I agree with your point that part of the cause is getting more senior and actually watching the lies. But I don't accept that we should condone that behavior.
Full disclosure: I left Micosoft last year after I long debated the trade offs of starting my career over. I was a "top performer" and Microsoft makes a point of telling the many people like me to stick around for all sorts of reasons. Deferred compensation. Trajectory. Influence. Etc.
But then I actually got into the VP's circle and didn't like what I saw. This smooth-talking, confident leader within Office was some kind of sociopath. He and his comrades snickered after a middle manager announced he would put the blame on someone for failing to deliver a major feature. I was confused when it happened. Like one big inside joke, that would be my initiation.
This feature was promised three years ago to the previous President of the division, and it turned out to be a top priority for the incoming president. Well, the middle manager miscalculated and let it slip. We've all done this to some degree-- answer an email late, forget to deliver on a request -- it's part of being an engineer working with people. But the middle manager had done it at a big scale and was wrong.
Rather than admit it because that would end his career (as I'll explain in a minute), he threw someone else under the bus. He asked this senior PM to take the project over. Rather than give her support, he decided to undermine her. He had people give copious amounts of negative feedback on her specs, held back people from working with her, and lied about progress to management. He was setting her up to fail so he could swoop in and deliver it after she failed without the wrath of being late. We've all seen managers excuse being late because of low performers. The VP and his manager needed to construct a low performer. And all he had to do was signal to the herd to stay away from her with all the negative feedback.
The hell they put her through so they could save their asses. And the fucking snicker. She was a warm, smart, expert in this feature and had she been allowed to work she would have outdone the middle manager. But the middle manager was ambitious. And the VP seemed to like watching people destroy their lives. And he liked loyalty. He knew if he could get dirt on his managers he would keep them for a long time.
I try to be a good person. I try to be honest. I try to stand up for people. But I couldn't help her. For a year I gave as much moral support as I could without the inner circle knowing. But the politics were too thick and toxic to touch. I watched her nervous breakdown. And then I knew I had to leave. Maybe it really was this one bad team. But this was the rising star VP. If this is how he succeeded then the others VPs would have to eventually. And the middle manager was his replacement.
So, I got a different job. I took 3 months to travel in Europe to wash off the filth. And I checked in with my friend, and am pleased to hear that she has landed on her feet and is doing much better. At my current job the people argue about -- gasp -- the customer. What a difference.
But I am still angry that evil people -- the VP, the middle managers -- are allowed to continue. I don't agree we're supposed to be quiet. Food critics used to be afraid of giving bad reviews because they wouldn't be allowed to keep their jobs (in local markets unless you were someone politics would prevail). Now we have Yelp. Really bad restaurants should have a hard time of hiding. I wish there was something like that for managers and companies without blowback. I wish there was a way to give feedback on LinkedIn. The middle manager's profile is really funny to read. Apparently he runs all of big data at Microsoft. From Office. As a middle manager.
Anyway, my point is there is opportunity to expose evil people and good people in their careers. We should find a way to do it safely. People should have an incentive to be good.
EDIT: grammar mistakes