As most have, I've seen and been effected by behaviors/scheming that have propelled the lazy, deceitful, manipulative liers to money/power while the honest, ethical, genuinely dedicated people/employees have (at best) been "passed over" or (at worst) quit out of frustration and/or due to being mortally "back-stabbed" reputationally.
And, human nature generally being a seamless continuum, behaviors in the office occur within families, between friends/acquaintences, social assemblies (eg: School Boards, Church Working-Groups).
To my personal frustration, people have generally surrendered to this situation; labeling it as "Office Politics", siting the inevitability of cronyism/nepotism in the work-place whose eradication is as hopeless as that of street-drugs.
Similar to Dr. Phil, I searched for previous work of others in this subject matter. However, I found the works of Dr. Robert D. Hare to be astoundingly pertinent. His "Snakes In Suits" is, in my opinion, spot-on as is the Video rendition of the book "The Art Of Urban Survival; a Family Safety and Self Defense Manual" (by Stefan H. Verstappen). At exactly 18:30 minutes:seconds into the 37:38 long "YouTube" video, the role-play/voice-over is incredibly precise in summarizing the modus operandi of these "bad" people.
Most interestingly, if you can picture the Elevational Path an Airplane takes ((1) accelerating down the run-way, (b) initial lift-off, (c) climbing to cruise-altitude and (d) leveling off), that is the profile/level of influence Predators gain as they "play" their "Mark" ("Target"); described as "Stages": (a) Assessment, (b) Relationship-Building, (c) "Predator's" entrenchment of "Soul-Mate" perception in the "Target's" Mind and (d) the complete surrender of the "Target" to the "Predator".... with one final incidious ("closing") act... abandonment of the "Target" upon his/her usefulness to the "Predator" being expended.
Similar to Dr. Phil, Dr. Hare has developed a Checklist against which a person's behavior ("badness") is evaluated on a Scale of 0 to 40 with such Checklist embraced by America's Justice System.
My opinion is that Dr. Phil's "Life Code" is a "soft" treatment of the subject matter; certainly valid and effective when dealing with "light-weight" to "light-middle-weight" "bad" guys. Dr. Hare's is definitely "heavy-weight" material. (ie: Dr. Phil's book includes a personal letter/"warning" to all "bad" guys while Dr. Hare doesn't. Such implies that Dr. Phil's "bad" guys are soft-core offenders that're somewhat receptive to "criticism". Dr. Hare's "bad" guys are "hard-wired" (unchangable predators) and will gladly take any morsel of information (ie: principles of behavior/behavioral therapy, potential victim's beliefs/attitudes)to add to the arsenal of deceptive/manipulative tactics.)
It's up to the reader to decide whether they're dealing with a pesky neighbor or busy-body office gossiper or a near "Satan Incarnate".
Regardless, I'm overwhelmingly happy that this subject matter is finally being recognized and addressed as an issue that can be delt with for, I believe, exposure is the worst nightmare of and best "weapon" against such Predators.
Where Dr. Hare's earlier work has a tinge of defeatism in it regarding the power (omini-potency) of these "bad" people over their chosen victims, I have valid hope to the contrary. I read of a Corporation's HR Department employing very skilled psychologists and of Employment Interview Models being developed/used that, during the interview process, subtly force-to-the-surface the true character of these perspective employees/"bad" people ('cause they can't help themselves) thru which they're rejected as employee candidates.
I believe the ultimate solution to Dr. Hare's hard-wired "bad" people is the hard-core tactic proposed by Thomas Sheridan ("Defeated Demons"); that being the definitive, global identification of these Personality-Types and subsequent rejection/isolation of such people. And, to a certain extent, such tactic may be appropriate with Dr. Phil's "bad" people (ie: "they can 'bad-mouth' me... but it'll be via long-distance calls"). People must reject the "Will Rodgers" paradigm ("never met a person I didn't like") and embrace what would be considered rude behavior... to out right and quite obviously reject interfacing (in any and all manners) with these people; for the "hard-core" "bad" guys are counting on people's penchant to be civil/polite to get a Toe-Hold of influence (or informational-resource) with them... to promote their schemes.