Bucket o' beans...
April 3, 2010 6:09 AM Subscribe
So, a few of us suggested to our manager that we, his employees, conduct second-round interviews on domain-specific knowledge the manager probably doesn't know well enough to judge himself. Manager agreed, we did the interviews, some people got hired. Recently, Manager mentioned to us in private that we should appreciate this sort of autonomy because there were places where this would not fly at all. Should I be worried?
The phrasing of his comment, as closely as I can reconstruct it from memory, was that we had done something that was not standard procedure. It seemed to be turning out well, and he was happy that good hiring for the lab had dovetailed so neatly with a learning experience for us in the social dynamics and soft skills of a workplace (probably a reference to the criteria he asked us to evaluate). There were managers in the world who would have felt threatened or even punished us for making this suggestion. We should enjoy the sort of autonomy and meritocracy available here without automatically assuming it will be the same everywhere else.
So, a few questions:
1. How unusual is it to have employees involved in hiring decisions? Are there places where this sort of suggestion would be received poorly? Have we accidentally challenged Manager's authority, and what should we do to fix that?
2. What are the social implications of pulling a few people out of a group of supposed equals and giving them what looks like special influence on the hiring process? We actually have exactly as much authority as anyone else who wants to arrange a meeting with Manager and plug for their good friend Candidate X, but I ask because there was no official announcement of our proposal and I suspect there's misinformation going around on this point.
3. Would a native English-speaker describe anything as "giving you a lot of rope" unless he meant to allude to people hanging themselves? Manager does have a noted habit of letting people try even bad ideas once. I suspect sometimes he knows how it will end and just wants us to see it happen.
Just to be clear, Manager has always been a great manager and I don't imagine he's trying some kind of devious office politics here. I just worry that he's being a little too diplomatic right now, considering that our profession is notorious for poor people skills.
The phrasing of his comment, as closely as I can reconstruct it from memory, was that we had done something that was not standard procedure. It seemed to be turning out well, and he was happy that good hiring for the lab had dovetailed so neatly with a learning experience for us in the social dynamics and soft skills of a workplace (probably a reference to the criteria he asked us to evaluate). There were managers in the world who would have felt threatened or even punished us for making this suggestion. We should enjoy the sort of autonomy and meritocracy available here without automatically assuming it will be the same everywhere else.
So, a few questions:
1. How unusual is it to have employees involved in hiring decisions? Are there places where this sort of suggestion would be received poorly? Have we accidentally challenged Manager's authority, and what should we do to fix that?
2. What are the social implications of pulling a few people out of a group of supposed equals and giving them what looks like special influence on the hiring process? We actually have exactly as much authority as anyone else who wants to arrange a meeting with Manager and plug for their good friend Candidate X, but I ask because there was no official announcement of our proposal and I suspect there's misinformation going around on this point.
3. Would a native English-speaker describe anything as "giving you a lot of rope" unless he meant to allude to people hanging themselves? Manager does have a noted habit of letting people try even bad ideas once. I suspect sometimes he knows how it will end and just wants us to see it happen.
Just to be clear, Manager has always been a great manager and I don't imagine he's trying some kind of devious office politics here. I just worry that he's being a little too diplomatic right now, considering that our profession is notorious for poor people skills.
No, you shouldn't be worried.
Vetting candidates with technical domain questions is a completely reasonable request for people who may be working beside you. Specifically:
1. I find a (presumably technical, creative) work environment where peer interviews are not required to be a little unusual. If the manager allowed it, how can that be a challenge to authority? His time to say no would have been when you asked, or to reject your responses.
2. You can't control what others think, speculate, or gossip about. People are inherently gossips and bristle at perceived inequities in power. Ignore it if you hear it indirectly, respond open and honestly if you hear it directly; don't expect to be believed.
3. I could use "give you a lot of rope" in a context where there was a possibility that it would end in a unpleasant outcome, even if that possibility is vanishingly small.
You are probably over-thinking the whole matter. Be glad that it worked out well, continue the suggestion that the practice continue. Suggest that people outside your "interviewer group" be included when appropriate.
posted by fydfyd at 6:27 AM on April 3, 2010 [2 favorites]
Vetting candidates with technical domain questions is a completely reasonable request for people who may be working beside you. Specifically:
1. I find a (presumably technical, creative) work environment where peer interviews are not required to be a little unusual. If the manager allowed it, how can that be a challenge to authority? His time to say no would have been when you asked, or to reject your responses.
2. You can't control what others think, speculate, or gossip about. People are inherently gossips and bristle at perceived inequities in power. Ignore it if you hear it indirectly, respond open and honestly if you hear it directly; don't expect to be believed.
3. I could use "give you a lot of rope" in a context where there was a possibility that it would end in a unpleasant outcome, even if that possibility is vanishingly small.
You are probably over-thinking the whole matter. Be glad that it worked out well, continue the suggestion that the practice continue. Suggest that people outside your "interviewer group" be included when appropriate.
posted by fydfyd at 6:27 AM on April 3, 2010 [2 favorites]
Sounds like he just wants to hear the words "thank you".
posted by cestmoi15 at 6:28 AM on April 3, 2010 [12 favorites]
posted by cestmoi15 at 6:28 AM on April 3, 2010 [12 favorites]
I think you're overthinking, but at the same time, he's right to say that this is unusual, if only b/c non-manager employees often have no idea what they can & can't ask about in an interview and might get the company sued.
1. I think your manager is cool with it. If he wasn't you wouldn't have been in on the interviews at all, right?
2. If people are gossiping, then all you can do is not participate and if you are told something gossipy directly, refuse to participate or refute the statement with fact depending on how froggy you feel. You can't control other people.
3. I think if your manager lets you try even a bad idea one time, he isn't looking to oust you over this interview thing, which seems to have worked out, anyway.
That said, the place I loved to work at the most so far had nearly every person who would interact with you at all speak with you at some point, and it worked out very well. We hardly ever hired a dud.
posted by Medieval Maven at 6:29 AM on April 3, 2010
1. I think your manager is cool with it. If he wasn't you wouldn't have been in on the interviews at all, right?
2. If people are gossiping, then all you can do is not participate and if you are told something gossipy directly, refuse to participate or refute the statement with fact depending on how froggy you feel. You can't control other people.
3. I think if your manager lets you try even a bad idea one time, he isn't looking to oust you over this interview thing, which seems to have worked out, anyway.
That said, the place I loved to work at the most so far had nearly every person who would interact with you at all speak with you at some point, and it worked out very well. We hardly ever hired a dud.
posted by Medieval Maven at 6:29 AM on April 3, 2010
At my last job, it was very common for any sort of technical position - or any job with specific subject matter expertise really - to have candidates interviewed by both management and a team member with that knowledge. Sometimes in separate interviews and sometimes alongside a member of management team.
I agree with cestmoi15 that he'd likely loved to be thanked and felt appreciated.
posted by pointystick at 6:32 AM on April 3, 2010 [1 favorite]
I agree with cestmoi15 that he'd likely loved to be thanked and felt appreciated.
posted by pointystick at 6:32 AM on April 3, 2010 [1 favorite]
I think he's just reasserting his authority, alpha-male style. Nothing to worry about unless he really starts to feel threatened.
1. Not all that unusual. And even if it was unusual, it's such an obviously good idea that it shouldn't matter what other companies do.
2. Could look like favoritism, sure. But it's the manager's job to explain to everyone what's going on, and to pull in others who should be included.
3. This is probably just a mixed metaphor. He probably meant to say "giving you a long lead" or something like that.
posted by equalpants at 6:37 AM on April 3, 2010 [2 favorites]
1. Not all that unusual. And even if it was unusual, it's such an obviously good idea that it shouldn't matter what other companies do.
2. Could look like favoritism, sure. But it's the manager's job to explain to everyone what's going on, and to pull in others who should be included.
3. This is probably just a mixed metaphor. He probably meant to say "giving you a long lead" or something like that.
posted by equalpants at 6:37 AM on April 3, 2010 [2 favorites]
I agree that your manager feels unappreciated. Some employers allow peers to have a voice in the hiring process. Your boss listened to you, accepted your suggestion, acted on it. Tell your manager what she's doing right. It's more likely to be repeated.
posted by theora55 at 6:39 AM on April 3, 2010
posted by theora55 at 6:39 AM on April 3, 2010
At my old job, I was decidedly entry-level, but was on a committee where job applicants shadowed me for an hour, then I told the hiring people what I thought of them. I don't think this is that unusual, especially in a technical field.
posted by ishotjr at 6:39 AM on April 3, 2010
posted by ishotjr at 6:39 AM on April 3, 2010
How unusual is it to have employees involved in hiring decisions?
Well, I think peer interviews are very common, if not the norm, in technical fields. But, if you're asking how much input the interviewing employees have in the final outcome...I'd have to say that depends on the manager. My manager asks for our feedback and definitely takes it into account, but there are other managers around who I think just pay lip-service to the peer interview.
Maybe he felt like you weren't deferential enough to his role as the manager. I mean, you can suggest who you think he should hire, but ultimately it's up to him, and maybe he felt like you guys didn't respect that.
What are the social implications of pulling a few people out of a group of supposed equals and giving them what looks like special influence on the hiring process?
If the other members of this group are the kind to feel slighted, then they will. If they are the kind who trust other team members to make a decision, then it's no problem. It depends on the group dynamic. My opinion is that it's a good idea to involve the whole team and let those who don't care to be involved exclude themselves.
posted by cabingirl at 6:41 AM on April 3, 2010
Well, I think peer interviews are very common, if not the norm, in technical fields. But, if you're asking how much input the interviewing employees have in the final outcome...I'd have to say that depends on the manager. My manager asks for our feedback and definitely takes it into account, but there are other managers around who I think just pay lip-service to the peer interview.
Maybe he felt like you weren't deferential enough to his role as the manager. I mean, you can suggest who you think he should hire, but ultimately it's up to him, and maybe he felt like you guys didn't respect that.
What are the social implications of pulling a few people out of a group of supposed equals and giving them what looks like special influence on the hiring process?
If the other members of this group are the kind to feel slighted, then they will. If they are the kind who trust other team members to make a decision, then it's no problem. It depends on the group dynamic. My opinion is that it's a good idea to involve the whole team and let those who don't care to be involved exclude themselves.
posted by cabingirl at 6:41 AM on April 3, 2010
It's possible that your manager got his hand slapped by his manager for deviating from the normal interviewing process in your company. So perhaps his comment was a reflection of how much it cost him (in terms of his image among the higher-ups) to accommodate your request as well as a reminder to not make things worse by talking up what you did to other groups in the company.
posted by DrGail at 7:06 AM on April 3, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by DrGail at 7:06 AM on April 3, 2010 [1 favorite]
I would not overthink this. "Giving you a lot of rope" is a reasonably commen phrase and I would not worry about it. It sounds like the manager just wants you to realize that this might not happen all the time, and that perhaps he stuck his neck out a bit for you. Basically what theora55 said.
As to how common this is, this is how we interview (technical field). Even a single 'no' from any one of the interviewing employees means a no hire. Interviewing employees are at all levels. I'm the manager.
posted by true at 7:27 AM on April 3, 2010
As to how common this is, this is how we interview (technical field). Even a single 'no' from any one of the interviewing employees means a no hire. Interviewing employees are at all levels. I'm the manager.
posted by true at 7:27 AM on April 3, 2010
Mod note: Follow-up from the OP:
I hadn't considered the possibility that he was feeling unappreciated. Of course, I'm happy to thank him or otherwise show my appreciation. How could I phrase it, though, to put the emphasis on him rather than him acting on our proposal? I don't want it to sound like a backhanded, 'Gee, look how well things go when you listen to us!' kind of compliment.posted by jessamyn (staff) at 9:22 AM on April 3, 2010
No need to say anything but the truth - you appreciated that he involved you in the process, you'd welcome the opportunity to do it again, and you're pleased that it turned out so well.
posted by true at 9:26 AM on April 3, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by true at 9:26 AM on April 3, 2010 [1 favorite]
Maybe not in the lab world, but as illustrated above it's very common these days for candidates to be interviewed by potential future peers. I agree that the manager may just be reacting to a little static in how this was pursued in terms of knowledge he doesn't have, i.e. ego.
posted by rhizome at 9:37 AM on April 3, 2010
posted by rhizome at 9:37 AM on April 3, 2010
tell him he's one of the most empowering, open minded managers you have encountered in your experience. and if you learnt something about leadership and/or teambuilding from this experience, share that too. in my experience in a variety of different creative industry jobs, there aren't enough people in leadership positions who know how to guide with a light touch as your manager seems to have done. and at least the phrase "given you a lot of rope" goes, i've used it myself with people in my teams when I suspect that there may be a problem if they followed their 'head' but its a measure of trust and respect (as well as the learning that comes from a failure if that turns out to be the case). in a way, I'd look upon that as "security to fail"
posted by infini at 9:47 AM on April 3, 2010
posted by infini at 9:47 AM on April 3, 2010
Yah, I'd put a strong vote in the "you're overthinking this" column. Next time you see him, just tell him how much you appreciated the fact that he gave you guys so much input, and that it's something you really value about working for him.
posted by Happydaz at 10:42 AM on April 3, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by Happydaz at 10:42 AM on April 3, 2010 [1 favorite]
What Happydaz said, although to ease awkwardness, you can simply use the satisfactory performance of the new hires as an entree: "Fred is working out so well! Joe, we really appreciate the way you handled this."
posted by dhartung at 1:54 PM on April 3, 2010
posted by dhartung at 1:54 PM on April 3, 2010
« Older Reselling s3? Other options? I need to get paid to... | I don't need the whole thing, just that widget... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
I think you're probably overthinking things.
posted by davey_darling at 6:26 AM on April 3, 2010 [1 favorite]