Toxic employee strikes again!
April 21, 2018 7:02 AM Subscribe
My direct report plagiarized my own work in her written performance review, copying sections of a document I had written nominating another team member for an award to describe her own performance. The document itself was confidential. My manager and I can't think how she could have accessed it in the first place. Help me get past my befuddlement and come up with a plan to deal with the situation.
For some background: It's performance review time for staff at the large University where I am a low-level supervisor. The University HR department has been incredibly lax over the decades, and in the three years I've been working there, I've regularly observed poor performance and toxic behavior from long term employees who know that there are very few consequences for bad behavior. This particular employee, let's call her Louise, has been a known problem for nearly 30 years. She has terrible attendance, regularly screws up straightforward work, doesn't take any responsibility for her actions, is a huge gossip, etc. etc.
Louise's coworker, with whom she feels a strong rivalry not reciprocated by the other employee, won a service award a few weeks ago. It was my manager's idea to nominate this person, and I wrote the nomination (2 pages), and then subsequently the blurbs for a poster and the announcement at the award ceremony. We assumed Louise would do something to create drama, but as luck would have it, she was absent the day of the award ceremony so things have been fairly quiet. Fast forward to Thursday, when I'm reading the comments Louise has input to the performance management software, and realize that she has copied language I used in the nomination for the other team member. She changed some words, but with some sentences largely intact, it's clearly ripped from my work. Louise would never use some of the vocabulary or the fairly elevated writing style I was playing with in the nomination.
We do not know how she accessed the file, though she's no computer whiz so assuming someone else gave it to her. It had been shared from my Google Drive account privately to my manager and the person in admin collecting the nominations. The awardee herself has not seen the nomination, but I don't know who else has seen it in admin. My name is on it, so Louise should know I wrote it.
I've introduced the situation over email with my manager (who has a long, frustrated history with Louise herself), and she's asked me how I would like to handle the situation. My brain isn't wired for dealing with this kind of passive-aggressive, petty person, and I'm at a loss how to proceed. I can't get past how bizarre this is, and generally how grumpy I am that I have to deal with the situation at all over all of the other productive, interesting things I could be doing. This feels a like a big ol' drag, but I need to get past my feelings and deal with it.
Performance reviews are due a week from Monday (hard deadline). My manager and I already have a meeting on the calendar to discuss issues related to my team's work with my manager's manager, our organizational development person, and our HR rep for this upcoming Thursday. Any suggestions how to address the issue with Louise and/or the higher-ups would be appreciated!
For some background: It's performance review time for staff at the large University where I am a low-level supervisor. The University HR department has been incredibly lax over the decades, and in the three years I've been working there, I've regularly observed poor performance and toxic behavior from long term employees who know that there are very few consequences for bad behavior. This particular employee, let's call her Louise, has been a known problem for nearly 30 years. She has terrible attendance, regularly screws up straightforward work, doesn't take any responsibility for her actions, is a huge gossip, etc. etc.
Louise's coworker, with whom she feels a strong rivalry not reciprocated by the other employee, won a service award a few weeks ago. It was my manager's idea to nominate this person, and I wrote the nomination (2 pages), and then subsequently the blurbs for a poster and the announcement at the award ceremony. We assumed Louise would do something to create drama, but as luck would have it, she was absent the day of the award ceremony so things have been fairly quiet. Fast forward to Thursday, when I'm reading the comments Louise has input to the performance management software, and realize that she has copied language I used in the nomination for the other team member. She changed some words, but with some sentences largely intact, it's clearly ripped from my work. Louise would never use some of the vocabulary or the fairly elevated writing style I was playing with in the nomination.
We do not know how she accessed the file, though she's no computer whiz so assuming someone else gave it to her. It had been shared from my Google Drive account privately to my manager and the person in admin collecting the nominations. The awardee herself has not seen the nomination, but I don't know who else has seen it in admin. My name is on it, so Louise should know I wrote it.
I've introduced the situation over email with my manager (who has a long, frustrated history with Louise herself), and she's asked me how I would like to handle the situation. My brain isn't wired for dealing with this kind of passive-aggressive, petty person, and I'm at a loss how to proceed. I can't get past how bizarre this is, and generally how grumpy I am that I have to deal with the situation at all over all of the other productive, interesting things I could be doing. This feels a like a big ol' drag, but I need to get past my feelings and deal with it.
Performance reviews are due a week from Monday (hard deadline). My manager and I already have a meeting on the calendar to discuss issues related to my team's work with my manager's manager, our organizational development person, and our HR rep for this upcoming Thursday. Any suggestions how to address the issue with Louise and/or the higher-ups would be appreciated!
as for data security issue, i wouldn't even attempt to address that directly but instead institute department-wide policies focusing on compartmentalizing as appropriate.
this all assumes that you're not suddenly pushing to have her fired, which i assumed was unlikely given her ability to flaunt her poor performance in the past and the large university environment.
posted by noloveforned at 7:13 AM on April 21, 2018 [2 favorites]
this all assumes that you're not suddenly pushing to have her fired, which i assumed was unlikely given her ability to flaunt her poor performance in the past and the large university environment.
posted by noloveforned at 7:13 AM on April 21, 2018 [2 favorites]
Best answer: Oh, Louise. Silly, silly Louise. Silly, silly, plagiarizing Louise who has been there for 30 years and ain't going anywhere. We all have a Louise.
One of the very few truisms I've learned in my many years is that our supervisors want us to handle our own stuff. Sure, they say the door is always open and the support is there, but it's not true. They really don't want to be presented with problems, and since yours asked how you want to proceed, it's a safe bet that's code for, "Please don't bother me about this; Louise has been a known fill-in-the-blank since prehistoric days and nothing's going to change so please don't present me with Chapter 72 of What Louise has Screwed up Today."
Unless Louise is actively screwing up your chances of promotion or good performance reviews or anything that directly interferes with your career path, forget her.*
*Also, use every terrible thing she does as an active reminder of What to Never Do at Work. Reframing her actions and being grateful for the opportunity to learn from her can feel empowering.
posted by yes I said yes I will Yes at 7:17 AM on April 21, 2018 [49 favorites]
One of the very few truisms I've learned in my many years is that our supervisors want us to handle our own stuff. Sure, they say the door is always open and the support is there, but it's not true. They really don't want to be presented with problems, and since yours asked how you want to proceed, it's a safe bet that's code for, "Please don't bother me about this; Louise has been a known fill-in-the-blank since prehistoric days and nothing's going to change so please don't present me with Chapter 72 of What Louise has Screwed up Today."
Unless Louise is actively screwing up your chances of promotion or good performance reviews or anything that directly interferes with your career path, forget her.*
*Also, use every terrible thing she does as an active reminder of What to Never Do at Work. Reframing her actions and being grateful for the opportunity to learn from her can feel empowering.
posted by yes I said yes I will Yes at 7:17 AM on April 21, 2018 [49 favorites]
Probably, Louise is friends with someone who works in the office that evaluates the award, and that person showed her a copy of the nomination. Either that, or somehow someone left a draft out somewhere. (Is there any chance you left a draft in the recycling bin or to-be-shredded bin? We have a locked to-be-shredded bin, but there's a key to it that you could use if you were really nosy.)
Honestly, I would probably not address the plagiarism at all. She'll deny it, and it will become the entire focus of the performance review. Instead, I would carefully document all the tangible ways in which her performance is not acceptable.
And then remember that Louise may have a mole in the office to which you sent the nomination. I don't know how that could potentially change your behavior, but it's a good thing to keep in the back of your head.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 7:20 AM on April 21, 2018 [6 favorites]
Honestly, I would probably not address the plagiarism at all. She'll deny it, and it will become the entire focus of the performance review. Instead, I would carefully document all the tangible ways in which her performance is not acceptable.
And then remember that Louise may have a mole in the office to which you sent the nomination. I don't know how that could potentially change your behavior, but it's a good thing to keep in the back of your head.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 7:20 AM on April 21, 2018 [6 favorites]
Long-term employees have deep and unknown alliances. You've only been there three years! She has TEN TIMES that to draw from. I've seen lifer colleagues ensconced in the break room and never realized they even knew each other, let alone knew each other well enough to have a highly-charged, in-depth head's-together conversation. You just. never. know.
She could have gotten that file (or access to the program) from literally anyone, and you will never know. So I really think any effort expended in that direction would be a waste. Suffice to say, someone Louise has a deep alliance with helped her out, and will never reveal the connection.
Is direct confrontation even possible? Sit her down and say, "I'm at a loss here- what is your goal, Louise? Why are you doing this?" Don't express anything that indicates how you FEEL about it. Just stick to the narrative of, "Help me understand you, and why you chose to do this." Because with someone like this, they act out in these passive-aggressive ways for reasons so dark and deeply obscured that you'll never find them. She may resent you. She may feel passed over or ignored in some other way. It's a mystery. Only she knows. Her ego may be unable to resist the spotlight, and if you pour on the (feigned) deference, she may not be able to stop herself from showing off and monologuing about it.
posted by I_Love_Bananas at 7:27 AM on April 21, 2018 [9 favorites]
She could have gotten that file (or access to the program) from literally anyone, and you will never know. So I really think any effort expended in that direction would be a waste. Suffice to say, someone Louise has a deep alliance with helped her out, and will never reveal the connection.
Is direct confrontation even possible? Sit her down and say, "I'm at a loss here- what is your goal, Louise? Why are you doing this?" Don't express anything that indicates how you FEEL about it. Just stick to the narrative of, "Help me understand you, and why you chose to do this." Because with someone like this, they act out in these passive-aggressive ways for reasons so dark and deeply obscured that you'll never find them. She may resent you. She may feel passed over or ignored in some other way. It's a mystery. Only she knows. Her ego may be unable to resist the spotlight, and if you pour on the (feigned) deference, she may not be able to stop herself from showing off and monologuing about it.
posted by I_Love_Bananas at 7:27 AM on April 21, 2018 [9 favorites]
Ugh, this is a pain, but I agree with the above about not letting it drain too much of your energy, or your supervisor's. Sadly, many big organizations like university and government are saddled with this kind of situation, and much as we all want to "do the right thing" as managers, your ability to change anything here is very limited. You are actually quite lucky that your own manager recognizes this and is not expecting you to work magic in terms of improving Louise's performance. Sometimes, the best you can do is "encapsulate" someone like that so they don't taint things for everyone else.
I'd just give her the performance review and rating you think she deserves, regardless of her inflated language describing herself. If you need to edit, or even delete and rewrite, do that. If she protests and points to the description she used, say that simply doesn't match what you have seen from her. As always, have specific examples of what you have seen, and how it has affected her performance. (I might fantasize about adding something along the lines of "and where did you get that language?" but that would probably not be productive and might inflame the situation unnecessarily.)
The question of the data breach is a separate one, in my view. In that case I'd follow up with the administrative section, either directly with the person or their supervisor (depending on the norms, atmosphere and relationships in your organization) and explain that there was a leak and you need to know what happened so it doesn't happen again.
And then, after that, focus your time and attention on your other excellent employees.
posted by rpfields at 7:30 AM on April 21, 2018 [3 favorites]
I'd just give her the performance review and rating you think she deserves, regardless of her inflated language describing herself. If you need to edit, or even delete and rewrite, do that. If she protests and points to the description she used, say that simply doesn't match what you have seen from her. As always, have specific examples of what you have seen, and how it has affected her performance. (I might fantasize about adding something along the lines of "and where did you get that language?" but that would probably not be productive and might inflame the situation unnecessarily.)
The question of the data breach is a separate one, in my view. In that case I'd follow up with the administrative section, either directly with the person or their supervisor (depending on the norms, atmosphere and relationships in your organization) and explain that there was a leak and you need to know what happened so it doesn't happen again.
And then, after that, focus your time and attention on your other excellent employees.
posted by rpfields at 7:30 AM on April 21, 2018 [3 favorites]
That being said- what is YOUR goal? A 30-year person in academia could practically commit murder before being booted. Nothing you say is likely to impact her job status. Reviews are especially bogus in such a tenure-laden, practically government-job environment. The university enabled the creation of Louise, and it's ridiculous to expect you to take on the burden of "managing" her, let alone achieving any sort of sanctions or consequences for a clear violation. Louise is shoving her protected status in your face for her own twisted reasons. Only you can decide what to do about it, knowing that truthfully, nothing you do is likely to make the slightest bit of difference.
posted by I_Love_Bananas at 7:31 AM on April 21, 2018 [4 favorites]
posted by I_Love_Bananas at 7:31 AM on April 21, 2018 [4 favorites]
Flag it to your superior, make a record and move on.
I agree asking you how you wanted to proceed was code for "this is not actionable or important."
I'm sorry. It sucks. Take back your life, stop caring about Louise.
posted by jbenben at 7:32 AM on April 21, 2018 [8 favorites]
I agree asking you how you wanted to proceed was code for "this is not actionable or important."
I'm sorry. It sucks. Take back your life, stop caring about Louise.
posted by jbenben at 7:32 AM on April 21, 2018 [8 favorites]
Best answer: So she’s quoting you to yourself? That sounds like a clear attempt to get you to confront her. Seriously consider ignoring it. I’m not clear on how your performance reviews work, but if you can, delete those lines without comment. If she asks why, just say you don’t think they’re applicable. And be grateful you aren’t this miserable petty person.
posted by FencingGal at 8:13 AM on April 21, 2018 [26 favorites]
posted by FencingGal at 8:13 AM on April 21, 2018 [26 favorites]
Data security doesn't deal with printing, which is how I imagine she got this, so you and your manager should both change your passwords for safety and move on.
posted by DarlingBri at 8:15 AM on April 21, 2018 [3 favorites]
posted by DarlingBri at 8:15 AM on April 21, 2018 [3 favorites]
Re. access, as a ten-year alumnus in my own large organization I still have access to folders from various offices and positions from the entire period, I would imagine she has similar, including perhaps delegate-status in some mail accounts. If she’s underworked and snoopy maybe she keeps herself up to date.
posted by Iteki at 8:16 AM on April 21, 2018 [5 favorites]
posted by Iteki at 8:16 AM on April 21, 2018 [5 favorites]
This sounds like issues of motivation and appreciation. Does Louise ever hear anything about what she’s done well? Does anyone ever thank Louise?
Also, there’s a chance Louise is underpaid and knows it. Louise is a woman, she works in academia, and she has probably watched inexperienced men get hired at a rate higher than what she’s making.
I’d bet that the problem is within the organization, and Louise is exhibiting behavior that is a reaction to/symptom of a not great work environment.
Address the environment. Find things to like about Louise, and convey them I her without blowing smoke up her ass.
And make sure Louise is being paid enough.
Also, when you get to the review portion that includes asking Louise for her feedback? Find actionable things in her requests and do them. And thank her for making the suggestions.
posted by bilabial at 8:25 AM on April 21, 2018 [11 favorites]
Also, there’s a chance Louise is underpaid and knows it. Louise is a woman, she works in academia, and she has probably watched inexperienced men get hired at a rate higher than what she’s making.
I’d bet that the problem is within the organization, and Louise is exhibiting behavior that is a reaction to/symptom of a not great work environment.
Address the environment. Find things to like about Louise, and convey them I her without blowing smoke up her ass.
And make sure Louise is being paid enough.
Also, when you get to the review portion that includes asking Louise for her feedback? Find actionable things in her requests and do them. And thank her for making the suggestions.
posted by bilabial at 8:25 AM on April 21, 2018 [11 favorites]
Maybe the admin shared the password to the relevant account with Louise at some point in the past (like, “hey can you print these off for me, I’m busy”, or possibly Louise bullied the admin into giving it to her)? Anything’s possible, as far as her access to the document.
Yeah, I don’t think she’s manageable. How far off from retirement is she?
posted by cotton dress sock at 8:34 AM on April 21, 2018
Yeah, I don’t think she’s manageable. How far off from retirement is she?
posted by cotton dress sock at 8:34 AM on April 21, 2018
Best answer: If her performance isn't adequate, start documenting those issues and putting her on a performance plan, with the goal of either ending her employment or finding a role she's more suited to.
I don't agree with not confronting her. As the manager, it's your job to represent what is appropriate and acceptable. Even if you're wasting your breath, you should say to her "I noticed that you copied much of this language from another document. That is not appropriate. We expect certain documents to be your original work, particularly HR documents such as this, in the future." And then move on. She is acting out. You're neither rewarding it with major drama nor letting it pass as though you are too intimidated to address it. If it really bothers you, email her and tell her that you'll need this to be original writing, so you've rescheduled the performance review and would like a revised version by a week from now.
Then use the meeting with the higher ups to either give them a heads up that this minor issue is happening or to inform them of your plan to start moving her towards the door via slowly but steadily holding her responsible for meeting the requirements of the position.
This is a big drag, but it's an opportunity to develop your managerial skills.
posted by salvia at 9:04 AM on April 21, 2018 [24 favorites]
I don't agree with not confronting her. As the manager, it's your job to represent what is appropriate and acceptable. Even if you're wasting your breath, you should say to her "I noticed that you copied much of this language from another document. That is not appropriate. We expect certain documents to be your original work, particularly HR documents such as this, in the future." And then move on. She is acting out. You're neither rewarding it with major drama nor letting it pass as though you are too intimidated to address it. If it really bothers you, email her and tell her that you'll need this to be original writing, so you've rescheduled the performance review and would like a revised version by a week from now.
Then use the meeting with the higher ups to either give them a heads up that this minor issue is happening or to inform them of your plan to start moving her towards the door via slowly but steadily holding her responsible for meeting the requirements of the position.
This is a big drag, but it's an opportunity to develop your managerial skills.
posted by salvia at 9:04 AM on April 21, 2018 [24 favorites]
Do you really think it was a coincidence she was out the day the other employee got the award? Me thinks not. She knew it was coming and did not want to be there. She also thought she had plausible deniability if she used the language because she would say she was not there that day and could not possibly have access to your documents.
I don't know what her end game is, but she is directly testing you and your mettle. She wants to see if you will do something about it and she is betting you won't. If she is not confronted about it, she has carte blanche to do whatever she wants.
I take a different approach. I would confront her or have someone else do it. You could have IT do an investigation into security to see who accessed the document. Let IT interview her. Even if nothing comes of it, she will be on notice.
But I would confront her directly.She may deny it, and you would have to prove it, but again, you would be on notice and her cronies would be on notice. {People may be helping Louise, but I bet no one is willing to lose their job for her.
posted by AugustWest at 9:10 AM on April 21, 2018
I don't know what her end game is, but she is directly testing you and your mettle. She wants to see if you will do something about it and she is betting you won't. If she is not confronted about it, she has carte blanche to do whatever she wants.
I take a different approach. I would confront her or have someone else do it. You could have IT do an investigation into security to see who accessed the document. Let IT interview her. Even if nothing comes of it, she will be on notice.
But I would confront her directly.She may deny it, and you would have to prove it, but again, you would be on notice and her cronies would be on notice. {People may be helping Louise, but I bet no one is willing to lose their job for her.
posted by AugustWest at 9:10 AM on April 21, 2018
Ask A Manager has a whole bunch of advice about employee plagiarism, and advocates a technique that kind of boils down to talking to the problem employee and saying something like “when I was looking at your review I found language that was extremely similar to language that I recently used in a confidential document. Can you explain what happened here?” and using the employee’s response to inform any consequences.
Ask A Manager also has loads of excellent advice about dealing with toxic employees, even in notoriously difficult to fire places like higher education. Looking through her columns will probably give you some good ideas to try for this and future situations.
posted by Kpele at 9:12 AM on April 21, 2018 [26 favorites]
Ask A Manager also has loads of excellent advice about dealing with toxic employees, even in notoriously difficult to fire places like higher education. Looking through her columns will probably give you some good ideas to try for this and future situations.
posted by Kpele at 9:12 AM on April 21, 2018 [26 favorites]
Address the access to confidential files separately. Do a google search for specific phrases to see if the document is as secure as you intended. Use our non-dominant browser so it doesn't come from cached data. If your google account is part of the University, fine. If not, and if ou put a confidential document on it, you may be out of compliance with policy. Cover your ass 1st, then talk to HR about the issue of a staff member gaining access to someone else's confidential personnel data. This is a big deal. If your Uni does not have good policies, agitate for this to improve. In many places, this is a fire-able offense. The fact that she plagiarized is lazy, but writing this crap is hard and I used to lift sentences form web sites for reviews to develop my own boilerplate.
Do a meaningful review using her Job Desc. Does her job desc. need to be changed? If there are things she does well, say so. Otherwise be very blandly accurate, going line by line through her job requirements.
Employee meets minimum standard for this. I encourage Employee to make some effort to improve at this task by doing X.
Employee does not meet minimum standard for this. Employee must improve at this task by doing X. W resources will be provided to Employee to assist her in meeting this requirement.
I managed a severely underperforming employee. Employee was genuinely awful at their job, abused sick time, did not maintain knowledge of job area, was a jerk to women, etc. Other staff, other departments complained. It was a violation of confidentiality policy that got the person fired. Managing an underperformer will make everyone hate you, even though they massively resent the underperformer. HR is no use. Tread carefully.
posted by theora55 at 9:19 AM on April 21, 2018 [2 favorites]
Do a meaningful review using her Job Desc. Does her job desc. need to be changed? If there are things she does well, say so. Otherwise be very blandly accurate, going line by line through her job requirements.
Employee meets minimum standard for this. I encourage Employee to make some effort to improve at this task by doing X.
Employee does not meet minimum standard for this. Employee must improve at this task by doing X. W resources will be provided to Employee to assist her in meeting this requirement.
I managed a severely underperforming employee. Employee was genuinely awful at their job, abused sick time, did not maintain knowledge of job area, was a jerk to women, etc. Other staff, other departments complained. It was a violation of confidentiality policy that got the person fired. Managing an underperformer will make everyone hate you, even though they massively resent the underperformer. HR is no use. Tread carefully.
posted by theora55 at 9:19 AM on April 21, 2018 [2 favorites]
Im not sure I fully understand this - she has altered your write up of her performance review? Or just changed the default language to include pieces of the language you wrote before you add your own thoughts? Or is this just her suggestions for her own performance review?
I don’t think I would consider this “plagiarism” - unless the expectation is that people come up completely with their own language for this. I know when I’ve written other people’s performance reviews, I’ve absolutely taken a peek at other people’s performance reviews, my own performance reviews, etc, to have more normative language. I’m sure someone at admin showed it to her because it was a Known Rivalry and she asked for a copy. I would also never dream that something like this was capital-C Confidential, unless it had been mentioned - it’s a write up for an academic award that was received publicly.
I think it might be useful to consider how you would feel if someone not Louise - a good performer not given to gossip - had done something like this. Would you be assuming it was a passive aggressive attack on you, or some boilerplate lifting?
posted by corb at 9:23 AM on April 21, 2018 [3 favorites]
I don’t think I would consider this “plagiarism” - unless the expectation is that people come up completely with their own language for this. I know when I’ve written other people’s performance reviews, I’ve absolutely taken a peek at other people’s performance reviews, my own performance reviews, etc, to have more normative language. I’m sure someone at admin showed it to her because it was a Known Rivalry and she asked for a copy. I would also never dream that something like this was capital-C Confidential, unless it had been mentioned - it’s a write up for an academic award that was received publicly.
I think it might be useful to consider how you would feel if someone not Louise - a good performer not given to gossip - had done something like this. Would you be assuming it was a passive aggressive attack on you, or some boilerplate lifting?
posted by corb at 9:23 AM on April 21, 2018 [3 favorites]
It's not clear whether or not you have any power to create consequences for Louise. If there's nothing you can do then there's nothing you can do. If you confront her and her response is some variation on, "So, what are you gonna do about it?" and there's nothing you can do, she'll have won a much bigger victory than if you simply ignore this.
If you have no actual power here, all you can do is flag it up the chain, document it, and move on. If you do have the power to create some sort of consequence, then I suggest you work on that. If I plaigairized my own boss to himself like this, I'd expect to see some significant consequences. I don't know that I'd get fired right there, but there would definitely be an uncomfortable conversation ending with the understanding that I could get fired if I continued that sort of behavior. And certainly it would come up in my annual performance review, which at my job is actually a meaningful thing that has a bearing on things like raises and promotions.
Don't start a confrontation if you can't back yourself up. An employee like this will not care about having an uncomfortable conversation with her boss. Shame doesn't work on people like this.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 9:28 AM on April 21, 2018 [3 favorites]
If you have no actual power here, all you can do is flag it up the chain, document it, and move on. If you do have the power to create some sort of consequence, then I suggest you work on that. If I plaigairized my own boss to himself like this, I'd expect to see some significant consequences. I don't know that I'd get fired right there, but there would definitely be an uncomfortable conversation ending with the understanding that I could get fired if I continued that sort of behavior. And certainly it would come up in my annual performance review, which at my job is actually a meaningful thing that has a bearing on things like raises and promotions.
Don't start a confrontation if you can't back yourself up. An employee like this will not care about having an uncomfortable conversation with her boss. Shame doesn't work on people like this.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 9:28 AM on April 21, 2018 [3 favorites]
Im not sure I fully understand this - she has altered your write up of her performance review? Or just changed the default language to include pieces of the language you wrote before you add your own thoughts? Or is this just her suggestions for her own performance review?I'm a staff member at a university, although presumably not the same university. The first part of my performance review is a self-evaluation, in which I document everything I've done in the past year and then answer some inane questions about my accomplishments, professional development, and goals. I assume that Louise borrowed language to fill out something like this. (And I do have a bit of sympathy, because it is an enormous waste of my time that I resent every year.)
My hunch is that some of you guys have never worked in higher ed, because some of the answers here are very private sector. Assume that there are no resources (so, for instance, IT is probably not going to do much of an investigation), and it's very, very, very hard to fire an ensconced staff member just because they're incompetent.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 9:28 AM on April 21, 2018 [8 favorites]
Best answer: If there's nothing you can do, do the performance review as normal and then mention it offhand just at the end of summing everything up. And then go grey rock on the issue. If she tries to deny it, your answer is "that's how I see it", if she tries to apologise, "you already did it", just make it clear that you're not going to waste effort discussing this clearly provocative thing she did.
posted by ambrosen at 9:49 AM on April 21, 2018 [6 favorites]
posted by ambrosen at 9:49 AM on April 21, 2018 [6 favorites]
Ignore the plagarism, and take the words at face value, as if she wrote those words to sincerely attribute those qualities to herself.
Then the conversation isn't about anything except the disconnect between how she views her own performance and the way you and everyone else providing feedback view her performance.
Now you can do the standard stuff: focus on one thing she ascribes to herself but does not actually do according to the feedback you have collected, and work with her to make a plan for her improvement in that one area.
Then you can go back to focusing on people who actually want to grow and improve, and if she actually works toward the plan, you can actually make progress with her too (and you've started the paper trail if she simply won't or can't improve )
posted by davejay at 11:21 AM on April 21, 2018 [2 favorites]
Then the conversation isn't about anything except the disconnect between how she views her own performance and the way you and everyone else providing feedback view her performance.
Now you can do the standard stuff: focus on one thing she ascribes to herself but does not actually do according to the feedback you have collected, and work with her to make a plan for her improvement in that one area.
Then you can go back to focusing on people who actually want to grow and improve, and if she actually works toward the plan, you can actually make progress with her too (and you've started the paper trail if she simply won't or can't improve )
posted by davejay at 11:21 AM on April 21, 2018 [2 favorites]
A similar thing happened to me (employee lifted whole sections of someone else's award nomination for their self eval) -- this was before I worked in higher ed, but I just gave the employee a fair and accurate evaluation. (My employee wasn't bad, just had a very inflated sense of his contributions.)
Unless Louise wrote something that took credit for her colleague's work, I don't think it really matters that she used "elevated" (which I'm taking to mean kind of over-the-top, enthusiastic, overly effusive) language; at least at in my experience the only thing that really matters is your rating, which is given by the manager, and ultimately impacts your merit increase. I'm also staff at a university and I've seen this several times , in large part because it's been encouraged to really, strongly, cheerlead yourself to maximize the positive outcome of your performance review by reminding your manager of your accomplishments.
I get your frustration with ineffective, difficult to fire, and frankly not very pleasant "lifers"(oh boy, do I!) but don't know that I would consider this a big deal, unless you can prove that she accessed something she shouldn't have. At my current institution, those award nomination forms are supposed to be confidential but I've come across them in our publicly networked drives; your files may not be as confidential or secure as you think. I think it's bad form to just straight up lift material from/about someone else to describe your own work, but it's not the type of thing I'd generally consider to worthy of disciplinary action.
I'm not saying that you shouldn't address it all, especially since it sounds like your team has some overall issues that need to be dealt with, but I think you need to consider what you hope the outcome would be. She isn't going to quit, and it's highly unlikely that this is a fireable offense.
posted by sm1tten at 11:21 AM on April 21, 2018 [4 favorites]
Unless Louise wrote something that took credit for her colleague's work, I don't think it really matters that she used "elevated" (which I'm taking to mean kind of over-the-top, enthusiastic, overly effusive) language; at least at in my experience the only thing that really matters is your rating, which is given by the manager, and ultimately impacts your merit increase. I'm also staff at a university and I've seen this several times , in large part because it's been encouraged to really, strongly, cheerlead yourself to maximize the positive outcome of your performance review by reminding your manager of your accomplishments.
I get your frustration with ineffective, difficult to fire, and frankly not very pleasant "lifers"(oh boy, do I!) but don't know that I would consider this a big deal, unless you can prove that she accessed something she shouldn't have. At my current institution, those award nomination forms are supposed to be confidential but I've come across them in our publicly networked drives; your files may not be as confidential or secure as you think. I think it's bad form to just straight up lift material from/about someone else to describe your own work, but it's not the type of thing I'd generally consider to worthy of disciplinary action.
I'm not saying that you shouldn't address it all, especially since it sounds like your team has some overall issues that need to be dealt with, but I think you need to consider what you hope the outcome would be. She isn't going to quit, and it's highly unlikely that this is a fireable offense.
posted by sm1tten at 11:21 AM on April 21, 2018 [4 favorites]
As you say, the performance review is basically a ritual at universities, an attempt to have *some* degree of accountability in a job setting where achievements aren't easily measured. She sounds like she's taking the review with a grain of salt. She borrowed language, cut and pasted, because she doesn't care that much about the review. She does not probably think of this as your own inviolable work that she is plagiarizing, just some more verbiage to stick in there.
The subtext is poignant though, even if she is a PITA. She obviously is feeling that she deserves some of the praise given to the other employee, and so she's putting them there for herself.
This really seems like a not big deal to me and I take actual plagiarism seriously.
yes I said yes i will yes has a perfect attitude. I mean really, do you want to get this 60 year old person fired? She's doing the same thing she's always done in a work culture you've just entered, and it's basically annoying. Think what it really means to get fired. It can mean getting evicted. She wont' get another job easily. It's too much life punishment for being annoying.
Try to be kind, and ignore.
posted by flourpot at 11:25 AM on April 21, 2018 [8 favorites]
The subtext is poignant though, even if she is a PITA. She obviously is feeling that she deserves some of the praise given to the other employee, and so she's putting them there for herself.
This really seems like a not big deal to me and I take actual plagiarism seriously.
yes I said yes i will yes has a perfect attitude. I mean really, do you want to get this 60 year old person fired? She's doing the same thing she's always done in a work culture you've just entered, and it's basically annoying. Think what it really means to get fired. It can mean getting evicted. She wont' get another job easily. It's too much life punishment for being annoying.
Try to be kind, and ignore.
posted by flourpot at 11:25 AM on April 21, 2018 [8 favorites]
this makes little to no sense. if her self-evaluation is not objectively accurate and/or her subjective opinion of her own work quality doesn't match yours, you note that when you go over her evaluation with her. the way to "deal with the situation" is to complete an objective assessment in line with whatever guidelines your employer gives you, and make whatever salary change recommendation or adjustment of responsibilities or improvement plan is appropriate, given her performance. that's how you proceed with every direct report, every evaluation, every time.
A bullshit self-evaluation is not a creative product or a deliverable or a contest entry or a work for publication or any of the other things, however minor, where authorship matters and plagiarism is a concern. cutting & pasting boilerplate business bullshit is not helpful, but completely standard and not unethical. cutting & pasting your manager's own words is spectacularly unwise, and still not unethical. the official point of these things is to see if you and your manager agree on how well you're doing, which would be a No in this case no matter what she did or didn't cut & paste. the unofficial point of them is to vent spleen by making a case for how much much you deserve, knowing full well you aren't going to get it. and that is exactly what this woman has done.
the only reason to build this up into an incident is if you were honestly prepared to give her a promotion or a raise if she'd written a really terrific and original performance review essay, and now she's blown it all up for herself. is that the case? because it does not sound like it is the case.
posted by queenofbithynia at 11:53 AM on April 21, 2018 [4 favorites]
A bullshit self-evaluation is not a creative product or a deliverable or a contest entry or a work for publication or any of the other things, however minor, where authorship matters and plagiarism is a concern. cutting & pasting boilerplate business bullshit is not helpful, but completely standard and not unethical. cutting & pasting your manager's own words is spectacularly unwise, and still not unethical. the official point of these things is to see if you and your manager agree on how well you're doing, which would be a No in this case no matter what she did or didn't cut & paste. the unofficial point of them is to vent spleen by making a case for how much much you deserve, knowing full well you aren't going to get it. and that is exactly what this woman has done.
the only reason to build this up into an incident is if you were honestly prepared to give her a promotion or a raise if she'd written a really terrific and original performance review essay, and now she's blown it all up for herself. is that the case? because it does not sound like it is the case.
posted by queenofbithynia at 11:53 AM on April 21, 2018 [4 favorites]
I suspect the concern here is less the plagiarism (which is either petty as heck or just really ill-thought-out, I'm honestly not sure which) and the fact that Louise is accessing data which Louise should not be able to access. I agree that there are likely no resources available to explore how she got hold of the document. IT is unlikely to be any help at all, and she could easily have just gotten hold of a paper copy through the person in admin who collected the nominations.
If you really want to pursue this, you might take it up with that person who collected the nominations. If that person shared it directly with Louise, of course, they'll tell you nothing. If that person seems surprised or concerned, though, you might have a lead. Again, I don't know how you'd pursue that lead, but in an environment where confidential materials get shared, this sort of breach is not great, and informing the person in admin may help them ensure their own staff aren't mucking about with documents they shouldn't be, at the very least.
If you learn anything from contacting the nominations person, document it in Louise's file. She probably won't ever get disciplined, but it's not a bad idea to have a paper trail in place if her low-level shenanigans ever escalate -- particularly if she starts trying to undermine the 'rival' who got the award, which she probably will.
HARD disagree on empowering Louise / rewarding her behaviour by spinning her performance more positively than it deserves, or evincing deep concern over her levels of job satisfaction, or trying to please or placate her in any way. Convey to her in a neutral and objective way that she is not a good employee, if she is not a good employee, and enumerate the ways that she is not a good employee. Give her a detailed and honest performance review, as you would do for anyone else.
posted by halation at 12:18 PM on April 21, 2018 [7 favorites]
If you really want to pursue this, you might take it up with that person who collected the nominations. If that person shared it directly with Louise, of course, they'll tell you nothing. If that person seems surprised or concerned, though, you might have a lead. Again, I don't know how you'd pursue that lead, but in an environment where confidential materials get shared, this sort of breach is not great, and informing the person in admin may help them ensure their own staff aren't mucking about with documents they shouldn't be, at the very least.
If you learn anything from contacting the nominations person, document it in Louise's file. She probably won't ever get disciplined, but it's not a bad idea to have a paper trail in place if her low-level shenanigans ever escalate -- particularly if she starts trying to undermine the 'rival' who got the award, which she probably will.
HARD disagree on empowering Louise / rewarding her behaviour by spinning her performance more positively than it deserves, or evincing deep concern over her levels of job satisfaction, or trying to please or placate her in any way. Convey to her in a neutral and objective way that she is not a good employee, if she is not a good employee, and enumerate the ways that she is not a good employee. Give her a detailed and honest performance review, as you would do for anyone else.
posted by halation at 12:18 PM on April 21, 2018 [7 favorites]
We do not know how she accessed the file, though she's no computer whiz so assuming someone else gave it to her.
Someone who doesn't like her any better than you do, evidently -- I doubt very much that a person who's lasted 30 years despite general discontent with her performance and her personality would ever have risked plagarizing a supervisor if she'd known that was what she was doing.
I would say whoever gave it to her is a far worse problem for the university than Louise is.
She probably asked someone she trusted to help her compose the comments, and that person gave her your nominating document to set her up for being fired, and that would be despicable quite apart from the violation of confidentiality it would also entail.
posted by jamjam at 12:42 PM on April 21, 2018 [2 favorites]
Someone who doesn't like her any better than you do, evidently -- I doubt very much that a person who's lasted 30 years despite general discontent with her performance and her personality would ever have risked plagarizing a supervisor if she'd known that was what she was doing.
I would say whoever gave it to her is a far worse problem for the university than Louise is.
She probably asked someone she trusted to help her compose the comments, and that person gave her your nominating document to set her up for being fired, and that would be despicable quite apart from the violation of confidentiality it would also entail.
posted by jamjam at 12:42 PM on April 21, 2018 [2 favorites]
Also: as someone who frequently shares files in university platforms like Box etc: they are really not highly private or perfectly confidential. Don't put things up electronically if you want them to be really confidential. Or use one of the platforms meant for extra sensitive material (they take more time and effort, so people hardly use them except when necessary.) But really, people do get into each other's Boxes.
posted by flourpot at 12:42 PM on April 21, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by flourpot at 12:42 PM on April 21, 2018 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: Thanks for the nudges back to objectivity, and the commiseration. Surprised to hear of another identical situation! As others have suggested, I have very little authority in which to actually create real consequences for this person's bad behavior, and the idea that I could get her fired is kinda laughable. She'll work here until she decides to retire, that's the way it is. I'll proceed with the review as planned, which includes positive points as well as constructive criticism. I'll come up with some way to ask her about using the copied language, and see what she says, document, touch base with my manager and our HR rep, and move on.
posted by sk932 at 1:54 PM on April 21, 2018 [3 favorites]
posted by sk932 at 1:54 PM on April 21, 2018 [3 favorites]
I wouldn't bother asking her about the copied language. Louise is fucking with you. If you react to her, she wins. First, no matter how obvious it is that she copied your language, she'll deny it and sooner or later your "false" accusation will come up when you try to discipline her for something else. Second, you can't do anything to Louise. She knows it. You know it. The copying is her way of pointing out how powerless you are.
posted by rdr at 2:18 PM on April 21, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by rdr at 2:18 PM on April 21, 2018 [2 favorites]
Yeah, but wins what? Wins the mutual acknowledgment that you thought Rival was deserving of recognition and Louise wasn’t? Uh, yeah, I’d be like “That’s exactly what I think, and we’ll discuss this in detail at your performance review. And during that time, I’d like to hear an explanation from you about why you accessed your manager’s confidential document without permission.”
Just because you can’t fire her doesn’t mean you can’t make her sweat.
posted by Autumnheart at 3:07 PM on April 21, 2018 [3 favorites]
Just because you can’t fire her doesn’t mean you can’t make her sweat.
posted by Autumnheart at 3:07 PM on April 21, 2018 [3 favorites]
As a thirty-year higher-ed lifer who found herself years ago in a similar position with a competitive coworker, I have my own ideas about what happened here and why.
Louise has a coworker she feels a certain rivalry with. That coworker got nominated for an award for good performance.
Someone who knows Louise and has a certain level of access (might be support staff) is either on Louise's side, in which case the info was shared with her in commiseration, or is on her coworker's side, in which case the info was shared with Louise to fuck with her - to make her angry and to see what she'd do next.
If Louise isn't very competent, she probably also isn't very bright. She probably wouldn't realize if she were being set up for a fall. And Louise was probably angry and decided to claim for herself the accolade her rival received. Again, if she's not too bright it won't have occurred to her how petty and ridiculous this is going to make her look. So, don't assume it's Louise, or only Louise, who's in on this caper. Louise may be someone else's target, whose goal is to get her into serious trouble with you.
In my case, my Louise made a false report to our administration, claiming that I was on the take from one of our vendors. In other words, trying not just to get me fired, but to get me possibly charged with a crime as well. I had no idea she'd done this. . . until I got a phone call from a person whose voice I didn't recognize who literally said, "You don't know me, but you need to know your coworker did this to you." After explaining the situation, she told me she was told to secretly contact me on behalf of an unnamed higher-up who knew this was bullshit and was going to quash the accusation. But that person also wanted me to realize what my incompetent, lazy coworker was capable of.
Nothing happened to my Louise, but nothing happened to me, either. And a decade later, when I was targeted by a psycho superior from another department who made of hobby of picking unrelated victims to harass and hopefully get fired, I was approached again. This time by someone I did know, who simply told me that a higher-up wanted me to know what this nut was accusing me of, which resulted in an outside firm conducting a quiet investigation, and their conclusion. Which was: this lady is crazy. And once again, my secret higher-up protector wanted me to know.
posted by Lunaloon at 4:36 PM on April 21, 2018 [3 favorites]
Louise has a coworker she feels a certain rivalry with. That coworker got nominated for an award for good performance.
Someone who knows Louise and has a certain level of access (might be support staff) is either on Louise's side, in which case the info was shared with her in commiseration, or is on her coworker's side, in which case the info was shared with Louise to fuck with her - to make her angry and to see what she'd do next.
If Louise isn't very competent, she probably also isn't very bright. She probably wouldn't realize if she were being set up for a fall. And Louise was probably angry and decided to claim for herself the accolade her rival received. Again, if she's not too bright it won't have occurred to her how petty and ridiculous this is going to make her look. So, don't assume it's Louise, or only Louise, who's in on this caper. Louise may be someone else's target, whose goal is to get her into serious trouble with you.
In my case, my Louise made a false report to our administration, claiming that I was on the take from one of our vendors. In other words, trying not just to get me fired, but to get me possibly charged with a crime as well. I had no idea she'd done this. . . until I got a phone call from a person whose voice I didn't recognize who literally said, "You don't know me, but you need to know your coworker did this to you." After explaining the situation, she told me she was told to secretly contact me on behalf of an unnamed higher-up who knew this was bullshit and was going to quash the accusation. But that person also wanted me to realize what my incompetent, lazy coworker was capable of.
Nothing happened to my Louise, but nothing happened to me, either. And a decade later, when I was targeted by a psycho superior from another department who made of hobby of picking unrelated victims to harass and hopefully get fired, I was approached again. This time by someone I did know, who simply told me that a higher-up wanted me to know what this nut was accusing me of, which resulted in an outside firm conducting a quiet investigation, and their conclusion. Which was: this lady is crazy. And once again, my secret higher-up protector wanted me to know.
posted by Lunaloon at 4:36 PM on April 21, 2018 [3 favorites]
If your Google account is managed by your University (if your email address is username@yourschool.edu, it's likely), you have a Google administrator for the school's domain. Google admins can generally see who has access to a specific Google Doc, which may be informative.
FWIW, I'm with those saying you should address this. I also work in a large higher-ed institution and these folks are an insidious drain on morale and focus to those around them. I'm willing to bet that the rumor pipeline by you has as many branches as by me; word will get out that she was confronted. People who are silent but suffering around her drama will be grateful.
If you do want to take action later, you also need to establish a pattern. Start that soon, get the documentation on file, prepare for the battle.
posted by youknowwhatpart at 4:58 PM on April 21, 2018 [1 favorite]
FWIW, I'm with those saying you should address this. I also work in a large higher-ed institution and these folks are an insidious drain on morale and focus to those around them. I'm willing to bet that the rumor pipeline by you has as many branches as by me; word will get out that she was confronted. People who are silent but suffering around her drama will be grateful.
If you do want to take action later, you also need to establish a pattern. Start that soon, get the documentation on file, prepare for the battle.
posted by youknowwhatpart at 4:58 PM on April 21, 2018 [1 favorite]
Unfortunately, 30 year veterans who are just a nudge away from retirement *do* get fired from university staff positions. I've seen for example: after a series of petty errors over the decades (like, say, on the low magnitude of using text from a coworker for one's own performance review) one bigger mistake tips the scale. Sometimes they're transferred, but firing does happen. So please don't assume that nothing you do, as you choose how big a deal to make of a petty incident, can actually impact someone else's job. It can indeed. Source: i have been employed by a big university (faculty, but faculty are aware of why staff are fired) for 20 years.
posted by flourpot at 10:55 PM on April 21, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by flourpot at 10:55 PM on April 21, 2018 [2 favorites]
So please don't assume that nothing you do, as you choose how big a deal to make of a petty incident, can actually impact someone else's job. It can indeed.
...and maybe it should? Had action been taken with this person years ago, she wouldn't have done as much damage as she has; the fact that she's had years to be a toxic employee doesn't seem like much justification for protecting her now. There are plenty of people in the world looking for jobs who will show up for their shifts and not behave badly. Louise has chosen not to be one of those people and has continued making that choice for nigh-on thirty years! Does she deserve to be fired specifically for this? Probably not. Should bad behaviour be allowed to slide because she's close to retirement? I would say no.
posted by halation at 7:18 AM on April 22, 2018 [6 favorites]
...and maybe it should? Had action been taken with this person years ago, she wouldn't have done as much damage as she has; the fact that she's had years to be a toxic employee doesn't seem like much justification for protecting her now. There are plenty of people in the world looking for jobs who will show up for their shifts and not behave badly. Louise has chosen not to be one of those people and has continued making that choice for nigh-on thirty years! Does she deserve to be fired specifically for this? Probably not. Should bad behaviour be allowed to slide because she's close to retirement? I would say no.
posted by halation at 7:18 AM on April 22, 2018 [6 favorites]
She has terrible attendance, regularly screws up straightforward work, doesn't take any responsibility for her actions, is a huge gossip, etc. etc.
Sounds like this is the big stuff to put in the performance review and address with her.
Louise sounds to me like a narcissist - she thinks she can do whatever she wants without consequences, because she is just so great. To me this is where the plagiarism comes in - she thinks she should have gotten that award, and that you're being unfair to her. She's not going to listen to whatever you say or make changes, but instead just put you on whatever mental list of people she has that are unfair to her and don't understand how great she is.
If you can fire her or move things in that direction, do it. Enforce whatever penalties you can for her abuse of sick time, refuse to engage with her about anything that isn't work related, make clear that you have no time for her nonsense. You do not have to be patient or supportive with someone who is not making a genuine effort. There are plenty of people out there who would love her job and probably not cause the same level of trouble.
If you can't do that, try to minimize the damage she can do. Help other people avoid her. Stick her with projects that no one wants. If there's a way to put her on a performance improvement plan, do it. She sounds like she enjoys creating chaos for other people, and like she thinks every bad behavior she has is only a problem if someone else does it, not if she does it. Play her game back at her but do it better than she does - use her bad behavior against her, and when she complains about it, bring it up.
posted by bile and syntax at 8:57 AM on April 22, 2018 [1 favorite]
Sounds like this is the big stuff to put in the performance review and address with her.
Louise sounds to me like a narcissist - she thinks she can do whatever she wants without consequences, because she is just so great. To me this is where the plagiarism comes in - she thinks she should have gotten that award, and that you're being unfair to her. She's not going to listen to whatever you say or make changes, but instead just put you on whatever mental list of people she has that are unfair to her and don't understand how great she is.
If you can fire her or move things in that direction, do it. Enforce whatever penalties you can for her abuse of sick time, refuse to engage with her about anything that isn't work related, make clear that you have no time for her nonsense. You do not have to be patient or supportive with someone who is not making a genuine effort. There are plenty of people out there who would love her job and probably not cause the same level of trouble.
If you can't do that, try to minimize the damage she can do. Help other people avoid her. Stick her with projects that no one wants. If there's a way to put her on a performance improvement plan, do it. She sounds like she enjoys creating chaos for other people, and like she thinks every bad behavior she has is only a problem if someone else does it, not if she does it. Play her game back at her but do it better than she does - use her bad behavior against her, and when she complains about it, bring it up.
posted by bile and syntax at 8:57 AM on April 22, 2018 [1 favorite]
From Louise's point of view, you like her rival and you don't like her, so she is trying to make you like her. You know how, when you apply for a job, they tell you to tailor you job application to the ad? If the ad and the company's website uses the word forward-looking, your chances of getting a job there are enhanced by using the word forward-looking in your application letter? In her view that is what she is doing. You clearly value all those things that her rival does. In her opinion she does them too (as much as she can, and in her view at least as much as her rival).
She's not going to think of this is plagiarism, she's going to think of it as her following your written preferences. sk932 feels that clear communication is important, and she is a clear communicator; she understands everything that she is telling people. sk932 uses the phrase insightful evaluation and the word dedication - Dedicated, man, yes, she shows up for this wretched politics ridden job every damn morning. Insightful evaluation? Yep, she complains about the job to everyone she can corner. Unarguably, she is even better at this stuff than that boss's pet that you made up all that stuff about!
Remember that axiom "never attribute to malice what you can attribute to stupidity"?
So calling her out for plagiarism will probably make her feel much more defensive and much more misunderstood and much more picked on. In her head you are probably the boss from hell, but she has tenure and has to just weather you while trying to not get any worse on your bad side, nor let her mean suck-up co-workers take advantage of her.
I'm not saying that she's right or that she is forward-looking or anything like that. Basically, she is probably just bad at doing her job, and that includes doing a self evaluation, but my feeling on this is that she missed what self-evaluating means, and aimed for selling herself and missed that by a wince-inducing distance.
So I would use any part of her "self-evaluation" at which that you thought she had any remote chance of improving, and congratulate her for having those as her priority and even tell her that I had observed her working on those things too.
Once somebody is the toxic employee they are a bit of a scapegoat and probably can do nothing right. True, they may actually be the source of three-quarters of the problems in the department, but it is not effective managing to bitch about a bad employee to your manager, when she has tenure and can't be fired. The end game is to find ways to make working with and around that problem employee better and more effective. Confrontation is only workable if you mean to make her job hell for her so she quits. This can get you sued. So at this point you might find looking at her as the one you have to salvage, because as long as she is floundering she is pulling the department down. This is not to say that she might ever become capable of all those things, but if in the long run you are going to have to get other direct reports to do her work for her, then, well, what's the kindest way you can do that, without making your other direct reports unhappy and resentful.
I wouldn't tell her that she succeeded in those metrics. I would tell her that you can see she is making an effort - I see you are making and effort to get on with your co-workers, to learn the new upgraded software, to answer your e-mails promptly, etc.
Now chances are you and Louise loathe each other and will never be able to repair your relationship so that you actually like each other. The thing is, if she is dangerous because she hurts other people you need to protect them. If she is not dangerous and not causing other employees to cry in washroom cubicles, or to file harassment grievances, then she is annoying. And if she is annoying, that's mainly on you.
If someone is cranky, or incompetent, or disorganized or can't keep their information straight, or always feels other employees are picking on them, and yet can't be fired, your job is damage control, not rising to her bait. Annoyance and indignation will just wear you out and make your good direct reports insecure. They're going to always be just a little scared that you will start to refer to them the way your refer to Louise, because while they must be pretty sure she is awful, and that you are responding to that awfulness, they don't and shouldn't know just how awful she is. Which means if they make a mistake they are going to feel that you might think they are awful and toxic too.
As a manager the questions you need to be asking are what can you do to make your teem more effective. Right now you are indignant and looking more about how to correct and punish and bring her to a sense of how wrong she was to plagiarize the document. But punishing her for it, or shaming her will only increase the spiral of resentfulness and defensiveness on both of your parts. She's not going to become penitent. If you squelch her enough when you talk to her, she's going to burst into tears and hate you for being so mean. "Next time, please use your own words, rather than a source document."
Chances are she is so worried by the process of being evaluated that she is flailing badly. Her job may not be on line, but her self-esteem and her reputation, and the misery of working at the job are all very much impacted by this evaluation. What to do when an evaluation with a (in her opinion) toxic boss is looming? Go to your supportive peers for advice. Look up how to write a good evaluation, so her boss will actually see those strengths that she has. Suck up to your boss by highlighting all those things that are important to him or her, and show that they are important to you too...
Plagiarism??? That was research!
posted by Jane the Brown at 10:19 AM on April 22, 2018 [10 favorites]
She's not going to think of this is plagiarism, she's going to think of it as her following your written preferences. sk932 feels that clear communication is important, and she is a clear communicator; she understands everything that she is telling people. sk932 uses the phrase insightful evaluation and the word dedication - Dedicated, man, yes, she shows up for this wretched politics ridden job every damn morning. Insightful evaluation? Yep, she complains about the job to everyone she can corner. Unarguably, she is even better at this stuff than that boss's pet that you made up all that stuff about!
Remember that axiom "never attribute to malice what you can attribute to stupidity"?
So calling her out for plagiarism will probably make her feel much more defensive and much more misunderstood and much more picked on. In her head you are probably the boss from hell, but she has tenure and has to just weather you while trying to not get any worse on your bad side, nor let her mean suck-up co-workers take advantage of her.
I'm not saying that she's right or that she is forward-looking or anything like that. Basically, she is probably just bad at doing her job, and that includes doing a self evaluation, but my feeling on this is that she missed what self-evaluating means, and aimed for selling herself and missed that by a wince-inducing distance.
So I would use any part of her "self-evaluation" at which that you thought she had any remote chance of improving, and congratulate her for having those as her priority and even tell her that I had observed her working on those things too.
Once somebody is the toxic employee they are a bit of a scapegoat and probably can do nothing right. True, they may actually be the source of three-quarters of the problems in the department, but it is not effective managing to bitch about a bad employee to your manager, when she has tenure and can't be fired. The end game is to find ways to make working with and around that problem employee better and more effective. Confrontation is only workable if you mean to make her job hell for her so she quits. This can get you sued. So at this point you might find looking at her as the one you have to salvage, because as long as she is floundering she is pulling the department down. This is not to say that she might ever become capable of all those things, but if in the long run you are going to have to get other direct reports to do her work for her, then, well, what's the kindest way you can do that, without making your other direct reports unhappy and resentful.
I wouldn't tell her that she succeeded in those metrics. I would tell her that you can see she is making an effort - I see you are making and effort to get on with your co-workers, to learn the new upgraded software, to answer your e-mails promptly, etc.
Now chances are you and Louise loathe each other and will never be able to repair your relationship so that you actually like each other. The thing is, if she is dangerous because she hurts other people you need to protect them. If she is not dangerous and not causing other employees to cry in washroom cubicles, or to file harassment grievances, then she is annoying. And if she is annoying, that's mainly on you.
If someone is cranky, or incompetent, or disorganized or can't keep their information straight, or always feels other employees are picking on them, and yet can't be fired, your job is damage control, not rising to her bait. Annoyance and indignation will just wear you out and make your good direct reports insecure. They're going to always be just a little scared that you will start to refer to them the way your refer to Louise, because while they must be pretty sure she is awful, and that you are responding to that awfulness, they don't and shouldn't know just how awful she is. Which means if they make a mistake they are going to feel that you might think they are awful and toxic too.
As a manager the questions you need to be asking are what can you do to make your teem more effective. Right now you are indignant and looking more about how to correct and punish and bring her to a sense of how wrong she was to plagiarize the document. But punishing her for it, or shaming her will only increase the spiral of resentfulness and defensiveness on both of your parts. She's not going to become penitent. If you squelch her enough when you talk to her, she's going to burst into tears and hate you for being so mean. "Next time, please use your own words, rather than a source document."
Chances are she is so worried by the process of being evaluated that she is flailing badly. Her job may not be on line, but her self-esteem and her reputation, and the misery of working at the job are all very much impacted by this evaluation. What to do when an evaluation with a (in her opinion) toxic boss is looming? Go to your supportive peers for advice. Look up how to write a good evaluation, so her boss will actually see those strengths that she has. Suck up to your boss by highlighting all those things that are important to him or her, and show that they are important to you too...
Plagiarism??? That was research!
posted by Jane the Brown at 10:19 AM on April 22, 2018 [10 favorites]
« Older How to stop the internet from stalking me | South Korean Drinking Culture in the 80s/Early 90s... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
so she's welcome to say whatever she wants in it and you can just ignore it as what she says won't help her. give an accurate performance review and feel free to tack on a "louise sometimes presents work done by others as her own" where appropriate.
posted by noloveforned at 7:10 AM on April 21, 2018 [31 favorites]