Neutralize workplace political attacks using the MOAR framework from Gartner research
/plugin marketplace add cameronsjo/claude-marketplace/plugin install political-attack-neutralization@cameronsjoThis skill inherits all available tools. When active, it can use any tool Claude has access to.
README.mdresources/decision-tree.mdresources/message-formula-template.mdresources/restoration-plan-template.mdresources/risk-assessment-checklist.mdscripts/decision-support.pySource: Gartner Research "How to Neutralize a Political Attacker" (G00775161, October 2022)
When political attacks cannot be resolved diplomatically, executive leaders must use power appropriately to neutralize inappropriate behavior while maintaining professional relationships.
Political attacks that advance someone's personal agenda at the expense of colleagues or the organization are common, especially during enterprise stressors like economic pressures, talent shortages, and burnout.
Types of Political Attacks:
When to Use This Framework:
Four steps to neutralize political attacks:
1. MESSAGE → 2. OBSTRUCT → 3. AGITATE → 4. RESTORE
Craft a clear, four-part message to send to the colleague and larger enterprise.
1. NAME the behavior
"Behavior X of yours violates this principle..."
2. STATE why it's problematic
"Behavior X causes problem Y..."
3. HOLD accountable
"Please stop that."
"Please fix the damage X caused."
4. MAKE consequences clear
"Or there will be consequences."
"And that applies to everyone else as well."
Compliance/Risk Scenario:
"This is not consistent with our best practices. It places the enterprise at financial and compliance risk and may not continue."
Behavioral Standards Scenario:
"This is not how we treat one another in this company. We hold ourselves to high standards of behavior, even when we are under pressure."
Example: Unauthorized Contract Signing
"Signing vendor contracts without involving procurement and architecture review (NAME) violates our enterprise governance policy (STATE). This specific contract must be reviewed for compliance, and all remediation costs will be charged to your budget (HOLD). Future violations will be escalated to the executive committee (CONSEQUENCES)."
Use power appropriately and proportionately to obstruct the negative behavior.
Ask yourself:
Potential to Neutralize:
Risk Assessment:
Choose tactics proportionate to the situation:
| Situation | Obstruction Tactic |
|---|---|
| Unauthorized contract | Work with finance to cancel contract |
| Non-compliant vendor | Block vendor product/service in areas you control |
| Policy violation | Charge colleague for all remediation expenses |
| Resource hoarding | Redirect resources through alternative channels |
| Undermining initiatives | Escalate to shared superior with documentation |
Obstruction will agitate the colleague. This is intentional and necessary.
Only allow as much agitation as absolutely necessary to get the message across.
Criticality of Message
↑
│
Enterprise │ ●────── Maximum Agitation
Policy │
│
Enterprise │ ●──── Higher Agitation
Communication│
│
Public │ ●── Moderate Agitation
Discussion │
│
Private │ ● Minimal Agitation
Discussion │
│
└─────────────────────────→
Number of People Who Need
to Hear the Message
Guidelines:
| Agitation Level | When to Use | How to Execute |
|---|---|---|
| Private Discussion | Minor infraction, first occurrence | One-on-one conversation, document in writing |
| Public Discussion | Repeated behavior, small team impact | Address in team meeting without naming names |
| Enterprise Communication | Policy violation, department impact | Department communication citing the policy |
| Enterprise Policy | Severe violation, everyone needs to know | Enterprise-wide policy reminder or update |
⚠️ Warning: Do not allow more agitation than necessary. Over-agitating creates martyrs and damages your reputation.
The restoration step is essential to a positive, long-lasting relationship.
Restoration takes place ONLY after:
Restore Trigger → "I'm Sorry" → Restore Actions → Thank Them →
Collaboratively Partner → Solve Problem Together →
Fulfill Enterprise Goals
"I Promise Not to Do It Again" - Colleague acknowledges mistake
Restoration Actions - Leader takes material action colleague will value:
Moving Forward Together - Demonstrate that accountability + growth = positive outcomes
✅ Restoration IS:
❌ Restoration is NOT:
| Scenario | Restoration Action |
|---|---|
| Unauthorized contract | Partner with them to find compliant solution that meets their business need |
| Resource hoarding | Include them in resource allocation planning for next quarter |
| Undermining initiative | Give them visible role in initiative's next phase |
| Policy violation | Ask them to help improve the policy or process |
Neutralizing a colleague without restoration will:
Do NOT use neutralization tactics when:
Use this decision tree to determine your approach:
Is behavior inappropriate and damaging?
├─ No → Monitor situation
└─ Yes → Can it be resolved through diplomacy?
├─ Yes → Use verbal diplomacy techniques
└─ No → Do you have power to neutralize?
├─ No → Escalate to someone who does
└─ Yes → Are you willing to restore them?
├─ No → DO NOT NEUTRALIZE (find alternative)
└─ Yes → Assess risks
├─ Unacceptable collateral damage → Find alternative
└─ Acceptable risks → Proceed with MOAR framework
Situation: Colleague under pressure signs vendor contract without involving required stakeholders. When confronted, blames others for slow processes.
MESSAGE: "Signing contracts without procurement and architecture review violates governance policy. This creates compliance risk and sets a precedent others might follow. The contract must be reviewed. Remediation costs will be charged to your budget. Future violations will be escalated to the executive committee."
OBSTRUCT: Work with finance to pause contract payments until compliance review is complete. Block vendor access to enterprise systems.
AGITATE: Enterprise communication sent reminding all leaders of contract signing policy (doesn't name colleague, but timing makes it clear).
RESTORE: After compliance review and remediation, partner with colleague to create expedited review process for urgent vendor needs. Give them credit for identifying process improvement opportunity.
Situation: Project is failing. Colleague publicly blames your team for not delivering infrastructure on time, when real issue was changing requirements without communication.
MESSAGE: "Publicly blaming other teams (NAME) without first understanding the full situation (STATE) damages cross-functional trust and is not consistent with our values. We need to review the timeline together and agree on facts (HOLD). Further public blame-shifting will require executive mediation (CONSEQUENCES)."
OBSTRUCT: Send detailed timeline to all stakeholders showing requirement changes and lack of communication. Request joint postmortem facilitated by neutral third party.
AGITATE: Public discussion - Postmortem meeting with all stakeholders present where facts are reviewed.
RESTORE: After colleague acknowledges miscommunication, partner with them to create shared project dashboard that provides visibility to both teams. Co-present lessons learned at department all-hands.
Situation: Colleague consistently hoards shared resources (engineers, budget, equipment) for their initiatives at expense of enterprise priorities.
MESSAGE: "Allocating shared resources exclusively to your initiatives (NAME) prevents the enterprise from delivering on strategic priorities (STATE). Resource allocation must align with enterprise priorities. Please release 3 engineers to work on the customer platform initiative (HOLD). Continued resource hoarding will result in centralized resource allocation (CONSEQUENCES)."
OBSTRUCT: Escalate to shared superior with data showing impact on enterprise priorities. Request resource reallocation decision.
AGITATE: Enterprise communication about resource allocation principles and alignment to strategy.
RESTORE: After resources are reallocated, include colleague in enterprise resource planning process. Give them opportunity to make the case for their initiatives within the framework. Publicly acknowledge their commitment to enterprise priorities.
This skill works alongside:
Successful neutralization:
This skill is based on Gartner research and is intended for executive leaders who must occasionally use power to protect organizational interests while maintaining professional relationships.