Can't work with them, can't work without them

April 10, 2007 9:45 PM

How do you deal with, in a work setting, an incompetent individual or department? For the purposes of this question, assume that they provide an essential service, or would if they actually provided it, and can not be ignored or worked around. And for the purposes of libel, assume this is hypothetical.

I don't want to bias the answers by providing any more details at this stage. If you need a specific question answered, feel free to ask.

Bonus points if you explain how to cope with people you have to work with who blatently lie.

This is a serious question. Please only provide practical ideas.

posted by krisjohn to work & money (24 comments total)

Well, fire them? Can you explain why that's not an option?

Also a bunch more questions:

They're incompetent in the sense that, when you ask them to do a job, they try but can't do it? Or do they just not really try?

And then does someone else have to step in and do it for them? Or can nobody else do it, so it ends up not getting done?

Could their incompetence be fixed by training?

Do they lie about important things? To people in the office, or to clients, or who? What are the consequences of the lies? Do they lie because they think nobody will find out, or why?
posted by LobsterMitten at 9:57 PM on April 10, 2007

Well. Suppose you have a QA department who see their role in life to reject every single document revision submitted to them, thus threatening to de-rail every single IT project...

...I decided to fight them with their own weapon -- namely forms. I created a sign-off form, ostensibly for them to approve stuff, but with space for them to record the reasons for their rejections, and further space for them to record the regulatory reference supporting their reason.

They loved the form at first -- it seemed to be created in their honor -- but quickly realized that their sillier rejections (most of them) were now on the record. The rejection rate dropped from 100% of all document revisions, to about 20% of first drafts, and 0% of second drafts.
posted by blue_wardrobe at 9:58 PM on April 10, 2007 [4 favorites has favorites]

Oh -- and until the form -- there was blatant lying about the reason the documents got rejected.
posted by blue_wardrobe at 10:10 PM on April 10, 2007

ugh. a couple of years ago, i was working in a small office. after starting a new project, i began to realize that some of my work was being sabotaged. through some computer forensic work and a total stroke of luck, i was able to identify the culprit.

i took my complaint to the owner of the company. he refused to fire the other employee. i quit. he offered me an on the spot cash bonus to work until he hired a replacement.
posted by lester at 10:14 PM on April 10, 2007

Well, fire them? Can you explain why that's not an option?

While they can be fired, they can't be fired by me and have not been fired.

They're incompetent in the sense that, when you ask them to do a job, they try but can't do it? Or do they just not really try?

A little from column A and a little from column B. The end result is much the same...

And then does someone else have to step in and do it for them? Or can nobody else do it, so it ends up not getting done?

The second one. This is the main problem. Only they can do it, and they don't -- or they get it wrong. All. The. Damn. Time.

Hypothetically.

Could their incompetence be fixed by training?

Apparently not.

Do they lie about important things? To people in the office, or to clients, or who? What are the consequences of the lies? Do they lie because they think nobody will find out, or why?

They lie to me and other people trying to get stuff done. The result is that stuff that's supposed to happen doesn't and stuff that isn't supposed to happen does. While they don't deal with customers directly (mostly. I'm merging at least two examples into this one question) the problems they seriously inconvenience our customers.

forms

Unfortunately, for at least one major part of this hybrid, hypothetical, example, neither I nor anyone else trying to deal with this problem have the authority to enforce any sort of form.

Basically, I/we ask a person/department to do something. They say they're going to do it but it doesn't happen, or it gets completely screwed up. Plus, stuff that was fixed will break randomly -- then everyone involved points at everyone else and nothing gets fixed. Again. And again. And again. And again.
posted by krisjohn at 10:14 PM on April 10, 2007

When you ask, is it via email or phone? And if they say they're going to do it, is it via email or phone?

In other words, is there a way to create a record on the fly?
posted by blue_wardrobe at 10:21 PM on April 10, 2007

Sorry for your troubles. There are many variables here, so I'll have to be very general. I am assuming that in none of these scenarios are you their supervisor.

First, the incompetent individual:
Are they incompetent, or unmotivated? Is it possible they are capable of performing their function? If they are capable but not supportig you properly, you might want to consider talking with them. If they understand what your needs and responsibilities are, and you can create a reason for them to want to help you, you may have solved the issue.

Are there other people for whom this person also does not perform?

Reporting strucure is an important issue. If you've truly tried to win them over, or have determined they just don't have the skills/ability to do their job, you should talk with either your boss or with theirs. This can be tricky, so be careful and have supporting evidence. Keep a log for a week/month, with specific issues, dates, times, impact, etc.

If we're talking about an entire department, you may want to try a different approach:

Establish a connection with the dept. head. Find a reason to call/visit them, and compliment them on something. thank them; find something positive. Your goal here is to get inside their head, understand what their frustrations are, and, again, create a reason for them to want to help you.

Many times, people/groups withhold information, or do not do their jobs, simply because they feel disempowered, unappreciated, and ignored. They "act out" as a means of control. Get them on your side.

Usually, for me, I'll call and say, "Wow. You guys must be so busy. I'm sure you get hit from so many different sides every day. I really appreciated when you ... And I am so sorry to have to ask, but is there any way you could...?" Make them feel you care, and make them feel important. I used to bring donuts for the people in accounts payable. Always got my expense checks on time, and somehow, if I was late, my boss never found out.

Or if they're all just a bunch of incompetent buffoons, again, try the emotional connection, then go to your boss. With plenty of facts, supporting evidence, and peer support/confirmation, if at all possible.

Lastly, the lying issue:
Tread lightly. Are they really lying, or are they just ignorant? You need to determine intent. When you are ready, find a way to have a conversation with them, privately, and ask a lot of open-ended questions, such as:
"Hey Peter, can you tell me how X works?"
"So what happens if...?"
"But if that's the case, how could it be that...?"
Be positive, supportive, lead them down the path, then confront them with the evidence. Don't accuse, get them to confess. The less talking you do, and the more talking they do, will be enough to hang themselves. Also, a note on compulsive liars. (1) They can't help themselves. Lying is simply part of their DNA. I should know; I dated one. You can actually see the wheels spining in their head, before they open their mouths. (2) Compulsive liars get sloppy fast. They think you don't know, and they don't cover their tracks. They think they are smarter than you.

You might want to let your boss know that you are having issues with this person, and that you will be speaking with them. Again, have facts to support your story. The last thing your boss wants is a phone call from their boss coming out of left field. Your boss needs to be able to say, "Well, Jan, actually, I believe that (insert your name here) has tried on (insert dates & times) to get (insert incompetent buffoon's name here) to do X, but, even after identifying the issue, (previously mentioned buffoon's name) still did not provide the support that was expected.

Best of luck. I hope this was of some help. Feel free to email me (address is in my profile) if you want to discuss privately.
posted by davidinmanhattan at 10:33 PM on April 10, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]

Blatant liars are best dealt with using a documentation trail. Keep timestamped notes of all your dealings with this person/department for two months, then review. Same thing helps when dealing with incompetence.

Basically, you need to decide whether you're going to continue to put up with this crap, or fix it, or jump ship. If you decide on fixing it, and fixing it can't be accomplished without personnel changes, and you don't have the power to implement personnel changes, then you need to provide a log of evidence to somebody who does. And keep doing that, relentlessly, until things do get fixed. Meanwhile, just make sure you personally remain more valuable to the business than the incompetents you're shitting on, because you are going to get some on you.
posted by flabdablet at 11:26 PM on April 10, 2007

I've found in situations like this, simply document everything. forward emails to them also to your supervisor/manager/lead. Don't rely on telephone commitments as binding. Get an estimated date for any deliverables you require from them.
Also, sometimes elevating the problem (once you have sufficient paper trail) to your direct supervisors so they can take care of the issue over the heads of the frustrating person/group/department in question.

Obviously this only works if the chain of command is set up for this type of intervention and investigation.

And if documentation of *every* transaction and missed milestones (supported by physical evidence) isn't enough at your company, then you either have to suck it up, keep doing your best and hope karma wins out, or else chalk it up to experience and start looking for new employment.

on preview, I think everything I said has been covered above. good luck and document document document!
posted by johnstein at 11:35 PM on April 10, 2007

Can't you just create a trail of accountability that exonerates you and points to them?

You [to supervisor]: "Project A? Waiting on the widget from Bob since last Tuesday. Project B? Waiting to be tuned by Bob and has been on his desk since March."

You [email to Bob]: "Hi, thanks again for agreeing to fix and tune those widgets. Here's a list of all the parts I dropped off for you and what I wrote down about when each would be ready. Please let me know if I got any of this wrong or if you won't be able to finish by then. Thanks."

At some point, if your supervisor wants your projects to get done, she will have to talk to Bob if she supervises Bob, or if not, to either Bob's supervisor or maybe to her supervisor (assuming that person supervises Bob or Bob's supervisor). What's the chain of command here?

Another option. You [to supervisor:] "Bob is too busy to tune the widgets I need until 2009. This will set our schedule back by 2 years. If we want to stay on schedule, we could go to Widget Tuners R Us, or bring in a temporary widget tuner for our department. It will cost ____, but it's the only option for staying on schedule."
posted by salvia at 12:40 AM on April 11, 2007

I document it to the max (for my own protection - only pass it on if asked) and look seriously hard for other work. Working somewhere where the upper echelon have no interest in improving workflow sucks the big one. It's not worth it.

My suggestion sounds not like a solution at all, but it seems to me you've done the sensible things. All that is left is unsensible things (murder, sabotage) or moving on. It's probably cheaper to move on.
posted by b33j at 1:10 AM on April 11, 2007

Go to your boss and ask for the weight to be removed from your shoulders. That's what bosses are there for.

If my boss doesn't think that getting job X done is a priority, then it isn't a priority. I don't sweat it.

In my experience, you must *never* speak to someone else's superior about them if that superior is also superior to you. (Argh.) Example. If a reports to A and b reports to B, and if a and b are on the same level in the reporting structure, then a must never speak to B about b. Instead, a speaks to A and A speaks to B.

Meaning that incompetent employee b is not your problem, they are your boss's problem. Lay out the problem to your boss the way salvia suggests.

Your boss may not be able to make problems in other departments go away, but they may be able to work with you towards practical workarounds.

Your boss may also be playing the Document Document Document game and be simply waiting patiently for the other department to hang itself.

If your boss is completely unhelpful, then your problem is your boss, not the other employee or department.
posted by kika at 3:58 AM on April 11, 2007

One trick the brings accountability to the foreground is to CC their boss (and yours, if they're different) on all communications. Handle all communications via email, that way there's a timestamped record of everything said.

When they reply without CCing the boss, make sure you reply to them and add the CC back in, and make sure to include their original message.

If their boss won't do anything about it, CC their boss's boss. And so on up the ladder until someone who cares enough to do something about it rolls heads.

The only caveat, though, is this warning: it may be your head that gets rolled if the pendulum of office politics happens to swing the wrong way.
posted by jaded at 4:00 AM on April 11, 2007

CCing someone's boss is an aggressive tactic and escalates confrontation. Bosses generally don't like being dragged into their employee's squabbles (Mom, Johnny took my toy!), so a good rule of thumb is NOT to CC a boss without their (the boss's) permission.

I do, however often CC my boss, but I always talk about it with my boss (preferably before, but sometimes I'll stick my head in the door afterwards to give a brief rundown of the issue). Remember that bosses get huge amounts of e-mail and dislike having to do forensic analyses of long e-mail threads. If my boss wants to forward the e-mail to the other person's boss, they can. My hands are clean and I'm not polluting the office politics.

I sometimes BCC my boss if I want to let my boss know about something without appearing aggressive and confrontational to the person I am writing to.

E-mail is impersonal and doesn't always get the best results. If you're having trouble with someone, talk to them (in person if possible). Once you have agreed on a plan of action, tell them that you'll document the agreement in an e-mail to them as a courtesy to them so that they have a method of keeping track.
posted by kika at 4:40 AM on April 11, 2007

Sounds like the IT department I had to deal with at a former employer. Though their problem wasn't incompetence as much as it was arrogance on the part of a handful of people in that area, the results were the same.

And there wasn't a damn thing any of us could do about it. The CEO of the small company was a tech groupie and got all wobbly in the knees whenever he spoke with anyone in IT or development. In his mind, they could do no wrong.

So needs went unmet, or needs were met through the application of pet technologies that didn't actually solve the needs of the workers and created more issues in the process. And you got to hear about how stupid you were and how brilliant they were in the process.

In the end, we learned to simply avoid calling IT for anything other than dire emergencies. Which, I suppose, suited the techs just fine.
posted by Thorzdad at 4:41 AM on April 11, 2007

Have you tried bribes? Sometimes something as simple as pizza or bagels for the whole department can work wonders.

Failing that, document everything. Write out processes and ask them for their input so they feel like they've had a say in it. Good luck.
posted by Atom12 at 6:13 AM on April 11, 2007

See Dilbert today. Very apropos. Especially the physical threat! (Not!)
posted by blue_wardrobe at 6:28 AM on April 11, 2007

I asked a similar question some time ago.
posted by scratch at 7:15 AM on April 11, 2007

Man I wish all the advice above worked.

In my particular situation, there's a lot of nepotism at my (very large) company, and some of the most incompetent, useless doofuses are not only not fired, but are promoted.

There is a particular person in my department who makes errors constantly and hardly does an ounce of her own work. She's always either pawning off her tasks on people whose jobs have nothing to do with what she's asking them to do, or doing it herself and screwing it up.

She was just promoted this February.

I've tried a lot of the things outlined above and it didn't help. I hope for your sake, krisjohn, that you fare better. It's good advice, but depending on the climate where you work, it may not work.
posted by twiggy at 7:59 AM on April 11, 2007

First thing I would do ( if I was an equal or a department head) is meet with the other department supervisor or individual and define their role and what the expectations of them are. Or talk to your department supervisor to start the process. I find that people don't always know what to do innately, and a lot of the workplace runs on unspoken assumptions, and some of those assumptions are wrong. Some training or more defined job descriptions might be the solution.

As far as bad behavior goes, it should be dealt with at the time it occurs and not cumulatively. Deal with it immediately, not to micromanage as much as to identify the things that are not working and find a solution to that bottleneck. You may need to re-think your process. Try to identify where your process is weak, or not working, and fix it.
posted by SMELLSLIKEFUN at 8:50 AM on April 11, 2007

You should leave the firm as soon as possible.

If your managers don't know about the poor performing employee they are incompetant, and if they do know but have done nothing to rectify the situation, they are incompetant.

If they know about the situation, and for some reason they can't do anything about it, the least a competant manager would do is work with employees like yourself to allay your fears and assure you that will not be penalized for another's incompetance.

Single acts if poor performance are an employee-level issue - toleration of persistant poor perfromance is a managent level issue. No matter what you do about your co-worker the fact will remain that it is really management that is letting you down.

You should leave.
posted by Jos Bleau at 9:19 AM on April 11, 2007

Another option (that probably won't work but could make you feel like you've tried everything) -- you could try managing this incompetent person. Maybe it really is simple incompetence or just miscommunications. This would require a general meeting. It would sound like: "Hey Bob, can you help me understand what it takes you to shine a widget? In the next six months, I'm hoping to get about 30 widgets shined. Can we map out a process for when I'd need to get them to you so I'd get them back in time?" Then, you listen to him tell you the process. Try to spot potential problems and get him to think through how to solve them, like "Oh, so it sounds like you'll need a special screwdriver, huh? Is that something your department can order? How long does it take to get here? So, counting backward..." then write down "Bob orders screwdriver -- May 15th." Leave him with a copy of this plan. Obviously, this is a bit tricky since you are just approaching them as a potential teammate, but trying to enlist his help in figuring out how you could get what you need from their department might elicit more helpfulness than you've gotten by just expecting them to do their jobs (or you might get some blatant unhelpfulness that you can also document).
posted by salvia at 9:37 AM on April 11, 2007

Echo that you should leave. This NEVER turns out.

At any level, I might add.

I was an officer of a small (~80 employees) company, and had to bring to the ownership that one of the other officers of the company was simply incompetent, and that it was my DUTY to report this to them.

After months of back and forth on this issue, the ownership created a new, non-officer role for the person (a "demotion" of sorts, but not really), refused to fire them, and rolled the old officer's job duties into mine.

I left within 6 months, because I simply could not stand to have that person technically under my employ, but I could not fire them due to their "protected" status.

This person was, quite seriously, a total fuckup, and had been promoted outside of their ability at least 2 promotions ago. They were a shame and a disgrace to the company. Lower level employees would ask almost daily "Why is this person still here?" and I had no way to offer an answer.

I can only figure that this Gender A officer had been in a compromising position with one, or perhaps more, of the Gender B owners. The ownership finally admitted the person was ineffective, but refused to outright fire them.

I hate the corporate world.
posted by Ynoxas at 11:34 AM on April 11, 2007

Can you clearly document what's going on and submit information to your supervisor explaining what's impairing your ability to do the job? As said above, in a situation like this, it's your boss's job to talk to the other peoples' boss and see that it's corrected. Your boss presumably has as big a stake as you have in this project working, so if you include him or her in the process, hopefully he or she will bust some heads for you.

If your boss isn't willing to go to bat for you and your team then that's an entirely different problem and you should probably be looking for an exit strategy. I think Jos Bleau is right about on the money, there.
posted by Alterscape at 5:29 PM on April 11, 2007