Conflicts of Interest at Work

thepowermoves.com/courses/power-university/lessons/intro-power-strategies-machiavellian-
intelligence/topic/conflicts-of-interest-at-work

Political awareness, as much as any good social and life strategy, starts with a good
understanding of the conflicts of interest.

This is true across all socialization.

Understanding conflicts of interest is a foundational aspect of learning advanced social
skills, power dynamics, as well as the scope and opportunities for collaboration (or
for manipulation).

And the same concept applies to the workplace as well.

Once you know how and where the interests diverge, you will better understand the
political chessboard -and you will be better placed to play that game-.
On average, the areas of diverging interest are also the areas where you must be most
careful, as you can expect more manipulations and lies.

As a rule of thumb, there is more potential for conflict of interest at work than
in most any other social exchange (including sexual ones).
See this great post from John when he realized this much.

This why, albeit most of this course and website strategies are geared towards increasing
the scope of cooperation and realizing win-win, keep in mind that at work, on average,
you must be more guarded, and dial-up your Machiavellianism.

Which is not to say that you should become an asshole, quite the opposite.
And this is also not to say, of course, that there cannot be win-win.
All our basic principles apply.
Seeking win-win, using cooperative frames, aligning interests, assessing others when they
have more power… These are all sensible strategies no matter where you’re at.

1/17
But, at work, you must be slightly more towards your cynical side, less vulnerable than
you usually are, and more generally guarded as to your real thoughts and feelings.

Assessing People When Conflicts Of Interests Arise

Advanced people skills also recognize and assess others based on how they deal with
conflicts of interest.

Givers, naive givers, socially unaware, and passive folks ignore the conflicts of interest, or
live life as if conflicts of interests didn’t exist.

Smarter players know of conflicts of interest.

They know the risks of giving, so they will either seek a balance, or demand guarantees.

Cynics, fearful, and defensive players, balk in front of conflict of interests. They are afraid
of being taken advantage of.
They stop giving, or they never start giving in the first place. So it’s up to you to make sure
they know the relationship is a fair one (we go back to the basics: using collaborative
frames).

Finally, proud value takers and defectors will always defect.

You must get rid of them.

Now, let’s review the conflicts of interest:

Boss VS Employees
This is between you and your boss.

1. You want to work for yourself, your boss wants you to work for the
team

The better the team performs, the better it looks on your boss.

Unluckily:

1. The better the team performs, the more you’ll struggle to stand out
2. The more you do “for the team”, the less you can do for yourself

Solution: Listen to “team you”

Leadership comes at a cost.
But those costs are smallest at work, while the rewards are the biggest.

And while you’re revving up for leading, don’t forget that alongside the “team” there is
“team you”, and both of them need your attention.

2. You want to move up, your boss wants to keep you in the team

2/17
The general rule:

The better you are at your job, the more your boss wants to keep you within
the team.

If you move up, you won’t be helping your boss anymore.

So if he lets you go, or he helps you advance, it’s because he’s a good boss.
Some are -and many more simply don’t have a choice-.

But keep it in mind.

Some unscrupulous bosses might work behind your back to thwart your advancement
opportunities.

3. You want to take credit, your boss wants to take it for himself -or the
team-
You want people to know about your good work because:

1. It increases your status

2. Puts in the fast promotion track

And of course, because it makes you feel good as well, which is equally important -and fair
to demand-.

But your boss does not want you to take credit for your work.
The ideal team for your boss is a team of faceless and anonymous individuals
whose good work all fall under his name.

And the opposite is true when the team makes some major mistakes: then he wants to be
able to point finger at someone and assign the blame.

Solution: Intelligent self-promotion

There is an in-depth lesson on self-promotion, so refer to that.

4. You want to keep your best customers for yourself, your boss wants
you to share them with the team
Valuable contacts, be customers or powerful people, are power.

You want to keep them to yourself only, because that gives you leverage. And if one day
you leave the company, you might be able to bring them with you.

Your boss instead wants you to share all your contacts with the team, so that they become
more of “teams’ customers” instead of your personal friends.
That increases his personal power as well as the team’s resilience, but it decreases your
leverage.

Owners VS Employees

3/17
 You want a raise? Sure, talk to HR here behind me

“Owners” refers to anyone with a sizable stake in the company -and its revenues-.

It can be the founders, the shareholders, or the upper management with stock options.

Sometimes non-owners also act like owners.

These are “company’s loyal squires”, but you might offensively refer to them as “kapos”.

They make the company’s interests, sometimes flatly against their colleagues, without
even having much stake in that company.

Sometimes they are in HR, and they feel they need to defend the company’s interest
against all the other employees.
But sometimes they are low-level employees who are happy to play the guardian role for a
pittance more than the bare minimum.

Don’t you dare being one of them :).

And let’s keep on learning:

1. You want to put yourself first, owners want you to put the company first
Owners try hard to instill a mindset of “we’re a family”.

The more they can convince employees they are all a family, the more the employees will
work hard for the company, without caring what they will get back.

4/17
That’s why much of corporate slogans and values are about “teamwork”, “team first”, “we”
or, at the extremes, “family”.

Businesses and CEOs love to talk about their organizations as families.

CEOs autobiographies gush over their love for the people and employees. And they sob
and weep at the heartbreak of having to fire their own family members when hardships
strike.

I have seen a similar theme across business titans biographies such as Howard
Schultz (Starbucks), Phil Knight (Nike), Sam Walton (Walmart), as well as CEOs and VCs
(Ben Horowitz).

And then, guess what?

They fire people anyway. Multiple times if needed.

Ultimately, the only entity to gain when employees think of their workplace as a family is
the business itself -and the owner-.

2. You want to be compensated with real cash, owners want to pay you
with “motivation”
This is where subtle manipulation kicks in.

And this is how you get things like:

1. We’re changing the world

2. We add value to our customers
3. We care about… (whatever)

This goes back to intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Vallerand, 1997. Or see Pink 2009,
for a more general public approach).

In short: the more the owners can reward employees with ideals and emotional rewards
(extrinsic motivation), the more output they can get out of those employees while also
paying them less monetary rewards (intrinsic motivation).

Solution: Money Talks, You Listen

Money talks straight, owners manipulate. Listen to money.

The Power Moves

Lemme preface this actually:

There is nothing wrong with extrinsic motivation, ideals, and values.

Actually, they are a great thing, and they provide real mental -and even physical- benefits.
But also: don’t lose track of the hard-cash transaction.
Enjoy the values, ideals, lofty goals and all the extrinsic motivation you can get. But make
sure you also get your full financial compensation for the value you bring to the table.

5/17
3. You want to pursue alliances with colleagues, but the company prefers
to deal with you as an individual

“Divide and conquer” masqueraded as teamwork & meritocracy

Why do owners hate unions?

Because alliances make you stronger, and can enable you to increase your leverage and
negotiation power vis-a-vis with the company.

Owners don’t like internal cliques, personal alliances, or organized groups of workers.
Not only owners dislike them because they empower you, but alliances also channel your
allegiance away from the company and towards your friends. The company doesn’t like
that.

You can see this same conflict of interest repeated at national and government levels, as
well.
The government frowns upon -or outright bans- any congregation that might potentially
pose a threat to the government itself -or to its ability to collect taxes-.

4. You care about doing well personally, the company wants you to care
about the company doing well
There is some overlap here.

If the company does well, its workers are more likely to do well.

But the overlap is not nearly as strong as the company would want you to believe.

6/17
Yes, it’s true that a “rising tide” lifts all boats, but as political strategist Brendan Reid
correctly points out (Reid, 2014), it’s also true that you don’t really advance much
when everyone else is advancing.
You advance comparatively, not absolutely.

And it’s often during crises and restructuring that opportunities for rapid advancement
arise -at least for those who know how to take advantage of the turmoil-.

5. You want to increase your skills, your company wants you “just good
enough” to do your job
Personal value is a two-edged sword for owners:

On one hand, a skilled and driven workforce is a boon.

But on the other hand, the more you improve, the more you will want to move up the
corporate ladder, ask for more money or, potentially, move to another firm.

Skills empower both you and the company.

But while you are always empowered with more knowledge and skills, the company does
not always and equally gain n all circumstances.

The company does want some of its employees to move upward, but not everyone.
And it certainly doesn’t want too many people striving for more, and asking for more.

The truth is, all companies need someone doing some monkey jobs. And
someone has to keep doing those monkey jobs, for peanuts salaries.

So, for a good chunk of employees, the company prefers them to just stay put where they
are.

Solution: Take all training and growth opportunities you can get
You can only gain from personal growth.
Take all training and stretch assignments you can.

This is exactly where working in a company is good from a Machiavellian point of view:
you can fuck up, and not be on the hook as if you were working on your own.

There are plenty of people who escape responsibilities and seek the easy way out.
Just make sure it’s not you who remains stuck in the monkey business.

6. You want to cover your ass, the company wants you to trust them
The company wants you to trust them.

First because when you feel like you can trust your employer you perform better, second
because you don’t waste time in “cover my ass activities” and, third…

7/17
Because when worst comes to worst, if you did not cover your ass, you have no leverage
whatsoever and you’re screwed.

Some companies will also try to break or bend the law when they smell that an employee
can be pushed around, so be particularly careful.

But even if you’re not the guy to be pushed around, you won’t go far unless you can state
your case with evidence.

Solution: Collect Evidence

Machiavellian power move:

Leave no traces of bad conduct, no matter how minor, while you start
recording all infractions from your employer.

You don’t need to use those records.

And you might not even want to use it.
As a matter of fact, I recommend you always go for win-win relationships, even with your
employer.

But simply knowing that you have the power to win a lawsuit immensely increases your
power and leverage.
And it’s just good insurance policy.

7. You Want to Keep Your Best Strategies Private, The Owner Wants You
to Share Them -Better Yet, Codify Them-
The principle is simple:

Knowledge that you only have, empowers you. Knowledge that is shared
within the company, empowers the company.

Hence, you want to keep your best trade secrets to yourself, while company owners want
you to share the information.

As a matter of fact, the company owners want to have that knowledge codified in simple
format so that even a monkey could do what you’re doing. So that they can hire monkeys
and pay monkey salaries

BTW: monkey is terribly offensive, but that’s exactly how a founder I spoke to addressed
his people in operations-.

See this example from “The Wolf of Wall Street:

8/17
Watch Video At: https://youtu.be/dCANT0nG3bY

Owner: So, what do you say?

Everyone: (reads from a script)

That’s the dream of every owner: everyone is the same, and everyone is easy to replace.

Solution: Machiavellian Hoarding of Wisdom

Now you want to be strategic here.

Emptying your knowledge can and making your results replicable without first ensuring
you get your fair share is too risky and should be avoided in most cases.

But not sharing anything will make you come across as a poor team player (and you lose
an opportunity to showcase yourself).
Remember that it doesn’t matter who you are and what you know, it’s what others see.

The Machiavellian approach is to share information and knowledge that sounds helpful
and deep, but that truly adds little value.

Another good technique to add value is to make sure that you will get something
back before you provide that value.
If you can systematize your knowledge in a way that everyone gains, go for it, it’s a great
opportunity. But first make sure you negotiate your fair compensation for it.

Old-Guard VS New Generation

9/17
1. You want respect & personal power, they want you to be an obedient
grunt
Culture has changed -luckily-.

Back in the days, the expectation was for lower-level employees to be at the beck and call
of senior folks.

But the senior guys did go through that mild hazing culture.
And so today the senior guys want to have the same hazing rights over the new guys
joining in.

They are also secretly resentful if you get to experience too much of an easy life and, of
course, they don’t want to give up their “right” bossing you around.

That’s how you get all-too common tropes:

The new generation is soft

They are entitled without giving anything (sometimes true, but not as much as some
people like to parrot)
They don’t appreciate the value of hard work

Most of the times, these are indirect cries for appreciation.

The people telling them is actually saying “look at ethically I’ve played the game and
appreciate me for it”.
So throw them a bone, make them feel good, then frame yourself as a hard worker who
“wants to be like him”, and you’ll be good to go.

2. The Slower They Climbed, The Slower They Want YOU to Climb

As a rule of thumb:

10/17
The slower they moved upward, the slower they want YOU to move upward.

Anything less will make them feel bad about themselves.

PRO Tip: Adapt your style to exec

Some executives are jealous of hard-charging upcoming young guns. Tune yourself down
with them, seem kinder and friendlier, like you want to learn from them and respect their
position.

Some other executives prefer hard-charging drivers.

With them, be a stronger go-getter.

3. You Want More Flexibility, They Want You to Sweat Blood and Tears
I remember years ago, when I was “SHINE talent graduate”.

We were presenting new ideas to the board comprised of all the most powerful heads of
our IT center.

My idea was to change the policies around home office. “We should remove the 2 days cap
a week, and scrap the need for the manager’s prior approval”, I opined.
That way, I argued, we could attract and keep more talent.
And if people abused the system, great! Such an easier way to find out who the bad apples
are, and who we need to let go.
I had data in hand: the new generations considered flexibility as important as salary.

The answer from the board?

A big laugh.

“These new guys want to come to work and chill with a beer”, said the biggest boss.
And all the other senior guys jumped on the chance

Of course: they did NOT have flexibility during their career.

So they resented people who could now enjoy or, sacrilege, demand it!

It was my mistake, of course.

the mistae was in framing the request.
I should have framed it as a win for the company instead of “making new recruits happy”.
And I should have paid homage to hard work and the importance of face-to-face
interaction as well, a wink to the “real” way of doing business, the way they did it (plus:
it’s true that face-to-face trumps online).
Machiavellian twist: I could have joined them in laughing “at the new grads”.
“But if these simps want to stay home with their moms, let’s give it to them, and we’ll even
save money in office space” (see what a Machiavellian power move? You make power-
align with them, pretending to laugh at the people who instead you’re going to help.
That’s Machiavellianism for win-win).

Individuals VS Team

11/17
And here we come.

Those whom the company frames as your closest brothers in arms, your colleagues in the
trenches… Are also your biggest competitors.

That picture says a lot about the interests of conflicts at work.

Especially, about the inherent conflicts between “team work” and the obviously limited
opportunities for career advancement.

1. You want to be promoted, and all your colleagues want to be promoted

This is at the heart of the individual/team conflict of interest.

Most people prefer to move up the corporate ladder rather than staying put. But there are
only a finite number of spots.
And that’s how your beloved colleagues turn into your number one competitors at work.

2. You gain a comparative advantage by keeping the best information,

while your colleagues want to learn as much as possible from you
The better you get at your job, and the more knowledgeable and skilled you become, the
more you become a valuable resource for the team.

Theoretically, you could teach a lot to the team, and help them reach your level.
But then, what happens?
If they all reach your level, your comparative advantage for promotions diminishes. And if
everyone is asking to receive your salary, there is less money to go around for your next
salary increaes.

12/17
So while those rabid dogs want to suck you dry of all you know and who you know, and
what you know… You actually prefer to keep it all for yourself.

Also read this post for more information on sharing knowledge:

Information sharing strategies: what to share, and when

3. You want to shine for yourself, the team wants you to share credit

There are two levels of conflict of interests when it comes to team work and promotion:

1. You want to take as much credit for yourself as possible, the team wants the credit to
be shared
2. You want to make great work, the team prefers you to do average work

The more you shine, the more you make the team look bad by comparison.

Solution: The Competition Switch

Separate human kindness from business competition.
Internalize within you that friendly and friends go together with competition at work.
Outside of work, an increase in warmth and friendliness means a decrease in competition.
But not at work.

Also, if your friends are lower-level performers, be friendly and warm enough so they
don’t turn into enemies or frenemies (remember the general rule that enemies
disempower).
But make your warmth descend from a position of superiority, as if you
were already their leaders.

4. You want to be close to your boss, the team prefers you to stay away
from him
Obviously:

There is an inverse proportion between how close you are to your boss, and the likelihood
that your colleagues will have to shine and being promoted.

You do want to be close to your boss, but sterilize your closeness with being warm and
friendly to everyone in the team, so it doesn’t seem like you’re a brown-noser.

5. Men want to keep power, women want to upset the system

This one deserves its own post.

13/17
It intersects with general intersexual dynamics, as well as with manipulation.
Women overblow the “patriarchy” -which is not completely made up-, while men tend to
play it down -including male academics who study this stuff and who should know better
and be more honest-.

From the main blog:

And more befitting to the workplace:

How men keep women down

Execs VS Stakeholders
This conflict of interest might be one of the best arguments against unfettered capitalism.

And it becomes especially salient during times of financial crises -especially in the
banking sector-.
Then, when the ship risks going down, you’ll see all the captains trying to ransack the
ship, and leave everyone else to hold the bag.

1. Executives want short-term profit, even if it might create problems in

the future
Some classes of powerful people have an interest for short-term profits, even if that
means creating far bigger problems down the road.

Politicians sometimes belong to this category.

Borrowing today, for example, helps politicians keep power, maybe even (indirectly)
taking some of that money, while pushing the problem of repaying that money to the
future generations (de Mesquita, 2003).

Sometimes the cycle of “gain, let someone else pay for it” is even shorter, with simply the
new class of elected politicians having to deal with the mess.

14/17
You realize you are in such a short-term profiteering environment when the bosses are
pressuring people to say and do what’s expedient instead of what’s true and, in the most
blatant of cases, to forego obvious standards of morals.

When that is the case, from a purely Machiavellian perspective, it’s best for you to work to
help the bosses line up their pockets and interests, and that will help you make a great
career.
Then you can move somewhere else before that ship will start sinking (bad management
doesn’t make for great companies).

See an example here from the documentary “Capitalism”:

Watch Video At: https://youtu.be/DOCx79xARc8

William Black: People who will give you the wrong answer, but the answer you want are
invaluable and they often get promoted precisely because they are willing to say and do
absurd things.

There is also a different approach possible though:

Dare to be black sheep

Once you’re pressured by those in power, there are strong incentives of both self-interest
and self-preservation to act unethically (and screw the invisible majority).

Still, know that there is a different road.

And it’s potentially even more powerful (albeit riskier).

William Black himself from the video above does pretty well for himself.
Di Pietro, the man who fought the Italian corruption system and gave birth to the huge
movement called “Clean Hands” also did great as a lone fighter (and he got my first vote

15/17
as soon as I could vote).

From a life strategy point of view, serving the corrupt bosses and helping them to make
more money by pushing the problem to the future is a safer way to gain personally.
While being the lone fighter can either get you kicked out very quickly, or it can make you
the leader of a new movement. Doing so requires lots of interpersonal skills and power
awareness, though.
And if you go that way, make sure the law on your side, and that you operate within the
law. Otherwise, it’s too easy for those in power to dispatch you.

2. Execs and owners want to privatize the gains, and collectivize the
losses

Similar to the above, and the two often overlap.

The further away and the more powerless the stakeholders are, the more the few in power
want to enrich themselves whilst pushing the costs to the many.

This issue is huge in politics, since politicians have access to tax money and the power of
the taxpayers once parted with their money is severely limited.

Owners and shareholders often have similar incentives to cut down the costs and let the
have-nots to pay the price.
The costs aren’t always a direct cost on people. Sometimes it’s indirect, paid with common
goods pollution, contamination, or depletion.
That’s even easier for shareholders to pull off, since people are even more unwilling to
rebel for what they don’t feel it’s even theirs.

There can be power, and even some potential personal benefits in making yourself the
“leader of the forgotten good cause”. But only if you do it outside of the corporation or
political party.
Doing it from within, especially if you do it too loudly, is political suicide.

You Can Still Work Through Conflicts Of Interests

Reader beware here:

being aware of conflicts of interest does not necessarily mean that you must
withdraw from the exchange, or refuse to give the other party what it wants.

Sometimes giving the other party what it wants is exactly how you succeed even when
there are conflicts of interest.
And if the other party reciprocates, then it’s also possible that you make the benefits of
win-win grow bigger than the potentials for conflict.

Conflicts of interests do not preclude indeed that there can be a win-win, mutually
beneficial relationship.
There are conflicts of interest everywhere after all. Even among mothers and children

16/17
(Buss, 1988).
Yes, mothers do care about their children, and few would argue with that notion.

Summary
Awareness of conflicts of interests forms the basis of political intelligence.

This lesson was high in cynicism, and it’s your task to make sure you don’t become too
cynical.

Remember that the general rules still apply: staying out of the exchange, no matter how
flawed it might be, is usually far more costly than partaking to the exchange.

And whenever you can, seek win-win and collaboration -especially with other high-value
players-.

And now that you are better aware of the workplace conflicts of interests, you are also far
more empowered to base your win-win on real-world power dynamics, rather than on
naive ignorance.

17/17