The first time this happened to me, I ended up losing my cool and said things that made it awkward in the workplace from then on (this was at another company). I didn’t use foul language, or say anything that violated company policy—it was actually pretty tame, but I definitely lost my normal composure. The bosses did absolutely nothing to rectify the situation. Most bosses don’t want to interfere unless they have to; they don’t like dealing with conflict. This time around, I’m not going to say anything. I plan on just grinning and bearing it.

We have a pretty high turnover rate, and I’m fairly sure that one of us will be let go within the next couple of years. No matter who is replaced, we won’t have to deal with each other for that long. I knew these guys were trouble from the first day they started working.

The first guy showed up to work late for a meeting and then proceeded to actually close his eyes throughout the morning meeting—like he was sleeping. None of the big bosses were in the room, so I guess he thought he could get away with it. With me, it was a terrible first impression, and one from which he never recovered. I had a meeting scheduled with him later that day to go over my own role with the company. When I showed up for the meeting, he responded by saying that it wasn’t on his calendar (he referred to a sheet of paper) and asked if it was critical that we meet. He was sitting there doing nothing; he wouldn’t even get his computer until the next day. I sized up the situation and immediately made up my mind to avoid this guy at all costs. I said, “No, it’s not critical by any means, maybe we can schedule it for another time.” Since then, I haven’t done anything to help him out—much less meet with him. He’s still not sure about my role with the company, and I could definitely make his job easier, but I never volunteer my services. I leave it to him to work it out. I should also mention that we’re the same salary level, although we have very different work hours because he shows up an hour late everyday and leaves an hour early. Everyone else has also noticed his schedule, and the office is starting to talk.

The second individual made a good first impression, but as I got to know him I realized that this person was fairly incompetent. He constantly needs to be micromanaged, doesn’t understand how to use basic Office software, and is afraid to learn anything new. As a person, he’s fine. As a work colleague, he’s terrible. Normally I can complete the task faster if I just do it myself as opposed to taking the time to try and train this person. He never writes anything down and has used up more vacation in the last eight weeks than I have in the past two years. He seems to just be hanging around and waiting for retirement.

As I said before, I don’t plan on making a scene at work. I’ll just deal with it and avoid both of them as much as possible. We’ve all had these situations before, and I think that in this case, the best course of action is to simply not take any action at all. I’ll let you know how it works out.

I should also mention that this colleague is very ambitious, although I don’t really know very many people who would turn down a promotion. He is definitely working to make as much money as possible. One of the more interesting points of our conversation centered around his belief that many of his new co-workers were fairly complacent with their position within the company, thereby creating more opportunity for a go-getter like himself.

In my past experience, promotions are not necessarily handed out because of merit. Sometimes they’re given out based on how long you’ve been employed by the company, in addition to about a hundred other factors that have nothing to do with job performance. His new company is very conservative in my opinion—more old-school based than cutting edge. Because of this work environment, I believe that he is quite possibly misreading the situation (I didn’t mention this to him in the conversation).

I believe that many of his colleagues are complacent because they know that taking initiative and working hard won’t necessarily yield a promotion. It’s more about just putting time in the office and being promoted when someone is fired, retires, or quits. I used to work for a company that had this exact same mentality. People didn’t display a go-getter attitude because they knew there was no place to go. When a position did open up, it was usually given to an employee who had a significant amount of time with the company.

Most of the people in his department, that are of a comparable level or higher, are Baby Boomers that have been with the company for quite some time. My own experience has taught me that this group is more concerned about paying dues than any other personal attribute. If I were to stereotype, Boomers believe that promotions should be given to those people who have demonstrated loyalty to the corporation. Adding value and generating new ideas aren’t as important as just completing tasks and executing procedures the way they’ve always been done. Boomers just want to get things done, and they’re not interested in learning new ways of doing things.

I hope I am wrong in my analysis of the situation, and I hope he gets that promotion he is looking for. I’ll keep you posted on how things work out. I should also point out that my own upward mobility seems to be limited at my current employer. I’ve decided to wait it out for awhile to let the economy pick back up. Once things are a little more stable in the markets, I might be looking to make a change myself.

If things continue to go bad, leadership will look towards layoffs. I’m not sure what is in the executive’s playbook, but I can assure you that it usually goes cost-cutting and then layoffs. They will look to eliminate positions that are more non-critical. For example, some companies will layoff personnel in sales. The reason being that other companies won’t be buying as much, so it makes sense to reduce the number of people who are selling; however, this can vary from company to company.

I would like to point out that I have never been layed off. Part of the reason for this is that I’m one of the lowest paid for my position. If you’re high on the salary totem pole (or low in seniority) and not an executive you need to understand that you could be let go and replaced by someone far cheaper. Another thing they will do is eliminate positions and start doubling up the responsibilities for the remaining employees. One Fortune 500 I worked for loved to do this. Just be ready if it starts happening at your workplace.

Another point that I would like to make about myself is that both my wife and I are employed. If one of us were to get laid off, the other’s salary could easily support our lifestyle. We live well below our means, something I don’t think most Americans do. Sure, most of our money is in the stock market and we’re taking a beating just like everyone else. We’re not retiring anytime soon though, and we really don’t care about taking a short-term loss. We have plenty of time to recover our losses. Unlike most employees, I also look for ways to take advantage of the current economic environment to make more money.

One of the ways I take advantage of a weak market is to buy stocks when everyone else is panicking. We keep a fairly large sum of money in an online account that receives an interest rate comparable to many bonds. We simply move this money out of savings and into the market when everything is low. We did this when the markets tanked after 9/11, and I am currently in the process of doing this right now. Again, we are able to take advantage of the economy because we live so far below our means.

In times of economic turmoil, be prepared to act on opportunities when you see them. Yeah, you could get laid off, but if you’ve prepared yourself properly, it really shouldn’t be a big deal. In the end, you might even find a better job later on down the road. Just make sure that you have your personal finances in order to weather the storm.

As Americans, we are brought up believing that hard work will pay off. Don’t buy into that kind of thinking. I’m talking from experience here. One of my greatest mistakes in Corporate America has been going above and beyond the call of duty. So far, it has gotten me a mid-level manager position with longer hours and less pay than many of my peers. Being the go-to guy really hasn’t paid off for me, and it hasn’t paid off for a lot of other people I know.

The idea of being paid for performance is a myth. Sure, I know some sales people who are compensated for achieving goals, but the economy will always take a dive at some point, and things like a commission don’t really depend on hard work; instead, it’s more about being in the right place at the right time. My advice is to do what you’re supposed to do and nothing more. In the end, you’re not going to be compensated for working harder anyway.

A good example comes from one someone I have known for several years. She has told me that she works a total of 20 hours a week. She has no metrics that really matter, and is left alone to do pretty much whatever she wants. She also makes over a $100,000 a year—a very good salary for her age and her low-cost of living area. She is employed by a very well-known Fortune 500 company and has excellent job security. Meanwhile, I’m killing myself and doing absolutely nothing that’s going to advance my career.

The trick it to work smarter, not harder. And by smarter I don’t mean being more efficient or getting more things. What I mean is putting yourself in a position to do the least amount of work for the most amount of money. Think about it, if somebody is going to do less and get paid more, don’t you want that person to be you?

Many of my colleagues love to travel on the company’s dime. They also don’t have a lot to do in the office, so it’s a chance to get away and do something other than stare at a computer. For me, it’s just the opposite. I hate traveling because I have too many things that need to get done from my desk. When I’m forced to travel, my workload doubles because I’m not nearly as efficient on the road as I am at my desk. Also, with all of today’s communications tools, is there really a need to get on a plane? Like I’ve said, I’ve already developed the relationships in person, why do I need to continually meet face-to-face when we can just do a videoconference?

Half the time I am forced to travel with my colleagues. Usually this angers me even more because when we get to our destination I usually have a million things to do while some of my peers basically sit around all day. Don’t get me wrong, there are a couple of other individuals in my department who need to be there and are just as busy as myself. My favorite is the Baby Boomer who always tries to fly everywhere but has nothing to do when he gets there. He also loves to tell other people about how much traveling he has to do and how important his role is to the company. Give me a friggin’ break!

When someone tells me they visit a lot of other countries for work, I always have to suppress rolling my eyes. You know the person I’m talking about. They try to pretend that there so much more worldly than everyone else because they spent some time in some foreign land. These people annoy me. I also love it when someone speaks multiple languages and expects me to be impressed. I could really care less. This is not a sign of intelligence to me, it’s just a sign that you have too much free time on your hands.

Do me a favor if you’re a frequent flier, keep it to yourself. No one cares, and if they do, they obviously don’t travel for work. You’re not impressing anyone; instead, you’re just embarrassing yourself for those who are in the know. Sorry for the rant, but sometimes you just gotta let it out.

I’m pretty lucky in that I have a very good boss—if I could get my e-mail under control—life would be even better. People shouldn’t be allowed to just send you a message, there should be a more stringent process. There should be repercussions for sending e-mail and requesting it. Sure, I understand that it’s a tool and I can definitely see how it helps get things done, but too many people are abusing the privilege.

There’s this pompous jerk at work that always wants someone to send him an e-mail (he uses this tactic to let people know that he’s in charge). Recently, he asked me to send him an e-mail regarding a topic at a meeting. I responded by saying that the information was already available at one of our internal websites and that he just needed to visit a very easy to remember website. We then had a follow-up meeting the next week, and he once again requested that I send him an e-mail. I responded again by giving him the name of the website. He then proceeded to send me an e-mail requesting the information for a third time, blind copying my boss. My boss then approached me and asked why I hadn’t sent the information. After I explained my side of the story, my boss told me to just send him an e-mail with a link to the site. I complied and sent him the message, but also blind copied some of the other team members on the project.

A couple of weeks went by and we just had our third meeting. Would you believe that he asked me to send him another e-mail? I responded by saying that the information he was requesting was on the same website I had already e-mailed him. He then responded by saying that he didn’t remember getting it—maybe there was a server error or something. The funny thing is that a couple of people in the meeting that I blind copied said they had received the e-mail. We all wrote it off to some technical problem that was probably unique to his Inbox, but everyone knew that he just hadn’t read the message. He’s always telling people what to do but never bothers to do anything himself, which includes reading his e-mail.

For the moment, he hasn’t requested another e-mail. I’m sure it’s just a matter of time. He’ll come at me again, and we’ll probably continue this vicious e-mail circle until the project is over. Technology can definitely improve productivity, but in the hands of an idiot, it’s just another tool to be idiotic.

It’s also important to distinguish between creating a resource for gossip and a resource that actually provides you with real and pertinent information. I know many office gossips. They tend to be a breed unto themselves, and for the most part, I’m not really interested in office gossip. If it helps you stay focused and interested at work, then I guess there’s no harm so long as reputations aren’t at stake (or maybe they are, and that’s what interests you). For the most part, I could really care less if an executive is secretly dating one of the employees (unless I’m working with the employee). I don’t really find the information useful, and honestly, I usually don’t care that much.

I try and build a grapevine that lets me know about announcements before they actually happen, or informs me about why certain moves or changes are being made. Developing relationships with people who are actually in the know can be difficult, especially if you’re new to a company. For the most part, it usually takes me at least a year to develop the kind of trust that is necessary.

I have also discovered that one of the best ways to get information is to regularly provide others with the information they find valuable. It’s a two-way street and you’ve really got to trust the people in your grapevine. With a good network in place, I often know about changes ahead of time, but even more importantly, I usually know why those changes are being made. I also know a lot of people at work who are regularly caught off guard by these announcements and never seem to know what’s really going on behind the curtain—don’t be one of these people.

Perhaps the most effective way I have found to galvanize a solid grapevine is to wait for something to happen where I’m in the know. An example of this occurred when one of my co-workers made a huge blunder and compromised his position within the department. I happened to be there when he did it. The event occurred away from our usual work location. I knew the information was valuable because our boss also knew about the incident and would probably enforce a change in procedures within our department.

I didn’t talk to anyone at first, but I knew where I wanted to make a “friend.” I strategically chose the person because I felt like they could be trusted and also provide me with insights from another department. Once I told him about the incident, he shared several interesting happenings with me as well. Since then, we have provided each other with critical updates, and our circle has grown to include several other people from other departments as well. This grapevine is one of my most trusted sources for information.

A good example of this is occurring at my workplace right now. There are a lot of big changes happening in my department. People are being moved around laterally, and there’s even been discussion of relocation for some employees. However, all of us are left wondering what this means in the grand scheme of things. Is this beneficial for my career, or are they looking to phase me out at some later date? None of us are being told what the bigger picture is. It’s hard to know how to best navigate your career when you have so little information to base your decisions on.

Information is the biggest advantage a boss has. I know it sounds cliché, but it’s true. For instance, one of my colleagues has already accepted a reassignment; however, there is disagreement amongst us as to whether he is being groomed for the next level or if he’s merely taking the first step to being replaced. There is another colleague who has made it known that he would like to leave the department, but interestingly enough, they have already told this person that this is not an option and that he will remain in the same role. What does this mean? Do they like the work that he is performing? Why make him stay when there’s an opportunity to move him out? Is he now stuck in his current role? Is his only option to leave the company? None of us knows.

As for myself, the options remain just as unclear. Certain possibilities are being discussed with me. I’m not sure what any of them ultimately mean for my career. It is highly evident that the higher-ups prefer to work in this ambiguous environment. The bigger picture hasn’t been revealed to any of us, and the bosses know that there are too many variables for us to work out without additional information.

I have learned to stop trying to control things in my career. It is an exercise in futility and has only caused frustration for me in the past. My attitude drives my wife crazy because it seems like I don’t care. In fact, it’s just the opposite, I do care, but I also realize that trying to control something that is completely out of my control is an exercise if futility. I will do what I think is best, but I certainly have no clue what that is at this point. What I am prepared to do is leave if necessary. It is the only option that resides within my realm of control. I have a strategy in place to find work elsewhere, and it’s a strategy that I advise everyone who works in Corporate America to have ready at all times.

This is in stark contrast to the men’s 100m final in track and field. Usain Bolt easily won the event, and really only seemed concerned about his own greatness. He could care less about his countryman Asafa Powell and only looked at him as another competitor he had to beat. Usain’s showboating and ego were incredibly offensive to me. In fact, all three medalists in the 100m seemed only concerned about their own self-interests. Usain didn’t even put forth his best effort, forgoing a faster time so he could do some showboating at the end of the race. This is also in stark contrast to Tyson Gay, who didn’t even make the final. Tyson displayed a humble and honest attitude that made me proud to be a U.S. citizen. Walter Dix, who took the bronze for the U.S., also seemed incredibly egotistical. The men’s 100m really seemed to be a microcosm of most of the employees I know in Corporate America.

In swimming, I saw a lot of parallels between compensation and Equal Opportunity laws in Corporate America. Jason Lezak has been one of the best sprinters for the U.S. for the past decade. He is also one of the lowest paid. His performance in the 4×100 freestyle relay was the stuff of legends—helping Michael Phelps win eight gold medals. On the other hand, you have Cullen Jones, an African-American swimmer who doesn’t have half the achievements of Jason Lezak, but received a $2 million contract from Nike in addition to numerous sponsorships for TV ads. He’s has far fewer achievements, but receives more money and fame because of his ethnicity. I’m not knocking Cullen Jones, he’s probably a great person, but that still doesn’t justify why he should receive so much more money than Jason Lezak. Compensation should be tied to performance, not the color of your skin.

In Corporate America, too many people are focused on winning the gold medal while focusing only on themselves. It’s possible to achieve greatness while being a team player and retaining some sense of humility. For me, the end does not always justify the means. I’d rather take a bronze and do things the right way than win gold and be a pompous jerk. Just my two cents.

In response to the question, I quickly replied, “Sure, it’s not a problem for me or my wife. We don’t have any kids and we’re just renting an apartment. We would welcome the change.” At this response, my boss gave a quick smile and said, “That’s all I needed to hear. I’ll get back to you soon with an update, but don’t discuss this with anyone else till you hear from me.”

A couple of weeks later, I was given the promotion. My new job was even located in the same facility. There was no relocation involved. My boss was only testing me to verify my commitment and loyalty to the company. Once I assumed this small position within the management ranks, I learned that the company issued random work tests like this all the time.

Another example occurred when they were considering promoting an employee who had only been with the company a short period of time. To help them make their decision, they decided to have this person speak at a rather large company meeting to judge his presentation skills under duress. They also planned to ask a couple of tough questions to put him on the spot. They were somewhat under-whelmed by his performance and thought it would be better to wait. To this day, I still don’t think that individual knew he was being tested.

The important take away is that you should always act and behave at work as if you’re being judged. Another good example is when I overheard one fairly high manager dismiss a promotion candidate because she thought the person dressed sloppily, always looked disorganized, and “sweated too much.” In the corporate world, you never know when you’re being watched, that’s why it’s always best to just be paranoid. It’s another reason why all of us cubicle jockeys are fairly crazy.