I've heard a theory about clique dynamics that I deeply agree with:

If you never form gangs, stay heads-down focused on your work every day, don't participate in the kind of interpersonal infighting and factional disputes, and don't join cliques either. When someone mentions you, their first instinct is "this person is reliable."

Then you've actually moved into a dangerous position.

Because you're a variable that isn't controlled by any faction, yet comes with built-in reputation and credibility.

In an organization that runs on cliques, taking sides, internal circulation, and maintaining order, this kind of person isn't an asset—they're a threat.

This is deeply counterintuitive:

Anyone who's experienced power struggles understands that what truly makes people wary is never the people who love forming cliques, but rather those who avoid conflict, don't join camps, yet still earn trust.

From my experience, to climb the ladder, you need leadership favor, work competence, and grassroots support—all three are essential. You must have a leader's appreciation, you must have information channels, you must have trusted confidants. Otherwise, when competition shifts from individual level to hierarchical level, you'll definitely lose out.

When young, we're in awe of everything unknown. By middle age, you realize it's all makeshift operations—people are pretty much the same. The same position can be filled by anyone; there's a ceiling to how well or poorly it gets done. Those in the system probably feel this more deeply.

Humans are fundamentally social creatures. In an organization, what truly makes superiors wary isn't the most capable person, but rather the person with independent judgment.

Capability means they're manageable; judgment means they might not agree.

Essentially, organizations never pursue maximum efficiency—they pursue maximum stability.

Once a trust network forms that bypasses the center, the center loses its uniqueness.

So you see this strange phenomenon: problematic employees often still get tolerated, while the overly independent, overly clean, overly reliable people tend to get marginalized.

This isn't a moral issue—it's a structural one.

The system can accommodate cogs, but it can't accommodate a coordinate system.

And the so-called "reliable person" is precisely someone who brings their own coordinate system.