Caught between my boss and my staff - how do I respond skillfully?
June 17, 2013 10:33 PM Subscribe
I need help in figuring out how to respond to a work situation between my boss and my staff. I am the second in command in our office, and manage all of the administrative staff. The administrative staff support all of the professional staff. (Think something like a law firm, or university department, where professional staff rely on and share administrative support). My boss is driving my administrative staff crazy.
My boss, who heads the office, needs the support of the administrative staff to get tasks done. In the past the administrative staff have complained about him - he is a big picture (not detailed oriented), pressure prompted (read last minute) type of guy, who unfortunately is responsible for some projects that require attention to detail and early planning to be done well. My entire administrative team is a group of early planning females, who find themselves caught in a situation involving work style, power and gender issues each time a project comes along.
The usual scenario is that he will ask for their support in doing a project, they will try to get him to think through the details of that project, he will either not make time and/or insist that he's got the details covered, and 1-2 days before when it becomes clear that he doesn't have the details covered, he will ask for their help, which will lead them all the scramble to get the task done. But then, they will be behind on their other projects (because the also support the other professional staff), and they are resentful, because they hate what they view as avoidable problems like this, but because he is the boss, they don't feel they can say no.
I've tried to address this from a couple of angles, and it occurs to me I may just be looking at it wrong. So I'd like the hive mind's perspective on what I have done, and what, if anything, I need to do next to enable us to work together well.
I have laid out the roles, responsibilities and expectations of the administrators and professional staff when working together.
For example, I've made it clear to everyone that before considering a request for support, (an immediate yes), the administrative staff has the right to consider their current work load (even if that means saying: I need to check my schedule - can I let you know in 30 minutes). Yet today, my boss walked in - made a last minute request because he forgot to do something - and my staff immediately said yes (which meant one of them ended up having to work late.)
I've also made it clear to everyone that if you come last minute, there is a chance that the administrative staff won't be able to meet your request. I've also explained that the administrative staff has the right to say no. I've told the administrative staff that if anyone balks - even my boss - let me know, and I'll back them up. Every time an administrative staff person has done this - I've followed up with the professional staff person - and protected my staff.
I have talked to my boss about the power dynamic issue - that his request is like a command, and so he has to verbalize whenever possible that the administrative staff can tell him no if they are already booked. I've also told him if he's making a last minute request to ask about the administrative staff person's current work load. In viewing today's exchange - this did not happen.
We have gone through staff trainings on personality/work type styles. My boss knows he is pressure prompted. He knows the staff is early planning. The administrative staff knows this as well. But all this has served to do is not change behavior but excuse his. The admin female staff sees how 'helpless' my boss looks when he is close to a deadline and it's finally clear to him that he didn't do x, y and z, and they start trying to help by asking him questions. Which means soon they are sucked in with new tasks to solve his problem.
I've also told my staff to keep track of additional hours worked, which I then give them in comp time whenever they want during the week, because they have got to pace themselves. I've also acknowledged this dynamic, and how hard it is to say no to my boss, but that if they don't say no, they won't get their work done (and fail to meet work expectations) and they will burn out.
As a final point, my boss isn't that great at acknowledging what he's not doing - so he isn't great at recognizing all they've done to pull his ass out of the fire. So no matter how much I appreciate them, they feel under-appreciated by him.
After watching today's dynamic, I realize I am just exhausted by getting caught in the middle of this. My staff won't stand up to my boss, so they get behind, and frustrated. So they complain to me. My boss won't stop underestimating the true workload involved, getting in over his head, and repeatedly make last minute requests of the administrative staff. I have noted the few times they have said no, my boss has sometimes insisted that the task he asked for was small, and he can't figure out why it's a problem, and that the admin staff is making it 'too complicated'. So he complains to me as well. The environment is tense.
Finally, I had an 'I'm done - I know of no other way to fix this dynamic, so if it's getting fixed you need to help me brainstorm solutions' conversation with my admin staff a few weeks ago that says: I appreciate the difficulty you are in, and I've tried every way I know to support you and protect you (acknowledge situation, let you know you can say no, support you when you say no, addressed preferred language, etc.), and asked you if there is any other way to do so. But I need you to not overcommit yourselves, and get behind. If you do - if you choose to take on tasks when I've told you you can say no to, I have no choice from now on to hold you accountable when you fail to meet those expectations.
I now I need to have an 'I'm done - I know of no other way to fix this dynamic, so if it's getting fixed you need to help me brainstorm solutions' conversation with my boss.
Which brings me to my three questions; thanks for reading this far if you did.
1. How should I approach this conversation with my boss?
2. Should I actually have this conversation? And if not, what should I be doing?
3. What did I do wrong and what did I miss in managing this situation over these past months?
Thanks...
My boss, who heads the office, needs the support of the administrative staff to get tasks done. In the past the administrative staff have complained about him - he is a big picture (not detailed oriented), pressure prompted (read last minute) type of guy, who unfortunately is responsible for some projects that require attention to detail and early planning to be done well. My entire administrative team is a group of early planning females, who find themselves caught in a situation involving work style, power and gender issues each time a project comes along.
The usual scenario is that he will ask for their support in doing a project, they will try to get him to think through the details of that project, he will either not make time and/or insist that he's got the details covered, and 1-2 days before when it becomes clear that he doesn't have the details covered, he will ask for their help, which will lead them all the scramble to get the task done. But then, they will be behind on their other projects (because the also support the other professional staff), and they are resentful, because they hate what they view as avoidable problems like this, but because he is the boss, they don't feel they can say no.
I've tried to address this from a couple of angles, and it occurs to me I may just be looking at it wrong. So I'd like the hive mind's perspective on what I have done, and what, if anything, I need to do next to enable us to work together well.
I have laid out the roles, responsibilities and expectations of the administrators and professional staff when working together.
For example, I've made it clear to everyone that before considering a request for support, (an immediate yes), the administrative staff has the right to consider their current work load (even if that means saying: I need to check my schedule - can I let you know in 30 minutes). Yet today, my boss walked in - made a last minute request because he forgot to do something - and my staff immediately said yes (which meant one of them ended up having to work late.)
I've also made it clear to everyone that if you come last minute, there is a chance that the administrative staff won't be able to meet your request. I've also explained that the administrative staff has the right to say no. I've told the administrative staff that if anyone balks - even my boss - let me know, and I'll back them up. Every time an administrative staff person has done this - I've followed up with the professional staff person - and protected my staff.
I have talked to my boss about the power dynamic issue - that his request is like a command, and so he has to verbalize whenever possible that the administrative staff can tell him no if they are already booked. I've also told him if he's making a last minute request to ask about the administrative staff person's current work load. In viewing today's exchange - this did not happen.
We have gone through staff trainings on personality/work type styles. My boss knows he is pressure prompted. He knows the staff is early planning. The administrative staff knows this as well. But all this has served to do is not change behavior but excuse his. The admin female staff sees how 'helpless' my boss looks when he is close to a deadline and it's finally clear to him that he didn't do x, y and z, and they start trying to help by asking him questions. Which means soon they are sucked in with new tasks to solve his problem.
I've also told my staff to keep track of additional hours worked, which I then give them in comp time whenever they want during the week, because they have got to pace themselves. I've also acknowledged this dynamic, and how hard it is to say no to my boss, but that if they don't say no, they won't get their work done (and fail to meet work expectations) and they will burn out.
As a final point, my boss isn't that great at acknowledging what he's not doing - so he isn't great at recognizing all they've done to pull his ass out of the fire. So no matter how much I appreciate them, they feel under-appreciated by him.
After watching today's dynamic, I realize I am just exhausted by getting caught in the middle of this. My staff won't stand up to my boss, so they get behind, and frustrated. So they complain to me. My boss won't stop underestimating the true workload involved, getting in over his head, and repeatedly make last minute requests of the administrative staff. I have noted the few times they have said no, my boss has sometimes insisted that the task he asked for was small, and he can't figure out why it's a problem, and that the admin staff is making it 'too complicated'. So he complains to me as well. The environment is tense.
Finally, I had an 'I'm done - I know of no other way to fix this dynamic, so if it's getting fixed you need to help me brainstorm solutions' conversation with my admin staff a few weeks ago that says: I appreciate the difficulty you are in, and I've tried every way I know to support you and protect you (acknowledge situation, let you know you can say no, support you when you say no, addressed preferred language, etc.), and asked you if there is any other way to do so. But I need you to not overcommit yourselves, and get behind. If you do - if you choose to take on tasks when I've told you you can say no to, I have no choice from now on to hold you accountable when you fail to meet those expectations.
I now I need to have an 'I'm done - I know of no other way to fix this dynamic, so if it's getting fixed you need to help me brainstorm solutions' conversation with my boss.
Which brings me to my three questions; thanks for reading this far if you did.
1. How should I approach this conversation with my boss?
2. Should I actually have this conversation? And if not, what should I be doing?
3. What did I do wrong and what did I miss in managing this situation over these past months?
Thanks...
You need to implement a project management protocol, I think.
If people have assigned tasks and schedules clearly laid out, than the impact of last-minute requests on various projects should become much more apparent to everyone.
posted by empath at 11:15 PM on June 17, 2013 [2 favorites]
If people have assigned tasks and schedules clearly laid out, than the impact of last-minute requests on various projects should become much more apparent to everyone.
posted by empath at 11:15 PM on June 17, 2013 [2 favorites]
And yes, a single point of contact with your boss would be ideal.
posted by empath at 11:15 PM on June 17, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by empath at 11:15 PM on June 17, 2013 [1 favorite]
Finally, I had an 'I'm done - I know of no other way to fix this dynamic, so if it's getting fixed you need to help me brainstorm solutions' conversation with my admin staff a few weeks ago that says:
Would it be possible to have this brainstorming session that included the boss, too?
posted by small_ruminant at 11:23 PM on June 17, 2013 [1 favorite]
Would it be possible to have this brainstorming session that included the boss, too?
posted by small_ruminant at 11:23 PM on June 17, 2013 [1 favorite]
Some situations you just cannot fix - and this seems like one of them: this dynamic is playing out in offices all over the world endlessly. The boss has no real incentive to change and you can't make him no matter how much talking or negotiating or threatening you do. Because at the end of the day he is higher up in the hierarchy than you or your staff and he does hold real power that could negatively affect your staff: he really could cause them to lose their jobs if he gets pissed at them for not supporting him in the way he wants. I don't necessarily mean he will yell and scream "you're fired" but following the rules of the hierarchy is ingrained in us because we (often rightly) fear those who can negatively impact our lives or livelihood.
He may be the nicest guy in the world (or not) but if his only incentive to change is because it's a better, more productive process - well, it would be nice if people worked that way but they don't. Most people in power just want to keep working the way they do because they believe the reason they are in power is because they do things "better" - so everyone else can work with their style. Even when they know they could make improvements they often view their foibles as idiosyncrasies and think that the end result is worth some messiness along the way.
So that's what I'd say your best bet is (and somewhat echoing Bella Sebastian above): find a way to work with his style without expecting him to conform to your process, even though you may be "right". Sometimes the smoothest path isn't always the straightest one.
posted by hapax_legomenon at 11:32 PM on June 17, 2013 [7 favorites]
He may be the nicest guy in the world (or not) but if his only incentive to change is because it's a better, more productive process - well, it would be nice if people worked that way but they don't. Most people in power just want to keep working the way they do because they believe the reason they are in power is because they do things "better" - so everyone else can work with their style. Even when they know they could make improvements they often view their foibles as idiosyncrasies and think that the end result is worth some messiness along the way.
So that's what I'd say your best bet is (and somewhat echoing Bella Sebastian above): find a way to work with his style without expecting him to conform to your process, even though you may be "right". Sometimes the smoothest path isn't always the straightest one.
posted by hapax_legomenon at 11:32 PM on June 17, 2013 [7 favorites]
Admin does what pro side asks. Hate to say it, but that's the rules.
posted by Ironmouth at 11:39 PM on June 17, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by Ironmouth at 11:39 PM on June 17, 2013 [2 favorites]
"is a group of early planning females"
What does this mean?
"Yet today, my boss walked in - made a last minute request because he forgot to do something - and my staff immediately said yes (which meant one of them ended up having to work late.)
"
Is this on your boss or on your staff. They likely know his opinion matters as much as yours or more.
"I've also made it clear to everyone that if you come last minute, there is a chance that the administrative staff won't be able to meet your request. I've also explained that the administrative staff has the right to say no. I've told the administrative staff that if anyone balks - even my boss - let me know, and I'll back them up. Every time an administrative staff person has done this - I've followed up with the professional staff person - and protected my staff.
I have talked to my boss about the power dynamic issue - that his request is like a command, and so he has to verbalize whenever possible that the administrative staff can tell him no if they are already booked. I've also told him if he's making a last minute request to ask about the administrative staff person's current work load. In viewing today's exchange - this did not happen. "
It really bugs you that he is the boss even though he has attributes you think a boss shouldn't have?
" How should I approach this conversation with my boss?"
Is the conversation a goodbye, working for you sucked talk? Or some sort of negotiation? Or is it maybe either depending on how he responds. Are you truly done or really wanting to create change? This is important to know.
"Should I actually have this conversation? And if not, what should I be doing? "
If you are really done, you find the situation beyond redemption there is no point in going over details. The discussion should only be how much notice and who your main contacts will be to provide a smooth transition.
"What did I do wrong and what did I miss in managing this situation over these past months?"
Did you forget that he is still mostly the boss? Your instructions that his crises need to be considered in terms of total work load perhaps needed to come from him. Was he sold on this plan? Was your staff sold on this plan? Was there enough building of consensus or enough authority behind this plan? Why were you so personally invested in it taking hold? If you were invested did other people really understand it was important to you and why it was important to you?
posted by logonym at 11:47 PM on June 17, 2013 [4 favorites]
What does this mean?
"Yet today, my boss walked in - made a last minute request because he forgot to do something - and my staff immediately said yes (which meant one of them ended up having to work late.)
"
Is this on your boss or on your staff. They likely know his opinion matters as much as yours or more.
"I've also made it clear to everyone that if you come last minute, there is a chance that the administrative staff won't be able to meet your request. I've also explained that the administrative staff has the right to say no. I've told the administrative staff that if anyone balks - even my boss - let me know, and I'll back them up. Every time an administrative staff person has done this - I've followed up with the professional staff person - and protected my staff.
I have talked to my boss about the power dynamic issue - that his request is like a command, and so he has to verbalize whenever possible that the administrative staff can tell him no if they are already booked. I've also told him if he's making a last minute request to ask about the administrative staff person's current work load. In viewing today's exchange - this did not happen. "
It really bugs you that he is the boss even though he has attributes you think a boss shouldn't have?
" How should I approach this conversation with my boss?"
Is the conversation a goodbye, working for you sucked talk? Or some sort of negotiation? Or is it maybe either depending on how he responds. Are you truly done or really wanting to create change? This is important to know.
"Should I actually have this conversation? And if not, what should I be doing? "
If you are really done, you find the situation beyond redemption there is no point in going over details. The discussion should only be how much notice and who your main contacts will be to provide a smooth transition.
"What did I do wrong and what did I miss in managing this situation over these past months?"
Did you forget that he is still mostly the boss? Your instructions that his crises need to be considered in terms of total work load perhaps needed to come from him. Was he sold on this plan? Was your staff sold on this plan? Was there enough building of consensus or enough authority behind this plan? Why were you so personally invested in it taking hold? If you were invested did other people really understand it was important to you and why it was important to you?
posted by logonym at 11:47 PM on June 17, 2013 [4 favorites]
I am overflowing with sympathy over here. OVERFLOWING. But the most obvious thing that comes to mind is that you need to take serious, seriously leadership to manage the workflow. More in the middle, in a way, but maintaining the hierarchy more strictly.
Your boss needs to be upwardly managed so that he is not the one asking your staff for help. He needs to ask you for help, and you can discuss the allocation of resources with him. With a budget conversation if needed. Quantifying effort is a bitch, but it's a way to get the message across keenly.
And then you can lead a very focused meeting between him, you, and the appropriate admin person(s) to get scope and details and complexity of the nitty-gritty nailed down, in which you chime in to make sure that you're not passing the buck to the admin(s), but instead are helping the boss get clued in as to the workaday complexity of getting the job done right. Meanwhile, you've prepared the admin(s) to stay on message, what not to do, i.e. agree to take responsibility for goals, when they need to defer to you, and when they should speak right up. I am not kidding when I say that hand signals would not be remiss.
This absofuckinglutely requires that your admin staff know that you are not disrespecting their expertise -- just the opposite, that you're taking the bullet for them and are absolutely positively giving them ALL the credit for the work. If there are class and/or race differences between you and the admins and/or you and the boss, get your head wrapped around that and get it out in the open with your admins, call a retreat if you have to.
Maybe they all should have the agency to say no to the big boss, but "should" isn't going to make it happen until the culture changes.
posted by desuetude at 11:54 PM on June 17, 2013 [22 favorites]
Your boss needs to be upwardly managed so that he is not the one asking your staff for help. He needs to ask you for help, and you can discuss the allocation of resources with him. With a budget conversation if needed. Quantifying effort is a bitch, but it's a way to get the message across keenly.
And then you can lead a very focused meeting between him, you, and the appropriate admin person(s) to get scope and details and complexity of the nitty-gritty nailed down, in which you chime in to make sure that you're not passing the buck to the admin(s), but instead are helping the boss get clued in as to the workaday complexity of getting the job done right. Meanwhile, you've prepared the admin(s) to stay on message, what not to do, i.e. agree to take responsibility for goals, when they need to defer to you, and when they should speak right up. I am not kidding when I say that hand signals would not be remiss.
This absofuckinglutely requires that your admin staff know that you are not disrespecting their expertise -- just the opposite, that you're taking the bullet for them and are absolutely positively giving them ALL the credit for the work. If there are class and/or race differences between you and the admins and/or you and the boss, get your head wrapped around that and get it out in the open with your admins, call a retreat if you have to.
Maybe they all should have the agency to say no to the big boss, but "should" isn't going to make it happen until the culture changes.
posted by desuetude at 11:54 PM on June 17, 2013 [22 favorites]
I have noted the few times they have said no, my boss has sometimes insisted that the task he asked for was small, and he can't figure out why it's a problem, and that the admin staff is making it 'too complicated'. So he complains to me as well. The environment is tense.
What was the end result in these situations? Because if I were an admin and tried pushing back and got criticized and complained about by a hierarchical superior, particularly if I ended up doing it anyway, well... I'd think twice before going down that road again, too.
If the end result was that I didn't have to stay late and accomplished what was on my plate in a timely manner and the hierarchical superior backed off and/or apologized and my boss applauded my actions, I can't imagine why I wouldn't do it again.
posted by vegartanipla at 11:55 PM on June 17, 2013 [3 favorites]
What was the end result in these situations? Because if I were an admin and tried pushing back and got criticized and complained about by a hierarchical superior, particularly if I ended up doing it anyway, well... I'd think twice before going down that road again, too.
If the end result was that I didn't have to stay late and accomplished what was on my plate in a timely manner and the hierarchical superior backed off and/or apologized and my boss applauded my actions, I can't imagine why I wouldn't do it again.
posted by vegartanipla at 11:55 PM on June 17, 2013 [3 favorites]
To fix this like grown-ups you need to be in the middle here, so that you can say to your boss "sure, we can fit that in. It will take n person-hours and the consequence is that these other streams of work X and Y will be set back in the following ways. Are you happy for us to incur that cost?". You don't need brainstorming, you need a commitment from your boss that he goes through you and doesn't do an end run around you when you're not there.
I'm assuming here that your boss also has responsibility for the entire output of your unit, including his professional colleagues, which means that there is something in it for him in making things go better.
You need to be prepared for the possibility that your boss regards the ability to do this as one of the perks of being in charge and will insist on retaining it and regard you as insubordinate. He kind of sounds like a dick already. In which case, the other solutions of getting him a dedicated underling, or learning to suck it up are going to be better.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 12:00 AM on June 18, 2013 [10 favorites]
I'm assuming here that your boss also has responsibility for the entire output of your unit, including his professional colleagues, which means that there is something in it for him in making things go better.
You need to be prepared for the possibility that your boss regards the ability to do this as one of the perks of being in charge and will insist on retaining it and regard you as insubordinate. He kind of sounds like a dick already. In which case, the other solutions of getting him a dedicated underling, or learning to suck it up are going to be better.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 12:00 AM on June 18, 2013 [10 favorites]
It feels like you're having a lot of really good solutions in your mind and that it's your own frustration more than everyone else's that is an issue at this point. Is there a way that can make it easier for you to repeat, when necessary, the core points of your management strategy, both to the staff and to your boss, without having the "I told you" troll making noises in the back of your head?
I mean, as it seems that some of your staff repeatedly fall into the trap of saying yes to the boss before really thinking, and then winding up at your desk with complaints, it may be time to be a little zen about that bit and accept that it, simply, will happen again. That acceptance may give you the strength to - in a relaxed fashion - talk the complaining party through the process again and point out the things that she [right..?] could have done otherwise to protect her own workload better.
In short, this seems to be about your finding strategies for yourself to make the rinse-and-repeat element of your job stress free.
posted by Namlit at 12:39 AM on June 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
I mean, as it seems that some of your staff repeatedly fall into the trap of saying yes to the boss before really thinking, and then winding up at your desk with complaints, it may be time to be a little zen about that bit and accept that it, simply, will happen again. That acceptance may give you the strength to - in a relaxed fashion - talk the complaining party through the process again and point out the things that she [right..?] could have done otherwise to protect her own workload better.
In short, this seems to be about your finding strategies for yourself to make the rinse-and-repeat element of your job stress free.
posted by Namlit at 12:39 AM on June 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
Yeah, I was wondering why your boss skips you and goes right to them too. The boss needs one point of contact with admin, and that's you.
Don't put your people in the position of having to refuse the boss. It's not fair. Instead, have them politely direct him to you. Something like, "Do you mind having It's a Parasox let me know if it's ok if I stop what I'm supposed to be doing now?"
But that still doesn't mean you can say no to him. You keep calling him YOUR boss, so ultimately you do what he wants you to do (after you explain what effect that will have on other projects.) Your job is to figure out how to shuffle manpower at the last minute to get his emergency done and STILL get all your other work done, and if that's impossible, to manage his expectations about his project's relative priority.
He'll stop jumping over you and tasking your workforce directly if you show him he doesn't need to do that.
posted by ctmf at 1:27 AM on June 18, 2013 [16 favorites]
Don't put your people in the position of having to refuse the boss. It's not fair. Instead, have them politely direct him to you. Something like, "Do you mind having It's a Parasox let me know if it's ok if I stop what I'm supposed to be doing now?"
But that still doesn't mean you can say no to him. You keep calling him YOUR boss, so ultimately you do what he wants you to do (after you explain what effect that will have on other projects.) Your job is to figure out how to shuffle manpower at the last minute to get his emergency done and STILL get all your other work done, and if that's impossible, to manage his expectations about his project's relative priority.
He'll stop jumping over you and tasking your workforce directly if you show him he doesn't need to do that.
posted by ctmf at 1:27 AM on June 18, 2013 [16 favorites]
I agree that you should be the filter from your boss to your staff. Talk to your boss and have them agree that for any requests for your staff, they come through you first. It really undermines your position if your boss skips you and goes straight to your staff, as of course they will do what he says.
Inform your staff that if the boss goes to them, they should email you. You can then go to your boss STRAIGHT away and say "we can do this work, but you need to get the stakeholders for Project Y to agree as it will delay their work" or whatever the impact will be. Then your boss and the stakeholders of the projects that will get delayed due to his last minute request will fight it out.
posted by Admira at 2:11 AM on June 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
Inform your staff that if the boss goes to them, they should email you. You can then go to your boss STRAIGHT away and say "we can do this work, but you need to get the stakeholders for Project Y to agree as it will delay their work" or whatever the impact will be. Then your boss and the stakeholders of the projects that will get delayed due to his last minute request will fight it out.
posted by Admira at 2:11 AM on June 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
Like several others above, I think the problem is that you're trying to set things up so that your boss and your staff can negotiate workload directly. You say this is your staff to manage, but it doesn't sound as if you're actually managing them. The "early planning" vs. "pressure prompted" stuff only seems relevant because it describes what goes on when you are not managing, but the problem is not the personalities, it's that you are not managing.
posted by jon1270 at 3:16 AM on June 18, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by jon1270 at 3:16 AM on June 18, 2013 [3 favorites]
What youre really asking here is "how can I turn my last-minute boss into a planner?" I think asking the head of the office to completely revamp the way he works is unlikely to be fruitful. I think you would have more success acknowledging his work style and planning ahead for someone to be available for a big push 1-2 days before his deadlines. He seems like a reasonable guy--if he can let you know his deadlines, maybe you can plan ahead to allocate some person-power to them even if you don't know the actual tasks ahead of time.
posted by The Elusive Architeuthis at 3:53 AM on June 18, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by The Elusive Architeuthis at 3:53 AM on June 18, 2013 [6 favorites]
Agreeing that there needs to be a delegator, one person that the boss goes through who doles out tasks to the admin staff.
I know you want them to stand up for themselves, but unfortunately in most of the jobs I've had, telling the boss no = you're fired. No one wants to get fired.
You need to step up and advocate for your staff here. Either appoint a professional/admin liaison, or become that person yourself. It's unfair to ask the low people on the totem pole to put themselves in that position.
posted by phunniemee at 4:37 AM on June 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
I know you want them to stand up for themselves, but unfortunately in most of the jobs I've had, telling the boss no = you're fired. No one wants to get fired.
You need to step up and advocate for your staff here. Either appoint a professional/admin liaison, or become that person yourself. It's unfair to ask the low people on the totem pole to put themselves in that position.
posted by phunniemee at 4:37 AM on June 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
Boss needs to talk to only you (or a designated point person from your team) about all work. He should not be talking to anyone else about any work. Make it clear how this will help him: one person will have all the answers, one person will know the status of all the projects. One person will know best how to respond to emergencies. One person will know how best to anticipate his needs and respond to them quickly. This is a good thing. Emphasise that.
Then enforce it with an iron fist in a velvet glove. This is an admin department head's job. Funnel requests so your team can focus on completion. Funnel & focus. Boss must allow you to do your job (funnel) so staff can do their job (focus).
posted by seanmpuckett at 4:41 AM on June 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
Then enforce it with an iron fist in a velvet glove. This is an admin department head's job. Funnel requests so your team can focus on completion. Funnel & focus. Boss must allow you to do your job (funnel) so staff can do their job (focus).
posted by seanmpuckett at 4:41 AM on June 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
Your boss isn't going to change the way he works, and it's your department's job to support him. Your boss should always come to you and you can allocate the work to your staff, and your boss should know and okay any consequences. The managing partner needs to know about the fact that apparently you need more resources (and definitely should know if you are giving out comp time during the week), and that shouldn't be framed as your boss' fault (especially if they are the same person or he's a senior partner) but it's totally fair to say these are the things we need to do and we don't have the man hours to do them.
It's your job to make sure your staff has the resources to get their work done, and while it's nice to empower them to say no you should be having them refer the boss to you so that you can either say no or discuss consequences. Okay Boss, I can have Mary do that cite checking for you, and that's going to take six hours - right now she's proofing Jeff's brief for XYZ case and she's not going to be able to get that to him on time if she drops that, how do you want me to handle that? (and propose a solution - Mary works late and gets comp time (because it's not ok to give that if it's not something your bosses know about, is it?) and we still have to let Jeff know that he won't get his brief on time, etc).
It sucks to be in the middle, but you have to manage the staff and also manage your boss, and that includes getting your boss to show some appreciation for the staff (even if it's just at your prompting). Hey Boss, can you send out a note to let everyone know you appreciate everyone pitching in and getting that deadline met?
I think your talk with your boss should be more like here's the new procedure, all requests through me so I can allocate resources OR even better, Mary is your new go-to and she and I will talk about managing her workload to accommodate last minute requests (and here's how that affects the rest of the work). Your problem sounds like a too much work for available staff problem as much as it's a boss' working style problem.
It's not a female/male issue as I see it, rather it's a boss/employee issue. There *is* a power difference - he's the boss who is presumably doing the revenue generating work and by definition admin support exists to handle his requests. It's your job to figure out how to allow that to happen.
Again, this really sucks, and what's worse it sounds like this is going to dump additional work on your plate. It's difficult to manage both sides (and make no mistake, you are managing your boss but you have to lead him there, you can't give him a list of the ways that you prefer he would do things).
posted by KAS at 6:05 AM on June 18, 2013 [3 favorites]
It's your job to make sure your staff has the resources to get their work done, and while it's nice to empower them to say no you should be having them refer the boss to you so that you can either say no or discuss consequences. Okay Boss, I can have Mary do that cite checking for you, and that's going to take six hours - right now she's proofing Jeff's brief for XYZ case and she's not going to be able to get that to him on time if she drops that, how do you want me to handle that? (and propose a solution - Mary works late and gets comp time (because it's not ok to give that if it's not something your bosses know about, is it?) and we still have to let Jeff know that he won't get his brief on time, etc).
It sucks to be in the middle, but you have to manage the staff and also manage your boss, and that includes getting your boss to show some appreciation for the staff (even if it's just at your prompting). Hey Boss, can you send out a note to let everyone know you appreciate everyone pitching in and getting that deadline met?
I think your talk with your boss should be more like here's the new procedure, all requests through me so I can allocate resources OR even better, Mary is your new go-to and she and I will talk about managing her workload to accommodate last minute requests (and here's how that affects the rest of the work). Your problem sounds like a too much work for available staff problem as much as it's a boss' working style problem.
It's not a female/male issue as I see it, rather it's a boss/employee issue. There *is* a power difference - he's the boss who is presumably doing the revenue generating work and by definition admin support exists to handle his requests. It's your job to figure out how to allow that to happen.
Again, this really sucks, and what's worse it sounds like this is going to dump additional work on your plate. It's difficult to manage both sides (and make no mistake, you are managing your boss but you have to lead him there, you can't give him a list of the ways that you prefer he would do things).
posted by KAS at 6:05 AM on June 18, 2013 [3 favorites]
Best answer: Next time this happens (probably today, right?), have your staff write out a timeline as to how much they spend on the project and on which aspect of it. Have them hand something to you that looks like:
9:05 am given assignment, asked to complete by 12:00 pm
9:07 am began googling competitors for comparisons
9:20 am compiled initial results in table (see attached)
Etc, etc.
Have them, literally, account of every minute on the next project like this. And then you start to manage your boss by saying such things, "Well, I have here that the last project we were given that you wanted done by noon couldn't be completed until the next day because x, y, and z took awhile for a, b, and c reasons." Then what you start to say is, "Yes, we'll do our best," and if you can without serious consequences to clients or yourself --- let it take longer.
I would have projects dropped on me that people wanted in twenty minutes. If there were no significant consequences, I'd get it done in an hour. If someone dropped something on my desk at 4:30 that they wanted by 9:00 the next morning, I'd get it to them at 10;00 and so on. I adjusted my timeline so other people would have to adjust theirs --- without having a conversation about it (and again, when no major consequences would occur).
See --- the problem was, the people I worked for needed to understand that while they thought what they had was priority, it sometimes wasn't because of something else I was working on. Because much like your staff, I didn't work for any one particular person, I worked for a department. And the department always comes before an individual's needs within that department.
You need to up-manage your boss to understand this as well with regard to your staff. Also --- if he's really difficult, it's not a good idea to dedicate one staff person to him. Maybe one staff person for an individual project and rotate them through. But don't give one person to him for everything ---- at least, not if you want to keep your current staff anyway.
posted by zizzle at 6:05 AM on June 18, 2013
9:05 am given assignment, asked to complete by 12:00 pm
9:07 am began googling competitors for comparisons
9:20 am compiled initial results in table (see attached)
Etc, etc.
Have them, literally, account of every minute on the next project like this. And then you start to manage your boss by saying such things, "Well, I have here that the last project we were given that you wanted done by noon couldn't be completed until the next day because x, y, and z took awhile for a, b, and c reasons." Then what you start to say is, "Yes, we'll do our best," and if you can without serious consequences to clients or yourself --- let it take longer.
I would have projects dropped on me that people wanted in twenty minutes. If there were no significant consequences, I'd get it done in an hour. If someone dropped something on my desk at 4:30 that they wanted by 9:00 the next morning, I'd get it to them at 10;00 and so on. I adjusted my timeline so other people would have to adjust theirs --- without having a conversation about it (and again, when no major consequences would occur).
See --- the problem was, the people I worked for needed to understand that while they thought what they had was priority, it sometimes wasn't because of something else I was working on. Because much like your staff, I didn't work for any one particular person, I worked for a department. And the department always comes before an individual's needs within that department.
You need to up-manage your boss to understand this as well with regard to your staff. Also --- if he's really difficult, it's not a good idea to dedicate one staff person to him. Maybe one staff person for an individual project and rotate them through. But don't give one person to him for everything ---- at least, not if you want to keep your current staff anyway.
posted by zizzle at 6:05 AM on June 18, 2013
Just to clarify, I did this to curb the last minuteness of people in my department. Everyone was last minute. It wasn't fair to me.
I didn't do this for crisis situations or for well-planned projects. It was just for last minute matters that easily could have been handled days or hours before it reached critical mass ---- sounds similar to what your boss is doing and what you need to curb.
posted by zizzle at 6:07 AM on June 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
I didn't do this for crisis situations or for well-planned projects. It was just for last minute matters that easily could have been handled days or hours before it reached critical mass ---- sounds similar to what your boss is doing and what you need to curb.
posted by zizzle at 6:07 AM on June 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
All projects need to go through you. The boss needs to come to you with a request as do all other requestors. You can even get some tracking software, or just a big white-board with each person’s name and the projects they're working on.
I'll echo that this is the world's most common problem. I am an analyst and I work in Sales Operations with two contract analysts. It's their job to take requests to create contracts from the field. We have a workflow where all requests come to a mailbox, and then each analyst will claim the project and work on it. Sort of a self-balancing workflow.
At the end of the month we switch from creating new contracts to processing executed contracts. An email goes out to the field, "As of the 24th we will not be creating new contracts." But what inevitably happens is that someone will go around the central mailbox and contact the analyst directly asking 'just this one time' if that person could create a contract. Now, they're told to push back and/or refer the request to a manager. But do they? NO!
What's worse, they'll bitch and moan about all the work, and how they have to stay late, and how unfair it all is. Um. Hello. It's all on you. You said you'd do it, you didn't push back and you didn't refer it to a manager. It's your own damn fault.
How does this help you? You need to understand human nature. Some Admins LOVE to feel like they're rescuing the big boss. Then they love to complain about it.
So if an admin accepts an assignment directly from the big boss, it’s on her then if she’s stressed, late with other projects, etc.
This shit happens to me all the time. I have a calendar for when my various reports are due and their dependencies. So if I don’t get X, then the deadline for Y is in jeopardy. Also, if our bossity-boss comes to me with some cockamamie fire-drill, FYI, that’s how late all the other reports are going to be. So heads up.
Interestingly enough, I’m respected for laying out all the issues, and letting people know that my ability to set aside something directly impacts other items on my calendar.
So enough with the jargon and the buzzwords, it doesn't help to identify people's styles or methods, because at the end of the day, the boss is going to ask someone to stay late to work on something. So you need to insert yourself so that you can manage that process.
posted by Ruthless Bunny at 6:09 AM on June 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
I'll echo that this is the world's most common problem. I am an analyst and I work in Sales Operations with two contract analysts. It's their job to take requests to create contracts from the field. We have a workflow where all requests come to a mailbox, and then each analyst will claim the project and work on it. Sort of a self-balancing workflow.
At the end of the month we switch from creating new contracts to processing executed contracts. An email goes out to the field, "As of the 24th we will not be creating new contracts." But what inevitably happens is that someone will go around the central mailbox and contact the analyst directly asking 'just this one time' if that person could create a contract. Now, they're told to push back and/or refer the request to a manager. But do they? NO!
What's worse, they'll bitch and moan about all the work, and how they have to stay late, and how unfair it all is. Um. Hello. It's all on you. You said you'd do it, you didn't push back and you didn't refer it to a manager. It's your own damn fault.
How does this help you? You need to understand human nature. Some Admins LOVE to feel like they're rescuing the big boss. Then they love to complain about it.
So if an admin accepts an assignment directly from the big boss, it’s on her then if she’s stressed, late with other projects, etc.
This shit happens to me all the time. I have a calendar for when my various reports are due and their dependencies. So if I don’t get X, then the deadline for Y is in jeopardy. Also, if our bossity-boss comes to me with some cockamamie fire-drill, FYI, that’s how late all the other reports are going to be. So heads up.
Interestingly enough, I’m respected for laying out all the issues, and letting people know that my ability to set aside something directly impacts other items on my calendar.
So enough with the jargon and the buzzwords, it doesn't help to identify people's styles or methods, because at the end of the day, the boss is going to ask someone to stay late to work on something. So you need to insert yourself so that you can manage that process.
posted by Ruthless Bunny at 6:09 AM on June 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
If you are "second in command", how come your boss isn't giving the tasks to you to delegate and assign? I would think it would be your duty to fill in the details. A general gives orders to his staff of officers and they give orders to the troops. If this is something you don't want to do maybe he needs a higher level administrative assistant that can better do the job of deciphering the project details. This would be someone who was experience or specific training in working on these types of projects and is sharp enough to fill in missing details or at least make qualified guesses.
Irregardless, the admin staff should just do as good a job as they can and the details would get filled in on review of either your boss or your self. In most cases these are iterative processes where the final project documents are reviewed several times for completeness and accuracy. I know sometimes in our office, the admin gets bogged down in trying to analyze things in the technical documents that they don't understand rather than just type and let the supervisor review the first draft and do the markups which get corrected on the second draft.
posted by JJ86 at 6:13 AM on June 18, 2013
Irregardless, the admin staff should just do as good a job as they can and the details would get filled in on review of either your boss or your self. In most cases these are iterative processes where the final project documents are reviewed several times for completeness and accuracy. I know sometimes in our office, the admin gets bogged down in trying to analyze things in the technical documents that they don't understand rather than just type and let the supervisor review the first draft and do the markups which get corrected on the second draft.
posted by JJ86 at 6:13 AM on June 18, 2013
One thing I've done is to say: "We could do that, but it means that Other Boss's project won't be finished in time, so you two bosses negotiate that for me, would you?" It's worked pretty well- a) First Boss will decide it's not that important after all, b) Other Boss will say, yeah- postpone mine, or c) they'll have it out and Other Boss gets to tell him its his own damn fault for waiting til the last minute. It's worked really well for our tiny office. It also helps that all bosses are reasonable and good people, so YMMV.
posted by small_ruminant at 7:48 AM on June 18, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by small_ruminant at 7:48 AM on June 18, 2013 [4 favorites]
Without being snarky -- totally sincere -- this is what many many bosses are like. They are not early planners about administrative details. They don't even know those exist until there is an obstacle directly in front of them that requires an admin's help.
You are trying to apply contemporary workplace thinking -- aligning styles -- to an old-school boss. I don't think it's going to work. As others have said, just let him be and work around him by acting as the project manager of the administrative stuff. No matter how late in the game, you shuffle the deck. Direct them to come to you as soon as he unloads, and then you figure out who/how it gets done.
Then, during your performance review, be sure to point out this additional management responsibility you have taken on, which has undoubtedly resulted in a happier admin staff!
posted by thinkpiece at 8:18 AM on June 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
You are trying to apply contemporary workplace thinking -- aligning styles -- to an old-school boss. I don't think it's going to work. As others have said, just let him be and work around him by acting as the project manager of the administrative stuff. No matter how late in the game, you shuffle the deck. Direct them to come to you as soon as he unloads, and then you figure out who/how it gets done.
Then, during your performance review, be sure to point out this additional management responsibility you have taken on, which has undoubtedly resulted in a happier admin staff!
posted by thinkpiece at 8:18 AM on June 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
Best answer: Your boss and his approach (putting out fires) is very common. You have two choices to fix this, pick one:
1. Give him a dedicated executive assistant. No more competition for his tasks versus their other work since his tasks will be all of their work.
2. Require ALL professional staff, including your boss, to route work through YOU. You get the assignments and delegate them out to your staff, avoiding them being in the position of having to stand up to the boss/owner.
posted by TestamentToGrace at 8:52 AM on June 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
1. Give him a dedicated executive assistant. No more competition for his tasks versus their other work since his tasks will be all of their work.
2. Require ALL professional staff, including your boss, to route work through YOU. You get the assignments and delegate them out to your staff, avoiding them being in the position of having to stand up to the boss/owner.
posted by TestamentToGrace at 8:52 AM on June 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
One thing I'm thinking when I'm reading this is am I correct in assuming the total amount of work wouldn't change here whether your boss was a planner or not? I mean, if he figures out the details early in the process, the admin staff still needs to do the same amount of work as when he's coming to you at the last minute? The difference is that you'd be able to better allocate resources over the length of the project.
If this is the case, then I think the issue is that you're not budgeting time in for last minute things? And since you know your boss always does this, it's something you could probably easily do.
So every time you know there's a project due, just assume your boss will have a last minute thing. Assign someone to be basically free of tasks for the 1-2 days of the project (or for the afternoons of those last days). In the meantime, you could give that person a longer term project to work on during that time but which can be dropped immediately when he inevitably comes rushing for help.
posted by cali59 at 10:45 AM on June 18, 2013
If this is the case, then I think the issue is that you're not budgeting time in for last minute things? And since you know your boss always does this, it's something you could probably easily do.
So every time you know there's a project due, just assume your boss will have a last minute thing. Assign someone to be basically free of tasks for the 1-2 days of the project (or for the afternoons of those last days). In the meantime, you could give that person a longer term project to work on during that time but which can be dropped immediately when he inevitably comes rushing for help.
posted by cali59 at 10:45 AM on June 18, 2013
Dedicated admin for your boss - because they'll be much closer to what he's up to they can also preempt a lot of the last minute stuff and set this stuff in motion earlier...everybody is happier and your boss looks good!
posted by koahiatamadl at 11:19 AM on June 18, 2013
posted by koahiatamadl at 11:19 AM on June 18, 2013
I nth having a person who is dedicated to the boss only, OR that you start "planning ahead for someone to be available for a big push 1-2 days before his deadlines." Heck, maybe have people draw straws or rotate which one of them is going to have to work late when the boss comes running.
Because he's the boss. He can do whatever he wants--that's the point of being the boss, that you get "the little people" to do it for you. They really, really can't say no to him without consequences and it's socially Not Okay to do at most jobs anyway. He has no incentive to change because everything has to revolve around him and his needs anyway, not what the poor admins want. I think your best bet for accommodating this is just planning ahead of time that he's going to come running to y'all at the last minute in a panic. That's the price of this job.
posted by jenfullmoon at 6:01 PM on June 18, 2013
Because he's the boss. He can do whatever he wants--that's the point of being the boss, that you get "the little people" to do it for you. They really, really can't say no to him without consequences and it's socially Not Okay to do at most jobs anyway. He has no incentive to change because everything has to revolve around him and his needs anyway, not what the poor admins want. I think your best bet for accommodating this is just planning ahead of time that he's going to come running to y'all at the last minute in a panic. That's the price of this job.
posted by jenfullmoon at 6:01 PM on June 18, 2013
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by Bella Sebastian at 11:05 PM on June 17, 2013 [9 favorites]