There are many different ways to play the corporate game. As I shut my eyes, profiles of individuals that are good at a particular style come to mind. There is a composite to each style – no one has it perfect, though some come close! A short reflection gives me a wide range of roles that I fall into.
The radical or contrarian likes to be seen as the rebel. The lead trait is one of being different. The individual often positions difference as a strength. In contrast, those around her/him often see an attitude of indifference and arrogance. Individuals playing this role are often sources of new ideas and different ways of thinking. Communities tend to embrace or reject, rarely anything in the middle.
Contributors value getting along above all other values. Goals can be secondary to harmony. Smooth relationships define the success of any method used. Often considered boring by others, every community needs hard working contributors if it is going to be successful. While key, contributors also tend to enable behaviors. For managers, the benefits outweigh the negatives, however these individuals require more attention than most are willing to give.
Agents are playing to win. Depending on the individual, the behavior others see can be viewed as manipulative, double sided, or slick. While I have a natural tendency to assign a moral scale to what I see, there are many examples that are seen as simply playing with the rules that one is given. One example is how a judge behaved. A historian notes his words and behavior. “‘When Captain Lysias comes down, I’ll decide your case.’ He gave orders to the centurion to keep Paul in custody, but to more or less give him the run of the place and not prevent his friends from helping him.” (Acts 24.23)
On any given day, I can play any or all of the roles. The question I wrestle with is why? What is my intent? How do my motives and actions play out in the lives of community? Am I willing to be accountable?
