Glory or Security

I've been struggling with work this week. I'm right in the thick of a highly visible project. I have my hands in two important milestones needed to keep the project moving forward. I want roles like this, high stakes, plenty of responsibility, but I'm not very good at the task needed for one of the milestones. There are also so many moving pieces that I only have so much control over the project's progress. I'm close to finishing my part of the process. I just hope it goes smoothly after that.

As for the other milestone, I think I may have been a little too vocal in a meeting this morning. Two managers were expressing opposing views on a situation that has come up in the highly visible product. One manager thinks the issue is of little concern and we should just go about our business. The other manager has serious concerns and feels that we should proceed with extreme caution. I tend to agree with the position that the issue is not a big deal, but I made the argument that the cautious approach has significant merit. I was just trying to keep my meeting on track. I spoke to the manager I argued against after the meeting. I told him that I agreed with him even though I argued the other point. Looking back, I'm wondering if that was a good idea. That thought is immediately followed by questions as to whether or not the soundness of that confession matters at all.

I refuse to get really deep in work place politics. I do all that I can to protect my reputation, but I don't try to flatter or get ahead by manipulating a situation. As it relates to this situation, my reputation will rise or fall on whether or not my contributions to the project are in place so the project can move forward. Comments or arguments that I made in a meeting are not likely to have too significant an impact. As I've been replaying the meeting in my head, I've realized that I was far more aggressive in staking a position than a colleague who is driving other aspects of the project. His reaction to the attention given to the project has been one of dread and fear. I suspect that his managers have been leaning on him heavily to get things moving. Rather than accepting the situation as an opportunity to demonstrate his ability, I can tell that he's already planning his defensive position if things don't go well.

I have to wonder if it's better to take a firm stance in a meeting and be willing to put everything in a project to try and make it a success or if it's better to passively observe in a contentious meeting and not to put too much into a project if there is no clear success at the end. I plan on going all out (especially after I'm free of the burden that I've been bearing for weeks now), but is this the naive position? I would rather not work in an organization that tries to avoid failure rather than pursue success, but I know that my organization is extremely risk averse and always takes the position with the lowest level of risk (and reward). We would rather not lose than go for the win and fall short.

We always seem to make the safe play. That play keeps us safe, but it doesn't get us ahead. We're content to mill in the middle of the pack. I don't like the middle of the pack (high Z scores, remember). Will I bend to the organization or can I get the organization to bend to me?