To wonder how much success at work is down to politics?

[superstarheartbreaker]

And how much is down to productivity. For example you might be fantastic at your job but if your boss hates you or is threatened then you won't get promoted. Any thoughts please.

Everything is to do with politics

If your boss hates you however good at your job you are your done for

That's why every office has one really lazy person who never seems to get the sack no matter how inept because the boss thinks he's a hoot ffs

Also I think if your very good looking you pretty much have a target on your back with other women if a office environment.

Personally when being interviewed by another women I often feel t hey are sizing you up and I have also felt people have not been given the job because xxxx wanted to tube the prettiest in the office and was threatened

Sadoldbag, are you trying to say that you could not find a job because you are too pretty?

A hell of a lot - I have been working in various environments, big and small, since I was 15 (now 35) and never ever have seen a workforce where politics didn't play a role - even if it was a minor one.

I think you can do ok with competence but you can do better with politics and unless you have politics on your side you cannot really achieve.

I worked for a large company a while back, there were several of us doing similar roles and on the same grade yet it was noticeable one woman always got given the easier options, got higher appraisal grades and apparently got paid considerably more than the rest of us. When I left she took over my role and really struggled with it yet she still got a top appraisal grade which was higher than any I had ever had despite me achieving agreed targets while in the role. Some faces fit and some don't.

Oh and YANBU to wonder

I agree politics at work can be hard to fathom. Something I've noticed is that people who are very good at their jobs are quite often overlooked for promotion whilst people who are average fare far better. Also, people who are incompetent or simply taking the piss quite often go unchallenged.

I've also noticed that jobs tend not to go to the obvious best candidate.

I've come to the conclusion that many bosses feel threatened by those who may prove to be "better" than them and don't promote them, preferring people who are unlikely to challenge them or show them up. And by the same token, many bosses fear those pisstakers who are likely to cause trouble so avoid taking them to task. I once worked with a guy who would come into work, "pop out" to the nearest pub for an hour and then plan his day around drinking. Despite complaints, it took years to get rid of him, and then he was paid off, not sacked.

It's the same thing with getting jobs, I think. Managers either appoint those like themselves, appoint those who look or sound the part( the halo effect) or appoint those they know are unlikely to show them up by being better qualified, more competent etc.

I doubt it, that would be v unprofessional and, if proved, could mean big trouble for individuals/the company.

But I've never had an office job so couldn't say for sure. Don't think it happens in teaching.

Its always about the politics and the closer to the top you get the worse it gets.

All organisations are political to some degree, and in a large company (especially at senior levels) it is your job to navigate the politics and have powerful relationships.

To what extent people play favourites/face fits etc varies massively from comaony to comaony and manager to manager. IME more successful companies have less of it.