Boss Management?

January 11, 2007 12:15 PM

How to explain company problems to bosses?

So, this small company I work for is divided into two sections over five employees. The bosses are married, one handles one side of the company, the other has the other side. The two paths never cross.
The problem lies in that one boss is nice, bends over backwards to please clients and give them free service. The other boss is a hard-ass, gets the bills paid, but spends tons on contract work that could be done in house.
In short, in my opinion, they could do better if they joined forces to use the best of their skills for both sides of the business.

How could I breach this subject of critical oversight, except in an exit interview... ;)

posted by emptyinside to work & money (19 comments total)

I think the answer is going to depend a great deal on your job title/level and your relationship with each of the bosses. Can you expand on that, maybe? (That is, if you're a brand-new, lowest-on-the-totem-pole employee, the answer is probably "don't," whereas if you're directly responsible for dealing with unhappy vendors or cash flow or something, the answer might be different.)
posted by occhiblu at 12:23 PM on January 11, 2007

If you're one of five employees working in a company and you don't know how to approach them with this then the answer is "you can't."
posted by phearlez at 12:29 PM on January 11, 2007

I learned the hard way that caring about the forest can make you look like a troublemaker. Tend to your trees and stay employed. Don't underestimate management ego.
posted by davebush at 12:38 PM on January 11, 2007

Seconding occhiblu.

One way of doing this, however, is to have a meeting with them in which you propose creating a new position in this company, who organizes the in-house takeover of the contract work you mentioned. Or offer a proposal of how these duties could be grafted onto existing positions. Of course, if you are trying to move up in the company, then you are conveniently available to make that suggestion.

Rather than try to convince them that their own tactics need to change, try to emphasize how this would save money and reduce the workload of boss #2.

Giving free service is less of a problem than overspending, so that problem can wait a bit until the company's finances reflect the money you've saved them. By then, this effusive free service will stand out more as an unnecessary loss for the company, and you'll be in a better position to propose ideas.

But yeah, if you're new, don't even say anything. Just bide your time. And even if you're not new and the bosses like you, be prepared to be shot down-- people often have vested interests in their management style, even if it comes at the expense of their company or employees. You can lead a horse to water, etc.
posted by hermitosis at 12:38 PM on January 11, 2007

Managing up not something for the faint of heart. Why don't you propose an idea to the whole company (heh) that you all have a post-mortem on a recent project to discuss what went right, and what things could be done differently to make the place run better, earn more $$, make everyone happy, etc. Keep it informal, and you can trot out some of your suggestions.

It is possible that the one boss doesn't understand the capabilities of the in-house staff, hence his/her failure to use them appropriately. Get everyone involved, keep it light and informal, and you may get somewhere.

Also, by "sides" do you mean that they are performing completely different functions, or is it more that they have two little redundant fiefdoms going (which is a terrible idea in an organization of that size.)
posted by Mister_A at 12:41 PM on January 11, 2007

Arrgh left out the verb in that first sentence. Managing up IS not something for the faint of heart.
posted by Mister_A at 12:42 PM on January 11, 2007

Very much depends on a few things:

• Your bosses' perceived attitudes to constructive criticism. This will dictate your overall strategy on what, when and how to discuss these issues with them
• Your ability to communicate constructive criticism effectively and your Negotiation Skills. If you are not a gifted communicator, start preparing by drafting bullet points you wish to make and make a mental checklist of how you feel you should communicate, e.g. dispassionately, uncritically, emphasising the positive even where change is urgently needed and so forth.
• How strong a business case you can make for change - you must be able to demonstrate their actions are harming the business' success with hard data. Show the bottom line and be prepared to back your arguments to the nth degree with solid research and facts from reputable sources, i.e. non-anecdotal

If you honestly struggle to be anything other than excellent in all three, you may have to sit quietly or prepare for that exit interview :)

Also and more generally, be sure you know what your objectives are here - are they truly altruistic, or are you trying to find opportunities for yourself? Nothing wrong with that if you are, it just helps to recognise it.

Be prepared to consider there might be good reasons for the separation of responsibilities being the way they are.

Lastly, I'm sure you won't, but avoid making the mistake of thinking your opinions and suggestions are the only way forward. Try to promote this as a group discussion to collectively uncover the best way forward, not as an 'I tell, you listen' meeting.

Good luck whatever happens!
posted by mooders at 12:45 PM on January 11, 2007

I would also say that, given that they're married, they may be fully aware of how they work best together, and that the strict work split is how they keep both their professional and personal relationships working without killing each other. This is seriously murky water you're wanting to enter.
posted by occhiblu at 12:53 PM on January 11, 2007 [1 favorite]

Oh wow, I just caught that they're married. Wow. Seconding occhiblu, proceed with caution.

I'd still like to know, however, whether they perform different duties or do more or less the same thing for different clients/accounts, etc. What is the division of responsibilities between them? If hard-ass boss is the CFO type, for instance, he/she should probably not be awarding freelance contracts - he/she should be bitching at everyone else about how much freelancers cost -- savvy? Knowing more about their respective roles in the organization is critical.
posted by Mister_A at 12:59 PM on January 11, 2007

Wow, what a response. I don't care enough to pilot an initiative / new division within the company. I've been here a year, ready to move on.
@Mister_A : yes, it's two completely different fiefdoms (i like that analogy)

basically, as my understanding goes, it's like two seperate companies are merged under the same name, in the same office, sharing bills. one headed by manager a, the other, manager b. a&b are hitched.
posted by emptyinside at 1:35 PM on January 11, 2007

Companies aren't democracies... they are more like fiefdoms.

Two things in your post strike me as odd....

First, how do you 'explain' things to them? This implies you (an employee) understand the company better than they (the founders) do. That may be the case, and you may be a Harvard MBA with 20+years experience and a track record, in whcih case, you have 'explained' many things to many people and you don't need advice. Or, this may be early in your career and you've got suggestions to make that may or may not be useful.

Second, do they want change? It may be that this dynamic is what they strive to achieve. There are a lot of scenarios that I can imagine where complimentary styles are useful. The post omits specifics.

If you've studied organizational structure, the evolution of enterprises, human nature, politics and interpersonal relationships AND/OR you have a savant's grasp of your new employer's organizational evolution, your input might be well received. Otherwise, you might find yourself in that vast crowd a TV producer friend of mine use to denigrate when he said 'Everybody is a director', meaning that there was no shortage of critics and "I could do better" bystanders.

If that's true in your case, and you can do better, you belong out there on your own, making your own mistakes and dealing with your own critics.

Otherwise... and especially if you're new to the work world, it's usually best to give advice when requested, be observant and learn from their mistakes. I don't mean this to sound as harsh as it does on re-read, but I don't have time to write less write now! Good luck and I hope it gets better for you somehow!
posted by FauxScot at 1:47 PM on January 11, 2007

I would be wary of any employer who would look down on a suggestion to analyze and reduce costs. Yes many companies are run like fiefdoms, but should look more like a research lab. I routinely ask my employer about areas in which they take non-intuitive approaches. Sometimes there is an explanation that I would not have been privy to in my regular course of business, sometimes there are oversights where costs could be produced but the labor and time involved outweighed the cost savings at the time the decision was made.

I do not like this, "sit down, shut up" approach being suggested by a lot of people in the thread. Good employers will value your curiosity and will explain to you the decisions. Not all decisions are purely quantitative but in such an instance it seems that no one has taken the initiative on this project.
posted by geoff. at 2:01 PM on January 11, 2007

Well, I think there's a difference between "asking" and "explaining" that some of us are trying to tease out. I would fully support openly asking why things are the way they are, and seeing if it's been thought out or just cobbled together, but I think approaching married business partners who you've known for one year and "explaining" why they're doing things wrong is an approach almost automatically destined for disaster.
posted by occhiblu at 2:08 PM on January 11, 2007

When you try to advise your superiors, there are a lot of things to keep in mind. The most important are the consequences to yourself of opening your mouth. If it's not going to benefit you personally in any way, don't bother.

One thing to remember is the natural human tendency to believe that oneself is right and others are wrong. Some people have this so strong that only bad things can happen to you if you ignore it.

Then, focusing on the content of your criticisms, you should know whether or not the person you're talking to

a) has the power to correct the problem. If not, you're commiserating, which is a social function but not a constructive one.

b) stands to benefit from correction of the problem. If not, you're wasting your time.

c) stands to be harmed (money, standing, job security, looking like an idiot) by correction of the problem. This isn't always obvious from the outside.

Considering the various interests at play, I find, obviates 99% of these discussions. Tread lightly.
posted by ikkyu2 at 2:57 PM on January 11, 2007

Good heavens, your bosses are married? I missed that on first read-through. So you want to give your boss marital advice?

Don't.
posted by ikkyu2 at 2:59 PM on January 11, 2007

geoff, my post sure sounds like that, but i was in a hurry.

I have never seen a relatively new employee granted instant and high credibility. It usually comes after several demonstrations of good judgment, and then, it's conditional. The big risk OP assumes is damaging his future circumstances with this outfit if he jumps the gun and tries to 'fix' things that may not be broken, just personally irritating to him.

It's tempting to offer him advice on how to approach them, but when his input is solicited, either spontaneously or when he successfully sets up the circumstances to have his advice solicited, they'll be more likely to listen to his input. In the meantime, the situation SOUNDS like a good chance to learn how things should/should not be done, and to work on the issues directly under his control, which, if he's effective, will be the surest way to credibility in that environment. Opening one's mouth can be quite career limiting and it takes a lot of mistakes to figure out how to do it and when.

emptyinside, pardon me if I sounded patronizing. If I'd had more time a while ago, I'd have aimed more for 'cautious'. Good luck, regardless.
posted by FauxScot at 3:06 PM on January 11, 2007

I've worked for two small (though not that small) companies owned and operated by married couples and made a few mistakes about trying to fix what I thought was wrong. I would hazard a guess that they are well aware of their differences, and at some point before you got there realized that the most efficient path to smooth operation was not to try and compliment each others styles but to divide and stay out of each other's hair.
posted by Martin E. at 5:29 PM on January 11, 2007

You can't. The managerial and corporate environment is set from the top down and the very fact that you have to ASK for a method of approaching them with a mere suggestion denotes that they are obviously not open to it.

The managerial guru, Deming, basically said that top management should always be open to employee suggestions because they are the one's on the front line, who know their tasks and how they should be done and and they ultimately, usually, want to do well. Deming taught this stuff to the Japanese back in the 50's and I think I read somewhere that the average GM employee makes MAYBE 2 or 3 suggestions per year regarding corporate imporvements and the average Honda and Toyota employee makes like 20 to 40 suggestions.

No one would be making 20-40 suggestions if the suggestions were shit-canned and not taken seriously. The Japanese worker is not inherently better than the GM counterpart but it's obvious the GM employee doesn't see the point in running into walls. Top - Down. You could be the next Jack Walsh and Steve Jobs rolled into one and your bosses wont want to hear it.
posted by Kensational at 5:30 PM on January 11, 2007

but spends tons on contract work that could be done in house....How could I breach this subject of critical oversight

if the person responsible for this gets some work back and complains about the quality or the cost or both in front of you, you can possibly spontaneously chime in with "yeah, you're right, Sally/Steve/I could have done that better." You might get told "We tried that, it didn't work" or you might get a glare that lets you know it's not a matter for you to have an opinion on. If the hard-ass doesn't comment on the quality/cost of the outside work in front of you, that may be a tacit clue that your input, no matter how enlightened, is not welcome. But that might be your "in" to broach the subject or get an explanation in a manner that is supportive as opposed to critical. YMMV. IANAcorporatepsychologist.
posted by Martin E. at 5:46 PM on January 11, 2007