Jennifer Selby Long
speaker
698 appearances
14 recordings
1 series
first heard Nov 2024
last heard May 2025
Jennifer Selby Long’s voice in public audio — every appearance, attributed to the second.
Trend
recordings per month · last 12 monthsNo recordings in the last 12 months.Older appearances are listed below; set an alert to hear about the next one.
Appearances
It's such a great question. And as you were talking about this experience of you leave, you're starting a business, you see your colleagues get promoted. They're still sitting in their six-figure incomes. Oh, believe me, that one resonates with me personally. And it's not a straight line.
When I started this business, which is actually my second business, a few years after it started, we hit the dot-com bust.
and the business sank right and really struggled and then again we got hit in 2008 when the economy collapsed in the united states and it is so easy to fall into the self-sabotage and i want to really convey the important message that when you start to feel yourself self-sabotage that's not you That's the saboteur neural networks in your mind firing up. That's all that is.
And they're sitting in there and they jump out when they get a signal that indicates that there's a threat to survival.
Today's guest is an old friend of our show, Jennifer Selby Long. Jennifer was with us in Season 3, Episode 7 and 8. In the last 30 years, Jennifer has been helping tech leaders navigate the waves of tech evolution, leading and managing organizational change. But leaders can't successfully drive organizational change without being a master of their own personal transformation.
So last time, Jennifer and I looked into the natural process of personal change. We also talked about how to manage self-doubt and self-sabotage. Jennifer, welcome back to Chief Change Officer. You are setting a new record for us. For one guest, you are going to have four episodes under your own name. Indeed. Thank you for having me. I so appreciate it, Vin.
At the end of our last conversation, we talked about something that really resonates with everybody. How some people, when making career moves... leave a toxic boss or a harmful culture or an environment that is so vested in office politics only to find themselves in a similar situation at the new job. It's like running away from one problem only to land in another.
that led us into a bordered discussion on toxic cultures and even the role office politics play in these dynamics. We also touched on how some leaders or managers might unknowingly struggle with their personality disorders, which can contribute to these environments. Today, we are honing in on office politics specifically. Let's be real, who hasn't faced them?
Whether it's subtle power struggles or outright maneuvering is something everyone has encountered. Yet, when I type office politics into Google, I don't find as much as I expected. Maybe the term isn't as trendy, but that doesn't mean the problem isn't real or common. People might call it power dynamics, workplace dynamics, but the underlying issue is universal.
Do you think having a hybrid work model might actually help manage office politics? Or does it make things worse? On one hand, with less in-person interaction, people aren't constantly grouped together, which might reduce some of the tension that can build in close quarters. it creates a bit of balance. You're not always in the office, so those dynamics don't dominate your entire day.
But on the other hand, there's the behind-the-scenes factor. Those who want to curry favor with the boss could still do it privately in ways others might not even notice. is a different kind of politicking that could still cause issues, just less visibly. I imagine researchers are already looking into this shift and its impact on workplace dynamics.
What's your take on how hybrid or remote work influences office politics? Does it shift the balance? Or do you think human nature finds a way to keep the same patterns alive just in new formats?
When I worked in corporate, I collaborated with people across different locations. Hong Kong, London, Singapore, New York, Australia, all over the place. Remote collaboration was the norm for me, even without smartphones at the time. While the systems were smooth, politics was always present, whether locally or at the headquarters.
Decisions made at headquarters, often driven by power dynamics, would ripple out and affect us in Asia-Pacific regional office. You brought up the idea of some people being immune to politically charged environments. But I've also observed an other type of those who thrive in them. And here's where it gets frustrating.
In many organizations, it's not the most skilled or high-performing employees who stay. Often, it's those who navigate all this politics best. I've seen this firsthand. Imagine you have three people, A, B, and C. A and B are top performers, far better at their jobs than C. But somehow it's C who sticks around while A and B either leave for better opportunities or are squeezed out.
Sometimes bosses prefer it that way because they don't want to feel threatened. Leaders may say they want to hire people smarter than them to push the organization forward. But in reality, jealousy, ego, and sense of insecurity often get in the way. A boss might think, why should I keep someone who doesn't follow my orders, even if they are brilliant?
Even when colleagues or clients sing the praises of these high performers, it can backfire. A boss who feels overshadowed might quietly engineer a way to push them out. The result? Talented, hardworking people leave feeling disillusioned and disengaged, while less capable colleagues remain. It's no wonder we hear terms like burnout or disengagement tossed around.
But at its core, it comes down to a lack of respect and recognition for those who truly contribute. This cycle is what I have observed and even experienced myself. Those who stay aren't always the best performers. They are often just the best at playing the game. Jennifer, what's your perspective on this dynamic? How do we address this to create fairer and more effective workplaces?
Office politics, as its core, isn't inherently good or bad. It is simply a reflection of human nature in group dynamics. When people come together to work towards a goal, there's always an underlying assumption that everyone is aligned. But in reality, goals often clash. When priorities conflict, tensions arise.
people start using alternative methods to advance their own objectives and agenda at the expense of others. Sometimes, this is when things like back-stepping, bad-mouthing, or other manipulative behaviors emerge. It's not the politics itself that's the issue, but how it manifests. Pursuing individual agendas can erode trust and create a toxic environment. It's a cycle.
Showing 421–440 of 698 · page 22 of 35
← Previous
Next →