo dos últimos 20 anos, trabalhos de gestão de RH para algumas das empresas listadass na Fortune 100. Ele viveu e trabalhou no Reino Unido, EUA, China, Suiça, Alemanha e Espanha e ganhou inúmeros prêmios por seu trabalho, incluindo prêmio de "Departamento de RH mais inovador" da PriceWaterhouseCoopers e Linkage, Inc. como parte do lime de liderança de RH da Dow Chemical
Games at Work
Across time and culture, companies have grappled with office politics: Gossip, Blame, Token Involvement, No Bad Feedback … the list goes on and on! Even the most transparent organizations can fall victim to office foul play, especially in the face of uncertainty—following a merger or leadership change, for example. The key to preventing office games is creating awareness of their ill effects and fostering an open and efficient corporate
Clique abaixo para baixar o artigo inteiro em formato PDF
Business Digest is a Paris-based monthly management review. Published since 1992, it helps leaders improve their understanding of the corporate environment and its evolution through dossiers covering management and leadership issues worldwide. For more information, go to: http://www.business-digest.eu/
Understanding the games office people play and how to stop them
Agosto 21, 2009
People play workplace games for two reasons: 1. They believe that win-win won’t help them climb the ladder. 2. In the hope of keeping their heads off the downsizing chopping block, they try to make themselves look better than their colleagues.
Time spent playing games like “Gotcha” (pointing out the mistakes of others) and “Blame” (you made mistakes and point the finger of failure at a scapegoat) keep you from doing what you’re paid for — your job.
Games do their damage beneath the surface, too. When a “watch your back” culture begins to thrive, collaboration, creativity, change, learning and innovation plummet. “Risk” becomes a four-letter word. Workplace gamesmanship verifies the reality of the “Dilbert” mentality.
Quitting the players' club
Agosto 24, 2009
OK, she may have been talking about smoking dope, but she could just as well have been referring to workplace maneuvering, whether it's blaming others or ostracizing co-workers.
To avoid these unproductive games, you first need to look inward. "It's not about the other. It's about you," says "Games at Work" co-author Mauricio Goldstein.
To get there, you have to be fed up with games on a gut, emotional level, he says, asking yourself: "Why am I playing these little games? Why am I encouraging someone else to play this game with me?"
You then have to decide on tactics, says co-author Philip Read. Ask yourself if you're in a position to "call" others on the games you're playing.
But pay attention to timing and don't grandstand like a self-righteous boob.
"We don't advocate that people go around and say, 'Ah, you're playing the Sandbagging game.'" Read says. "That's not effective."
Instead, start a tactful chat with co-workers and acknowledge your own participation in the games.
"When you engage from a place where you want to correct the other person, it is going to be bad," Goldstein says. "You need to engage in a conversation."
If you feel it's better to go to management with your concerns, back up your contentions with specifics on how the games are affecting the bottom line.
"Show that there's an organizational cost to it," says Goldstein. "Let's say we're playing a budget game. Show the number of hours we're taking to make these budgets. That often catches a manager's attention."
Then talk about how you can do it differently. A good way to do so is to examine root causes.
"We need to dig deeper into the game to find out why we are playing the game," he says. "Often it's to avoid confrontation."
Agosto 24, 2009
Even at the best companies, there's a certain amount of pointless balderdash that comes with the territory.
Meetings are held to weigh the merits of a decision that's already been made. A manager goes ape when a blameless underling delivers bad news about quarterly sales. The office slacker surfs the Web while 10 of her co-workers get the boot -- all because she caught the boss making a pass at an intern.
Call it a madhouse. Call it office politics. Call it the working life.
But a corporate consultant and a human resources executive put a different name on these and other morale-sapping maneuvers: They call them games, and say their effect on a workplace is "insidious."
"Games are manipulative behaviors that people use to gain advantage over others," says Mauricio Goldstein, a consultant to corporations around the world.
In the new book "Games at Work: How to Recognize & Reduce Office Politics," Goldstein and co-author Philip Read identify almost two-dozen annoying, obnoxious and dismal behaviors that amount to nothing more than games adults play at work. Everyone knows about them -- they're present even at the best companies -- but seldom do workers call a spade a spade, or even realize they're taking part.
"People will say, 'I think there's a lot of politics going on,' but they can't really put their finger on what it is,'" says Read, a human resources vet who's worked for a number of Fortune 100 firms: "They'll single out one or two people they think are political."
The games are so widespread that tribesmen in Borneo will lift their spears in acknowledgement of their universality. Goldstein and Read have identified three categories of games -- interpersonal, leadership and budget -- that often turn workplaces into a cross between an episode of "Survivor" and a grade-school recess. You may not have put names to them, but you've no doubt encountered at least a few of these.
Person to person
The most common games are in the "interpersonal" category -- those played between co-workers or that workers play with their bosses. Some favorites:
* The boss said: A common game that has its roots in "Mom said," wherein participants invoke a higher authority to add weight to their exhortations. As in, "The boss said he prefers you work sales in Arkansas while I suffer the indignities of our Hawaiian territory."
It doesn't matter if the boss actually said it or not, since the goal is to quash dissent, says Goldstein: "Let's not discuss it. Just do it."
* Big Splash Career Hopper: Everyone knows this superstar beloved by management, who greases the skids for promotion by proposing big changes, then is promoted before the damage is apparent.
The Hopper can be responsible for everything from acquiring the Midwestern company with the previously unnoticed $50 billion in asbestos liabilities to the purchase of 2 + 2 = 454,234.pi accounting software for a small department. There's one constant, though: The Hopper is never left holding the bag.
* The Blame Game: Another oldie but goodie honed to perfection in schoolyards the blame game is handy when "You don't want to take responsibility for your actions, so you blame somebody else," says Goldstein.
Common among those in leadership positions, it's often used to explain reduced bonuses, broken promises and poor performance: "I'd make you head of IT if only the cavemen in HR knew what the hell they were doing."
* Copy: The Copy game is when people use the cc on e-mails where it's "outside the need to know or the need to inform," says Read. Anyone who's gotten an e-mail -- cc'd to the boss -- about her obligations to the August numbers has been roped into a game of Copy.
* The Pre-Deal: Players of this one turn meetings into Kabuki theater by pretending there's going to be a considered discussion of a decision -- except that the decision has already been made. Their goal: to create the illusion that they're interested in somebody else's opinion, allowing them to "avoid the dialogue and the anxiety that you need to deal with when you don't know what you're going to get," says Goldstein.
* Gotcha: Straight out of elementary school, this one involves scoring points for highlighting others' mistakes. While a typical move is telling the boss about errors in someone's report, Gotcha players often dream of the game's hat trick: pointing out that Jeff in sales lost his division's biggest account because he was having an affair with his litigious secretary.
* Marginalize: Taking a cue from high school cliques, this game involves freezing out colleagues who are considered a threat, because they challenge the status quo, or are a boss' favorite, or just don't fit in for various reasons. It's often played in a passive-aggressive way: e.g., someone is "accidentally" left off a distribution list or otherwise cut out of the loop, or left out of social gatherings.
To add insult to injury, victims are often informed after the fact about being ostracized: "We really tore it up over drinks last night, didn't we, Bob? Oh yeah -- you were in a meeting when we left. Maybe next time!"
From the top down
While interpersonal games flow horizontally and upstream, the doo-doo rolls downhill in leadership games. For instance:
* Kill the Messenger: An ancient game that seems never to go out of fashion, in which a put-upon underling delivering bad news he's not personally responsible for feels the full gale of the boss' wrath.
Though the messenger suffers from broken eardrums, broken self-esteem and broken bones from the Russell Crowe-like hurling of office supplies, the boss is the ultimate victim.
"The problem is information is suppressed," says Read, inhibiting the tyrant's ability to make informed decisions.
* Gray Zone: A Gray Zone game exits when players go out of their way to create ambiguity about who's responsible for what. The goal: to avoid being held accountable. When there isn't a clear line of responsibility over certain areas of a business roles aren't defined, which allows people to pass the buck, much in the way a father tells his kids, "Ask your mother."
* The Window Watcher: This game involves putting useless or unwanted employees in non-jobs where they appear to be contributing something, but in reality do nothing of substance -- perhaps being shunted to a "special project" that involves little besides fingernails, an emery board and long sighs.
Bosses often play the Window Watcher game as a weak-kneed substitute for firing people, possibly to avoid an unpleasant interpersonal issue, or so they don't have to pay severance. What it amounts to "is you're killing the person slowly, psychologically," Goldstein says, often forcing them to quit.
Sticking it to the man
The third category of office gamesmanship is budget games, which pit workers and management against the company. They include "Sandbagging," where folks purposefully lowball sales projections as a "negotiating ploy" with higher-ups, and "Slush Fund," where people insert bogus "special funds" into departmental budgets to give them wiggle room if their assumptions about the coming year aren't correct.
What all these games have in common is they're controlling, recurring, reproductive and ultimately self-sabotaging, the authors say. And they're self-perpetuating, thanks to a monkey-see, monkey-do quality of corporate gamesmanship.
"It has a viral aspect to it," Goldstein says. "If you see that it works, then you start using it, too."
By identifying the games and their nature, he and Read hope to help people break the cycle.
Of course, solving the problem may be easier said than done, since the common thread winding its way through the many interviews they conducted for the book was a lack of self-awareness. People didn't admit to games they themselves played.
"All the stories we got are people telling us about games that other people have played," says Read.
Except for one.
"There's an awful lot of people playing the victim game," he says. " 'I can't do anything about the game because it comes from the top.'"
As the "Games at Work" authors formulated their book, one office pundit kept coming to mind: Scott Adams, who lampoons corporate life in the fabled comic strip Dilbert."
"These cartoons often derive their humor from the counter-productive games people play in the workplace," they write.
It helped catalyze the book. Goldstein adds, though, that their goal was to go a step further.
"He makes people laugh, but you don't do anything with the laughter," he says. Their question: "Can we take the laughter and transfer it into a different way of operating?"
Games at Work Interfere with Key Business Process
Mauricio Goldstein e Philip Read
Agosto 13, 2009
Organizational Experts Mauricio Goldstein and Philip Read, authors of Games at Work: How to Recognize and Reduce Office Politics, share some insight on specific office games that hinder productivity and the business process. Read on to see what they have to say:
"In our last blog we described games, and how they can interfere with productivity through sapping morale, becoming obstacles to learning, decreasing innovation and risk taking, and producing rigidity in the face of change. In this blog we want to describe how specific games can interfere with business processes.
One critical component of strategic planning is an objective assessment of the marketplace and the capabilities of the firm. Games have the potential to distort both.
No Bad News: Individuals present overly rosy communiqués; information flow from the external or internal world is optimistic or even falsified. This may result in over optimistic investment strategies for example.
Marginalize: Valuable information held by individuals who have been side-lined or blocked does not reach those who need to hear it.
The Boss Said: Information on the marketplace can be suppressed because of one individuals interpretation of what the CEO will think of this information.
Games can subvert decision-making by creating environments that are not level playing fields, and therefore increasing subjectivity.
Old War Hero: the person who has “seen it all” blocks fresh ideas because of certainty about their failure. Over time this reduces the groups ability to propose new decisions.
Great Idea: favoritism of one player gives unjustified momentum to their proposals or inputs to decision making.
Token Involvement: the CEO or other senior leader has already made their mind up but pretends to seek involvement or input without really wanting it or listening to it.
Gazeta (ES) - Fevereiro de 2011
ACREDITE. FOFCA FAZ BEM - Diná Sanchotene
Top 5 Games at Work
Mauricio Goldstein e Philip Read
May 18, 2009
We're talking about the manipulative behaviors that sabotage a workplace by destroying trust, stifling innovation, preventing learning and diverting time from customer to internal bickering.
How office politics sabotage the workplace
Mauricio Goldstein e Philip Read
Junho 24, 2009
Have you ever found yourself wondering why there is so much politics in the office? And how this wrecks both value-creation and many a career?
For example: Brendan, a smart new hire with an MBA, was the most junior member of a team that was put together to analyze growth possibilities for the company. Sensing a threat, others on the team "forgot" to brief Brendan before a key meeting, delegated to him time-consuming and low-level tasks, or picked his ideas to death. Eventually he threw in the towel -- and took his good ideas to a competitor.
When we lift the lid on office politics, what we find are "games." The game that was played with Brendan we call the "Marginalize" game: subtle exclusion, cutting people out of decision-making loops, for personal or political reasons.
But there are many more games that are played at work and over time they sabotage the workplace by destroying trust, stifling innovation, preventing learning and diverting time from customers to internal bickering.
Examples of games:
Gotcha: identifying and communicating others' mistakes to the boss.
The Boss Said: invoking the name of a senior executive to imply that what they are saying is gospel.
Abril 30, 2009
Oscar Wilde once said, "Illusion is the first of all pleasures," and business authors Mauricio Goldstein and Philip Read would argue that workers please themselves with the illusion that colleagues are always altruistic and unselfish, consumed with goals and cooperation. Sadly, Read and Goldstein suggest, workplace harmony is often imaginary, disguising devious, divisive game playing.
In "Games at Work: How to Recognize and Reduce Office Politics" Goldstein and Read outline how colleagues hurt each other, and themselves, by shifting blame, fudging facts and telling lies. The authors say game playing kills morale and diverts energy from work. But they acknowledge that games are human nature, used to assuage anxieties and cover individual and organizational flaws.
It's natural to play games, Read and Goldstein say, and equally natural to pretend that you aren't. Revealingly, the authors said, organizations that stress open debate, intellectual honesty and teamwork, have minimal game playing. At organizations stressing hierarchy and fear, game playing was more frequent and intense; people in these places think they need games to advance.
Abril 13, 2009
With the poor economy, stress levels are high and job security is down. In these conditions, workers are more likely to play "office games"—hidden agendas, manipulations and basic unproductive and malicious behavior—that offer them an escape from the workplace.
In the new book Games at Work, authors Mauricio Goldstein and Philip Read identify and address many of these office games created by today’s environment. The authors kick off the book by explaining what office games are and defining a few specific ones and then get right into how to go about avoiding these problems.
A few common office games include "Gotcha," where employees act like catching someone else’s mistake is an accomplishment; "Blame," in which people blame scapegoats to excuse themselves; and "Pessimism," when individuals make a task seem more difficult to lower expectations.
Goldstein and Read explain the negative impacts games can have on a business and why they have such an effect. The authors then urge the reader not to participate in such games and outline effective ways to carry out their choice, using the acronym AIM—Awareness, Identification, Mitigation—to outline appropriate steps to take.
Games at Work is full of bullet points, checklists and challenges directed at the reader. These make it simple to remember important ideas and easy for the reader to interact with the book, self-evaluate and improve.
Abril 30, 2009
Não há nada de engraçado nesses jogos mentais que ocorrem no local de trabalho, afirmam os autores desse sensato guia para compreender as manobras sub-reptícias no escritório. Entre esses jogos encontra-se "o chefe disse" (que invoca o nome do mandachuva, às vezes falsamente, para fazer valer sua opinião), a apropriação do crédito alheio e - esse delito testado pelo tempo - a indecente fofoca. Despertar para a existência dos jogos e rejeitá-los é uma grande parte da batalha para os executivos, dizem os autores. Mas não espere acabar com todos os jogos: isso seria "como tentar impedir que os empregados sonhem acordados.
Uma leitura fantástica não apenas para líderes e executivos seniores, mas também para os profissionais que querem crescer dentro de organizações complexas. Goldstein e Read dissecam a dinâmica interpessoal que afeta o desempenho da empresa, proporcionam uma estrutura conceitual para compreensão dos jogos praticados nas empresas, e oferecem ferramentas práticas para correção desses comportamentos e aumento da eficiência.
Jacopo Bracco vice-presidente executivo, DIRECTV Latin AmericaLeia mais...
Todos os direitos reservados © Jogos Politicos - Desenvolvido por Infoture