Ask HN: Resources for introverted devs to learn workplace politics?
I'm a junior dev and have been employed at my current work place for over a year. I love technology and code, less so humans. A lot less. If I had to guess I would say that I probably have some form of social anxiety/autism that makes it really painful/difficult/demanding for me to interact with other people, so I usually try to keep these "interactions" to a very strict minimum required to achieve the tasks I am attributed.
Now, recently, I've come to realize more and more, how much trouble this actually causes in the end for me, as I am perceived as that "odd" guy, that never says a thing, never hangs out at work place events, that you simply give tasks to, and ultimately the job gets done.
As I was searching to limit human-human interactions as much as I could, I ended up being treated like a machine, go figure... I get attributed tasks almost exclusively by sales/marketing people with absolutely no understanding of anything appart from the end result they want. Sometimes that ends up being a 2 word "spec", an unachievable task, some month long back and forths where they realize every other step of the way that what I implemented, which was what they asked, was not what they wanted, etc. So I am starting to get a little fed up by all of this and am at quite a loss when it comes to actually addressing these issues. I try, but I figure that I might as well document myself on the process instead of the usual trial and error one could go through.
Anyhow, as stated in the title of this Ask HN, does anybody have any ressources to recommend to someone that just started his carrier and has a demonstrated history of complete lack of such skills ? Anything is welcome really, books, documentaries, blog post, whatever you might have come across.
Thanks!
181 comments
[ 4.0 ms ] story [ 84.4 ms ] threadIt really came down to asking good questions. This allows people to help clarify themselves to you without you having to talk too much. It also builds your listening skills, which is probably one of the more important interpersonal skills you can attain. If you ask good questions, people will seek you out. Win-win for your interpersonal and professional goals.
As for resources, I recommend A More Beautiful Question: The Power of Inquiry to Spark Breakthrough Idea. It's a great book with actionable items to help you ask people questions they don't normally hear, which will help people not only understand you better, but help you understand them better. In the end I wouldn't be surprised if this book helps you help other people flesh out their ideas, desires and needs.
However, just reading a book on this subject is not enough. You will actually have to apply the principles in your everyday life. Dealing with people is kind of like an art. And just like any art (like painting) you can only get better with deliberate practice. Doing this might feel a little uncomfortable at first, but it's how we grow as people. Where I work, employees are offered tuition reimbursement for taking their official courses (https://www.dalecarnegie.com/en). The Carnegie courses helped me take the knowledge from these books and put it into practice. It was incredibly helpful for me, and aided in overcoming some of my social anxiety.
Another user also recommended toastmasters, which is probably an equal alternative if you can't get your company to pay for the courses.
It's incredibly easy to spot people who utilize concepts in that book and are not being genuine in their interaction. 'Masks' are a great way to prevent authentic connection.
I've found better utility in a combination of books about positive psychology, emotions in relationships, and analytical psychology.
What do you do when someone literally does not react to anything you say in any way whatsoever? I could tell them "Yeah, X sounds like a great idea!" or "Please don't do that, I think X would be very harmful to the project", and their reaction would be the same "OK thanks, guess I'll go do X now".
Then if doing X results in failure and they learn nothing from the experience.
1. You can talk to them directly, and say "I feel like we're not on the same page when we talk about X,Y,Z [what can we do to come to an agreement]/[why do you keep doing that?]" (the bracketed parts depend on who has what authority).
2. You bring it up with your manager.
There are ways to achieve the same effect without an equally bad appearance:
+ You can break the work into smaller chunks, to create more checkpoints
+ You can have a plan that is very specific about what is to be done that everyone agrees to in a written form (if you have a meeting, someone should take notes and have them circulated after the fact)
+ Most lightweight, you can not present the plan in one chunk, but talk it through, taking ample opportunity to reiterate and solicit agreement (if you do this right, the other person will repeat what you said, without you ever telling them to--everyone is happy)
Related to the concept of Strategic Questioning (https://www.context.org/iclib/ic40/peavey/)
They don't react to my statement at all - I don't think they disregard it, I think they don't listen to it in the first place.
I'm more than happy to refer you to him. Just pm me
It would help if you gave an idea on what you've tried.
As for your specific scenario, some points:
Don't have a telling posture. Even if you think it is a fact, present it with the posture of an opinion. "This is how I see it." Actively point out you may be wrong, and actively invite opposition "I'd like to hear other perspectives." You'll have to be sincere, because if people perceive you as the person who always wants others' opinions, but always dismisses them, people will very quickly stop offering them. I've seen this happen within a month of a new manager coming to our team.
Also, make sure you're asking open ended questions. Not questions that can be reasonably answered in a few words.
Starter Pack: Positive Psychology - Know your virtues - https://www.viacharacter.org/www/ - Know your strengths - https://www.gallupstrengthscenter.com/
Relationships - https://www.amazon.com/Relationship-Skills-Workbook-Do-Yours...
I recommend starting with these before diving into analytical psychology (they're more actionable than theoretical)
How do you know?
To clarify, you don't know how many people you interacted with that utilized those concepts but you haven't noticed at all.
You're right, there may be times I don't notice. I have no data to prove that.
IME, being in the moment and my body instead of in my head made it apparent that we aren't as clever as we think we are in social situations.
There's always something that can be found for mutual sincerity.
Some people interpret this to mean you have to fake interest in the subject, or you have to be honest that you don’t like said subject but it can also mean you take interest in the subject simply because the subject is of interest to the person you’d like to be friends with.
Again, this a bit of a skill and takes practice
Then they're not taking to heart the book's principles. An common theme behind a lot of his advice is based in being honest, sincere, and genuine. If they're not being any of those things then they're not doing it right.
At the very least, the utility of the book is that it teaches you how to play the game.
But that doesn't mean that someone who seeks to deal constructively and genuinely with people can't benefit from a book of observations on how people work and what does and doesn't work when interacting with them.
Yes, it's possible to take it too far and develop a fake, unnatural persona based on rule-following. So don't do that. But the book isn't about that anyway. For example, one of the chapters is about learning to just admit it when you're wrong. I see that as something a mature person ought to be able to do, and it took me a long time to learn to practice that.
If I find that my natural manner of interaction is offputting, and adopt a set of behaviors with the goal of not angering those around me is that so terrible?
Sometimes "manipulation" isn't some grand scheme to rule the world - it's just an attempt to carve out some autonomy and security in a world where overly emotional people can dictate your life.
One might argue that a coworker who will harm your career if you don't listen to them time waste and drone about their children or extorts you into social interaction (labels you "weird" or "aloof" if you won't go out after work with them) is the manipulative one - doing harm to force others to meet their emotional, non work related needs.
What you're talking about seems very different from that. Everyone faces situations where it just isn't practical to be completely sincere or genuine. We all have to put up a bit of a front from time to time. I don't think there's anything wrong it, as to some extent it's just the grease that keeps the social machine moving smoothly. In fact, if you didn't do it, you'd be creating unnecessary friction that really serves no purpose. As long as it's done for good reasons, it's fine or even good.
Of course, it's definitely much better if it's give and take, with both sides doing their part to adapt to make things work. If two people work together and one is very talkative and social, and the other is quiet and keeps to themselves more, the quiet person needs to engage in a little conversation, and the talkative person needs to understand that the other person isn't always up for that.
To the OP - in my experience, it's absolutely enough for a dev to be good to move up. That's the beauty of software development. Now, if you ever want to be a manager or a lead, it's definitely a different story.
Don't. You'll become utterly disgusted when you realize how many people use the "hacks" from that book on you and expect certain outcomes. Or if you insist, you can anti-hack them by doing the opposite of what they expected if you are bored (though significantly lowering your chances in the game of politics). Anyway, you'll see a pointless boring game played on all levels. Never seen a (not very capable) person perceivably insincerely asking something in a certain way, self-assured of its success, with arrogant body language, and then considering a person doing what was asked a disposable, predictable trash? Well, that book has something to do with it, even if it seemingly teaches the opposite, but certain agile people use it as a human hacking manual.
I was going to wait a few weeks, until I had more content ready, but might as well start now.
If anyone else is running into something similar, shoot me a note, we can get a 5-6 person study group together and I'd happy to provide some generic basics, and do a deeper dive into the specific issues you may be having (free of charge obviously, hopefully in exchange for some feedback).
Definitely think that training helped me a lot and one small thing I still remember to do all the time is to always ask "What do you think?" when discussing things with people!
Also work on being more at ease. "Limiting human interaction" is a bad route to go down to.
And finally on a positive note: learn to love your anxiety. Listen to what it says to you, knowing that its will ultimately help u do things better. People with no anxiety dont do things well. Learn to use it and master it to be better. Dont run from it
Just for some examples of what I've adopted:
(1) When you first enter into a conversation, whether with a single person, or a group at a meeting, come in with a big smile. And actually, the worse the situation, the bigger the smile should be. I got that from my boss's boss. Likely does no apply at funerals.
(2) When listening to someone explain something, when they pause, repeat the last few words they said and nod. Like if they say, "We can't add more labor to the Jennings account, because that would pull from the Labowski project and THAT just can't happen!". You (nodding understandingly): "can't happen."
(3) When talking to non-technical people, never say the word "no". Get the idea across, and be just as clear as needed that something is not possible, but do not actually use that ego bruising two-letter word. This grates like hell against my technical mind that prefers clarity and actual reality. But I've found "no" sets business people off like startled chickens.
https://under30ceo.com/never-say-innovation-4-lessons-improv...
I've noticed that conversations tend to go in interesting directions when you try to make it a habit of not fighting the premises that conversation partners lay out.
Maybe because they have a more holistic view of the purpose that you’re all there for.
As a developer, your job isn’t to say yes or no. It’s to understand the problem and solve it. If no solution is available within the constraints laid out, your job is not to deliver the bad news like a robot. It’s to understand the priority of the constraints and figure out which one(s) to break so you can solve the problem.
Not picking on you, but many developers lose sight of the purpose of what they do. No business wants or needs any code or developers to write and maintain it. It’s a means to an end, and a flat “no” betrays an inversion of priorities in the developer’s mind.
I write all this as a self-employee developer by the way. It’s one reason I make a lot more than my peers who could code circles around me.
You will get interrupted somewhere in your explanation. When asked for a less costly alternative, pitch anything you would be interested in doing, and make that explanation more opaque to outsiders than the original technobabble. They don't really care to hear what you have to say; they just need to know that there is a technical cover (that only the tech employees can really understand) for choosing the status quo.
Nothing sells quite like an excuse to never change.
If the question is "can you do X?" then the important part of the conversation, defining what X is, has already taken place. You're just there to support the decision that has already been made. Sometimes your job as an employee is telling the boss what all their options are, and sometimes it is telling the boss that what they are already doing is correct.
If you are your own boss, you are necessarily one step removed from the politics. You can do your customer relationship management directly. Customers that ask "Can you do X?" without first asking "Can you help us decide what X should be for us?" can be refused, or quoted a higher price. Self-employed contracting is in some ways a wholesale rejection of politics, rather than learning how to play better. your main concern is "How do I pay my bills?" rather than "How do I avoid getting fired, and possibly get promoted?" As long as you have enough paying customers, you can more safely uphold your professional ethics.
Politics isn't about doing the right thing. It's about picking the least-wrong thing from a restricted list of bad options.
[1]: https://youtu.be/BKorP55Aqvg
“Is this really impossible, or am I prejudging the acceptability to the questioner of the cost/effort needed?” and
“Is it likely that the questioner has prejudged a solution to their actual problem, and how can I get them to step back to the real problem, which may have a more-viable solution than the one they seem to be asking about?” (A lot of time, if you are familiar with the business domain, you can see the likely underlying problem yourself and just get them to confirm it, but otherwise you can try to walk them back to it.)
“Yes, it is possible, but it will take X, Y, and Z,” from which the client can decide it is not worth it is usually more honest, as well as more socially acceptable, than “no”.
And, “That would be difficult—but if you want to acheive X, A would provide the same benefit and be much easier to implement.” Can be better than both “no” and explaining the difficulty in th suggested course without exploring alternatives.
A couple of tips on finding truth in the social arena:
1. You have to find the truth by experimenting yourself. Set social experiments up deliberately and in a controlled environment [1].
2. Psychologists are mostly wrong due to the replication crisis. I didn't know this at the time, I've suffered the consequences I'm overfitted to detect human biases. I found that I know how people work much better than any psychology book (I did a bachelors in it). I also tested/experimented a lot more than any psychologist because I don't need to publish papers.
3. Self help books are about as wrong as psychology text books. My tip: go for the great classics (e.g. Dale Carnegie), ignore the rest unless you know that that person has a very similar profile like you.
4. When you experiment be ethical but err a little bit on the side for choosing for yourself. Chances are that you're too careful anyway. Slight transgressions are fine as long as you learn from them and rectify your mistakes. If you can't make mistakes then you're not in a place to learn anyway. My worst transgression was saying outrageous opening lines and looking at the effects of them [2].
5. Find books via HN just use the search bar or some aggregated data analysis on what books HN uses. That'll be a good application of 3.
With these tips you can find truth: ignore most books, test things yourself, do take the books for people who were like you (that's not an easy tip), err on the side of making mistakes. Personally, I haven't found an easier way and I learned this over 10+ years.
A couple of tips on dealing with anxiety:
1. Try to find core positive emotions that are natural to you. Mine are (in order): curiosity, fantasy/imagining things and playfulness (playfulness is already tricky). Identify it, frame everything like that. Curiosity goes really well with finding truth and experimenting. "How does this work?" is a question I often asked and tested.
2. Learn meditation, also helps in boosting emotional intelligence. I can write a book about it but I'll recommend you one instead. Search Inside Yourself from Chade-Meng Tan. Best book I know on the topic (I read a lot of them).
One tip on politics itself:
1. I don't know where I read it but it stuck. Social skills and political skills are different. There are people with good social skills who are not good politically. The reason is that political games are about groups not individuals. Learn how to divide and conquer (i.e. talk to multiple people 1 on 1 and push your ideas through that you are convinced about and think are good for the company).
On finding coaches:
1. Coaches are very hard to find. I've had several of them. The one that worked best for me was the one that showcased and demonstrated what was actually possible by doing it himself. All looked really social and good. But you need someone who's able to demonstrate and give real-time live feedback even during the conversation (in a covert way via text for example for obvious reason, or in ear also helps though I never tried that).
On using advice:
1. I am a sponge and would be too easily influenced by advice. A couple of questions you need to ask yourself for taking advice: (1) does the advice make sense to you? If it doesn't then why not (possibly do a couple of Google searches). If it still doesn't then leave that particular advice as on hold. Don't discard it but put it on the backlog and don't use it.
On dealing with people you tell that you're doing this:
1. If people are weirded ...
https://syntax.fm
My one piece of advice is to treat the problem like a really hard programming challenge -- it's a problem that definitely is solvable by you but will take a lot of work and learning a lot of new skills. You may never enjoy it or be the best at it, but you absolutely can do it.
Clearly you're on this path already by asking the question.
1 - Have a clear definition of your jobs remit in your own mind and be willing to say no entirely or partially to requests which are impossible or poorly defined. If someone hasn't given it thought themselves, why should you? This should be phrased in a polite manner and if they don't respond followed up after a few days to ensure blame cannot be placed on you.
2 - Identify key figures in your environment who are gatekeeprs/yield power in the business. These are people who you want to befriend or destabalise/reduce their power over you.
3 - Get some social skills outside of work, socialising is a skillset and can be developed regardless of the person. It is easier for some and more difficult for others but with practice you will improve, why not try a local tech club to test the water and maybe have some fun?
4 - Go to work events once you have some social skills. If you're terrible at even having a short, average conversation about the weekend for example, you will just be known as the awkward work guy who comes to events but no one likes..
5 - Understand what people want/their motiviations and their routine; If you can understand what makes a person tick and how they function, even on a low level you can use this information to either build rapport or to introduce chaos. An example of this would be a persons morning routine, if you know someone, lets say your boss arrives at 7:58 in the morning like clockwork, puts his bags by his desk and then gets ready to grab a coffee, why not ask him just before he puts his bags down and goes through the coffee thought process? You can talk about how the weekend was, maybe something funny that happened in the office etc and build rapport but also provide an outlet for venting.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiet:_The_Power_of_Introverts...
Also a side note even the most social person can be really antisocial. At one contract I had we had one guy lets call Joe that was the social butterfly would setup after work gatherings for the team and everyone seem to like. One day at lunch one of our co-workers was going through some bad stuff with his family, and Joe was pressing a joke on him that was getting him so upset that I had to hold back the co-worker from beating Joe. After lunch when I got Joe by himself I try to explain the situation, and why the joke wasn't consider funny and such in case it was just going over his head and he didn't realize what he was doing. Come to find out Joe understood, and did it on purposes. Joe actually disliked everyone on the team, and his way of blowing off steam was basically picking really random fights. You wouldn't think it from looking on the outside, but after learning that I start realizing all sorts of things.
Be polite, be considerate, don't take anything personal, don't over think it, and be yourself. I know easier said then done, but you got to go at it if you want change.
I think these are areas that definitely get a lot easier with age.
For me, the path out was making myself speak publicly.
1. The Ask A Manager Podcast and the audiobook on Audible.
2. Take a co-leadership course or read their book http://coleadership.com
2. Practice small talk:
-Ask others about their lives and thoughts and work.
-Listen.
Try to have at least one such interaction per day. This will be really hard at first, but it gets easier.
Politics is mostly leveraging relationships. You grow them with care and a little attention over a long time.
Here's a secret. Most people are uncomfortable talking to others. You're not alone. But once you make friends with others, interactions will be more enjoyable!
Good luck!
The only thing I should add is try and REMEMBER what they told you. If you ask the same question again and again, they will know you aren't really listening, which is almost worse than not interacting.
I find it hard to be genuine in these interactions and I think it shows :(
E.g. when you ask Sarah what she's up to on the weekend, remember she said "canoeing" so you can ask the following week how it went.
I find that helps so much when you're feeling confident enough to move past the "hi how are you?" stage.
The next time there’s a staff night out, go to it, drink, lose your inhibitions and talk to people.
It's a good tip because the OP needs just ONE interaction where he shows his colleagues that he is capable of the kinds of pleasant social interactions that they are.
This would break the ice for OP as well, knowing that his robotic reputation has been proved not totally correct, and will perhaps allow him to relax somewhat and take more risks socially.
Be careful, this can go sooooo badly!
A drink with coworkers is probably okay. "lose your inhibitions", however… no. Remain in control of your faculties, please. I've had to help more than one coworker who has drunk too much, and it is obnoxious, and it does lower my opinion of that person.
Don't feel obligated to drink alcohol, either. I wouldn't question it, and there are plenty of drinks that visually aren't distinguishable from alcohol if you need a cover (e.g., coke vs. rum and coke, sprite vs. gin and tonic), and a drink in the hand is a nice stressball of sorts. (And I've used "I have to drive later." as a reason to not have alcohol, but still enjoy the company of others.)
Lose your inhibitions is bad advice, my point was more to go to the social gatherings, make an effort to relax and talk to people.
It's purely my own experience that alcohol helps with this, as I can identify with OP, and I've found alcohol to help with my own anxiety in these situations, and has helped me relate to people and make friends.
Plus the original question is office politics. Socialising is a small component of office politics if you don't want to socialise.
Hard to tell why only some ppl 'suffer' from this. Maybe years of praise by parents/school teachers that you are some sort of 'good guy' and you yourself start believing that be to true at some point.
You could do a million things to overcome it but all of those would work shortterm and you would revert straight back to your introvert self as long as you have desire to be thought of as a good guy. Only sustainable "solution" to this problem is solve this issue.
https://www.amazon.ca/Power-Some-People-Have-Others/dp/00617...
https://www.amazon.ca/Getting-Yes-Negotiating-Agreement-With...
https://trainingcentre.secondcity.com/s/sc-class-category/a2...
Hopefully they have it in your city, or a similar resource, what was nice was that everyone was there for the same reason. The first class was very difficult, but it became easier and a lot of fun by the end. Hope that helps!
Honestly you have a work problem that is less personal and more process (or lack there of).
The key to cracking the poor specs is to return specs to the people making the requests. Learn to do quick and dirty Wireframes and storyboards. It is faster to draw a bunch of boxes and say "If I build this, is it going to do what you want". The first few times you wireframe it is going to take you a LONG time to get a product out - but if you do them for EVERYTHING your quickly going to get fast at the process. There are tons of tools to help you with this process so dont be shy about finding one that works for you and dont be afraid to go to pen and paper.
When your giving these to someone to walk through PRINT THEM OUT - people take paper an order of magnitude more seriously than an email attachment.
As for your anxiety - take public speaking - learn to give speeches, learn to tell a story that holds attention. It is a skill and you have to master it like every other one. You might not ever get to the point of being comfortable but you might be more willing to endure that discomfort if you know that you can be effective.
I also received some pretty sound advice around three years into my career: "just assume that people mean nothing more or less than the literal words they said to you. Don't read more into it than they actually say." I found that if I felt awkward about a situation, I was trying to read in between lines to find some reason that a person secretly hated me or were annoyed by me. They had never actually said or done anything to indicate that they even thought twice about me once I walked away, but I made up all sorts of stories about them in my head.
One of the most brilliant professors I have met fiercely preached this belief, and I can see how it can help some interpersonal relationships. But he took it to an extreme. When somebody asked him whether he thought Trump was racist, he responded "well, has Trump said that he is a racist?". The idea is that whether a person lies or not is immaterial; you should take the persons words as the ultimate truth. He is the most well published professor in the entire university, and an internationally respected mathematician.
I tend to read everything "between the lines," and I think about my professor's words often, because I wonder whether this habit is affecting my relationships.
It is one thing to say you aren't a racist, but if if you act like one all the time then congratulations, you actually are a racist even if you never say you are one.
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck.... it's probably a duck.
A wise response.
It is incredibly easy to smear a person in the “other” tribe.
Suppose a coworker offers you mints or gum every time you speak to them. If you only take their words literally, you'll think, "Gee, what a generous person," and miss entirely their true meaning: "Your breath stinks and it's bothering me but I don't want to hurt your feelings, so I'm giving you out where we can both pretend you fixed the problem before anyone noticed."
Yes. And yes, that's the way to go.
In my experience, when people of differing backgrounds try to read between the lines, you will get more damage than when things are simply not said. Absence of information leaves you somewhat open minded. Wrongly interpreted information often leads to bad decisions and fruitless battles.
If you've been the person that lots of people attribute stuff to because they read things between your words that simply did not exist, you'll know what I'm talking about.
>The problem is that there are many things people want to communicate but would rather not say because they're likely to lead to uncomfortable situations.
Completely agree. That's why the standard communication trainings/books focus heavily on making it safe enough for the other person to speak. There's no good alternative to that.
>Suppose a coworker offers you mints or gum every time you speak to them. If you only take their words literally, you'll think, "Gee, what a generous person," and miss entirely their true meaning: "Your breath stinks and it's bothering me but I don't want to hurt your feelings, so I'm giving you out where we can both pretend you fixed the problem before anyone noticed."
Sorry - I completely read the first half of the scenario and came to a different conclusion. As will many others.
I'm going to say what one book on communications essentially said: Utilizing tact is a poor fix to poor communications. People use tact because they do not know how to communicate well.
There isn't anything wrong with uncomfortable situations. I have a few moments every day where I am physically uncomfortable (correct response: stand up and stretch). Why should it be a problem if I am emotionally or socially uncomfortable (correct response: clearly state intentions, put a little bit of effort into making other people comfortable).
There is a difference between going out of your way to make people uncomfortable (bad idea), being blunt (not the best way) and being direct (escalating quickly if someone doesn't take a hint - most of the people I've seen doing this are successful). You can make people uncomfortable in a respectful and friendly way.
Basically, if you take everything literally and and the people around you who won't be direct; they are the problem. Try and work with them, but reading things in to what they say is not a great idea.
chapter names already give you some pointers