You hate me. I have to manage you. How?
March 1, 2024 5:27 AM Subscribe
Juniors at work are indignant about the fact that I (younger woman) have authority over them and are acting out. I’m frustrated. What the hell am I supposed to do?
I joined this organisation about 6 months ago, and after they announced layoffs 3 months in I was promoted (not in title or compensation) to team lead, where I’m the one running the day to day communications with clients and managing the juniors on my team. (Yeah yeah, I know, but this is a good springboard for me to grow into the next position up, so I’m not too bothered.)
The problem is, the juniors are very indignant about it. I’ve overheard them ranting about me in the bathroom, and basically they don’t think I have the right to be “bossing them around”. Adding to this, they’re also very sensitive to any sort of feedback, which management warned me about before I took on the role as team lead. They’re insubordinate and rude to me on Slack, sometimes replying with just one word when I ask them a question or rolling their eyes at me in person. Every time I leave feedback on their work they fight me on it, and then they turn around and try to make useless edits to mine, for example changing “Am looking forward to hearing from you” to “I’m looking forward…” and then writing in the group chat that they found a grammatical error in my work. Like they’ve caught me in a gotcha moment or something. (I have to say this is extremely funny now I’m reading it back, but still wtaf)
As you can imagine, this is frustrating and upsetting and very stupid. I’m ashamed to say that I’ve been driven to tears by this behaviour (never at work, I only cry at home). I have been nothing but professional and pleasant to them, and I can’t help that they’ve been here longer than I have, older than me, and yet are junior to me. I never “boss them around”, by the way, I always frame my feedback to them with the sandwich method and I try to be as nice as possible. Except when they make egregious mistakes, but I still maintain composure and professionalism when I’m giving feedback about these.
For what it’s worth, we’re all women and other colleagues have noticed their escalating behaviours towards me and others. I don’t think my other colleagues have it as bad - they seem to be targeting me for the worst of it because of the age/perceived authority thing. And I think it may also be because I’m a really high achiever? I hold my team to the same standards I do myself - which is something my own manager has very clearly stated that she appreciates about me and doesn’t want me to lower my standards.
The managers do know what is going on and have been stepping in/talking to them and also offering me support and guidance in managing these relationships, which is nice, but it doesn’t change the fact that I’m walking on eggshells when I log on every day. This is now fully a Thing which I cannot believe. I thought we were all adults! I thought such puerile behaviours were a legend of Ask a Manager! I can’t believe I’m caught in this stupid shit.
I have escalated this situation to their respective managers and will be talking to the Executive Director about this as well. Can you help me structure the conversation better and my thoughts? How would you tackle this?
I joined this organisation about 6 months ago, and after they announced layoffs 3 months in I was promoted (not in title or compensation) to team lead, where I’m the one running the day to day communications with clients and managing the juniors on my team. (Yeah yeah, I know, but this is a good springboard for me to grow into the next position up, so I’m not too bothered.)
The problem is, the juniors are very indignant about it. I’ve overheard them ranting about me in the bathroom, and basically they don’t think I have the right to be “bossing them around”. Adding to this, they’re also very sensitive to any sort of feedback, which management warned me about before I took on the role as team lead. They’re insubordinate and rude to me on Slack, sometimes replying with just one word when I ask them a question or rolling their eyes at me in person. Every time I leave feedback on their work they fight me on it, and then they turn around and try to make useless edits to mine, for example changing “Am looking forward to hearing from you” to “I’m looking forward…” and then writing in the group chat that they found a grammatical error in my work. Like they’ve caught me in a gotcha moment or something. (I have to say this is extremely funny now I’m reading it back, but still wtaf)
As you can imagine, this is frustrating and upsetting and very stupid. I’m ashamed to say that I’ve been driven to tears by this behaviour (never at work, I only cry at home). I have been nothing but professional and pleasant to them, and I can’t help that they’ve been here longer than I have, older than me, and yet are junior to me. I never “boss them around”, by the way, I always frame my feedback to them with the sandwich method and I try to be as nice as possible. Except when they make egregious mistakes, but I still maintain composure and professionalism when I’m giving feedback about these.
For what it’s worth, we’re all women and other colleagues have noticed their escalating behaviours towards me and others. I don’t think my other colleagues have it as bad - they seem to be targeting me for the worst of it because of the age/perceived authority thing. And I think it may also be because I’m a really high achiever? I hold my team to the same standards I do myself - which is something my own manager has very clearly stated that she appreciates about me and doesn’t want me to lower my standards.
The managers do know what is going on and have been stepping in/talking to them and also offering me support and guidance in managing these relationships, which is nice, but it doesn’t change the fact that I’m walking on eggshells when I log on every day. This is now fully a Thing which I cannot believe. I thought we were all adults! I thought such puerile behaviours were a legend of Ask a Manager! I can’t believe I’m caught in this stupid shit.
I have escalated this situation to their respective managers and will be talking to the Executive Director about this as well. Can you help me structure the conversation better and my thoughts? How would you tackle this?
basically they don’t think I have the right to be “bossing them around”.
You say you don't have a title corresponding to this position. How clear is the actual hierarchy to them? Do they understand the reasons for this setup? Will they be getting performance evaluations from you? It sounds like they already have managers ("I have escalated this situation to their respective managers") - how clearly has it been communicated that they need to report to you (instead of or in addition to their managers?) and what the scope of your authority is?
(You can contact the mods if you want to add any information to this thread.)
posted by trig at 5:49 AM on March 1 [56 favorites]
You say you don't have a title corresponding to this position. How clear is the actual hierarchy to them? Do they understand the reasons for this setup? Will they be getting performance evaluations from you? It sounds like they already have managers ("I have escalated this situation to their respective managers") - how clearly has it been communicated that they need to report to you (instead of or in addition to their managers?) and what the scope of your authority is?
(You can contact the mods if you want to add any information to this thread.)
posted by trig at 5:49 AM on March 1 [56 favorites]
There's a reason why the single most common organizational response to any installation of new leadership is The Purge.
What you need is for the organization to give you a title and compensation appropriate to the role you're currently fulfilling for it, at which point you can run your own Purge. Unfortunately, organizations that start down the "dotted line manager" path that yours has currently dumped on you are massively unlikely to do this.
So your options are
(a) grin and bear it, with hope for but no real confidence in organizational improvement
(b) start a serious search for a healthier org to work in.
posted by flabdablet at 5:52 AM on March 1 [25 favorites]
What you need is for the organization to give you a title and compensation appropriate to the role you're currently fulfilling for it, at which point you can run your own Purge. Unfortunately, organizations that start down the "dotted line manager" path that yours has currently dumped on you are massively unlikely to do this.
So your options are
(a) grin and bear it, with hope for but no real confidence in organizational improvement
(b) start a serious search for a healthier org to work in.
posted by flabdablet at 5:52 AM on March 1 [25 favorites]
A friend of mine was fond of saying "Keep the main mission in mind." All the passive aggressive stuff is infuriating and emotionally draining, yes. But it's also the juniors looking to get you into a power struggle. The best thing in the moment is just to side step those power struggles and stick to the task at hand.
Having the managers show a united front is a good thing. As well as talking to your ED about the issue. I'd say lean on them for moral support, but look for broader solutions to the workplace culture overall rather than trying to play whack-a-mole with specific behaviours.
And like others have said, clarifying your role is likely needed. If you're a team lead but they aren't your direct reports then that's a completely different dynamic than being their manager and requires different skills and strategies to navigate.
posted by eekernohan at 6:02 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]
Having the managers show a united front is a good thing. As well as talking to your ED about the issue. I'd say lean on them for moral support, but look for broader solutions to the workplace culture overall rather than trying to play whack-a-mole with specific behaviours.
And like others have said, clarifying your role is likely needed. If you're a team lead but they aren't your direct reports then that's a completely different dynamic than being their manager and requires different skills and strategies to navigate.
posted by eekernohan at 6:02 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]
flabdablet's advice is excellent, but you could also try (c), realize you don't have authority over them and act accordingly. You're not getting paid or titled to be a manager, so you're not a manager. Your role is more consultant and representative to management for a team of which you are a member on equal standing with the other members. I got one of these fake promotions ten years ago and that's how I handled it. You schedule periodic meetings with people and run around saying shit like "my door is always open!" and occasionally post some idiocy that looks like "feedback" somewhere where it can be seen by your managers but you pay no attention to whether anybody's reading your bromides and in the meetings where no bosses are present you ask questions about how people are handling problem X instead of telling people how you handle problem X and you move as quickly as possible to "what did you guys do over the weekend?"
If bosses don't like this more equitable and collaborative style of fake managing fake juniors, then they can give you an actual promotion and give you actual authority and make these people your actual juniors, whereupon like magic they will cease sniping in slack.
I always frame my feedback to them with the sandwich method
Oh, good ol' praise sandwich! I used to tell students to comment on peer papers that way and zero persons took me up on it because they knew intuitively that anyone over the age of three would see through it and be more insulted than if they just wrote "I have no idea what you're talking about."
posted by Don Pepino at 6:12 AM on March 1 [65 favorites]
If bosses don't like this more equitable and collaborative style of fake managing fake juniors, then they can give you an actual promotion and give you actual authority and make these people your actual juniors, whereupon like magic they will cease sniping in slack.
I always frame my feedback to them with the sandwich method
Oh, good ol' praise sandwich! I used to tell students to comment on peer papers that way and zero persons took me up on it because they knew intuitively that anyone over the age of three would see through it and be more insulted than if they just wrote "I have no idea what you're talking about."
posted by Don Pepino at 6:12 AM on March 1 [65 favorites]
I was promoted (not in title or compensation) to team lead
Is it clear to them what you’re responsible for?
When I was managing in a situation where the supervisor (in title and compensation) wasn’t the manager (hire/fire/performance/compensation), I made it crystal clear:
1. Supervisor is responsible for the quality of the X (our X was a program but yours could be a product)
2. Supervisor will assign tasks, give feedback, and communicate with clients and from there, make improvements
3. You all (the team) are responsible for supporting Supervisor as a core part of your work. Of course if there is an issue you can let me (manager) know, but good relations with Supervisor is a part of your job and will count in your performance evaluation.
This killed 80% of the issues. And it was a young woman vs. Slightly older men situation. This is what you need from management.
For you, stop using sandwich feedback. Be kind but firm. “This doesn’t meet our standard.” “ this work is not going to fly with the client.” Etc. You can let some things roll off your back but you can call people on a few things like “hey. That’s not cool.” Because you’re supervising work and not managing people, I would keep your feedback (good and bad) product related. “Hey, that piece really stands out as effective.” “That was a well-led meeting” “this many typos erodes trust - did you not have time to prooof-read?”
posted by warriorqueen at 6:14 AM on March 1 [31 favorites]
Is it clear to them what you’re responsible for?
When I was managing in a situation where the supervisor (in title and compensation) wasn’t the manager (hire/fire/performance/compensation), I made it crystal clear:
1. Supervisor is responsible for the quality of the X (our X was a program but yours could be a product)
2. Supervisor will assign tasks, give feedback, and communicate with clients and from there, make improvements
3. You all (the team) are responsible for supporting Supervisor as a core part of your work. Of course if there is an issue you can let me (manager) know, but good relations with Supervisor is a part of your job and will count in your performance evaluation.
This killed 80% of the issues. And it was a young woman vs. Slightly older men situation. This is what you need from management.
For you, stop using sandwich feedback. Be kind but firm. “This doesn’t meet our standard.” “ this work is not going to fly with the client.” Etc. You can let some things roll off your back but you can call people on a few things like “hey. That’s not cool.” Because you’re supervising work and not managing people, I would keep your feedback (good and bad) product related. “Hey, that piece really stands out as effective.” “That was a well-led meeting” “this many typos erodes trust - did you not have time to prooof-read?”
posted by warriorqueen at 6:14 AM on March 1 [31 favorites]
You absolutely need the formal authority to boss them around if you're going to be their boss. I've deleted a whole comment because I really just wanted to say everything trig said.
One thing I will add: The sandwich method is not always the best way to deliver feedback, for a number of reasons. I liked this explanation of why. My personal 'bible' on feedback is Kim Scott's Radical Candor - despite how a lot of folks have started using the title to refer to "being an asshole," the core message of the book is mostly about kindness and one of its major messages is that if we try too hard to be 'nice' we actually do people a disservice by obscuring the truth of the feedback we need them to hear. I can't recommend it enough as a management guide, whether you're new to the work or a veteran.
posted by Tomorrowful at 6:15 AM on March 1 [14 favorites]
One thing I will add: The sandwich method is not always the best way to deliver feedback, for a number of reasons. I liked this explanation of why. My personal 'bible' on feedback is Kim Scott's Radical Candor - despite how a lot of folks have started using the title to refer to "being an asshole," the core message of the book is mostly about kindness and one of its major messages is that if we try too hard to be 'nice' we actually do people a disservice by obscuring the truth of the feedback we need them to hear. I can't recommend it enough as a management guide, whether you're new to the work or a veteran.
posted by Tomorrowful at 6:15 AM on March 1 [14 favorites]
I think the key here is actually in the "I have high standards for myself and them" as well as them not feeling you should be "bossing them around".
The notion of hierarchy and leadership is often rooted in expectations and social understandings and unspoken social contracts that often aren't shared. For example, the work one might be, "I will work hard, and I will get treated and paid well in return." If employees aren't being treated and paid well, they may feel like they have no obligation to work hard, and if you're asking them to do so without upholding your end of the implicit 'bargain', that you're out of line. However, your managerial authority may not extend to being able to offer them incentive benefits to work well. You may have no control over their pay and other incentives or even know what they are.
My suspicion is that this workplace is not one that is adequately holding up its end of the implicit work bargain - I say this because they are taking on new hires at the same time that they are undergoing layoffs, meanwhile promoting you, but not providing you a title or compensation to accompany that hire. If they're not treating you, their manager, well, then they're likely not treating people you're supervising well. Meanwhile, you're asking them for escalating performance at a time of decreasing reward. That's not going to go over well.
You've, in my belief, handled this poorly as well by escalating it to their managers and the executive director, rather than trying to find and address the root cause of the conflict - you've pretty squarely aligned yourself with the company, and in opposition to them. I don't know that you're going to be able to repair this relationship without outside help. I would suggest looking into conflict resolution tools that address the root issues, and/or reaching out to the person least in conflict with you to see if there are any problems that can be addressed short of the overarching one.
posted by corb at 6:15 AM on March 1 [19 favorites]
The notion of hierarchy and leadership is often rooted in expectations and social understandings and unspoken social contracts that often aren't shared. For example, the work one might be, "I will work hard, and I will get treated and paid well in return." If employees aren't being treated and paid well, they may feel like they have no obligation to work hard, and if you're asking them to do so without upholding your end of the implicit 'bargain', that you're out of line. However, your managerial authority may not extend to being able to offer them incentive benefits to work well. You may have no control over their pay and other incentives or even know what they are.
My suspicion is that this workplace is not one that is adequately holding up its end of the implicit work bargain - I say this because they are taking on new hires at the same time that they are undergoing layoffs, meanwhile promoting you, but not providing you a title or compensation to accompany that hire. If they're not treating you, their manager, well, then they're likely not treating people you're supervising well. Meanwhile, you're asking them for escalating performance at a time of decreasing reward. That's not going to go over well.
You've, in my belief, handled this poorly as well by escalating it to their managers and the executive director, rather than trying to find and address the root cause of the conflict - you've pretty squarely aligned yourself with the company, and in opposition to them. I don't know that you're going to be able to repair this relationship without outside help. I would suggest looking into conflict resolution tools that address the root issues, and/or reaching out to the person least in conflict with you to see if there are any problems that can be addressed short of the overarching one.
posted by corb at 6:15 AM on March 1 [19 favorites]
Warriorqueen's advice is good, but you're six months in and they set you up with as management over a known truculent team without the corresponding management cash? If this ain't it for you in terms of this being your forever company, take the title and parlay it into another job with a real raise.
posted by kingdead at 6:20 AM on March 1 [34 favorites]
posted by kingdead at 6:20 AM on March 1 [34 favorites]
You say your managers are offering support, but the proper and obvious "support" is to promote you. If your managers don't see you as worthy of a promotion, is it really surprising your coworkers don't either? Your managers need to fix this. (probably by following warriorqueen's advice)
posted by mrgoldenbrown at 6:28 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]
posted by mrgoldenbrown at 6:28 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]
I like Don Pepino's advice, because, frankly, without an actual formal promotion to a titled position of manager of this team, you don't have the authority over them that you believe you do. You have been misled. You are not their boss.
posted by MiraK at 6:33 AM on March 1 [21 favorites]
posted by MiraK at 6:33 AM on March 1 [21 favorites]
This is a difficult situation. Is there a way to bring your team to your side as peers? Something like "look, none of us is especially happy with this arrangement, it is what it is, but let's figure out how we can work together as a team so all our interests are met". Try to create a vibe that you're a first among equals as opposed to a 'senior'?
In general, your framing of these folks as 'juniors' struck me as potentially part of the problem, they have more experience than you and may in fact be better at the job than you are. Leadership isn't about being better at the job than your team, a big part of it is creating the appropriate environment.
Basically, what Corb said.
posted by sid at 7:25 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]
In general, your framing of these folks as 'juniors' struck me as potentially part of the problem, they have more experience than you and may in fact be better at the job than you are. Leadership isn't about being better at the job than your team, a big part of it is creating the appropriate environment.
Basically, what Corb said.
posted by sid at 7:25 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]
This Ask a Manager has good advice about when your employee is being an a-hole to you.
posted by chesty_a_arthur at 7:30 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]
posted by chesty_a_arthur at 7:30 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]
Take this very opportune moment ("six months into my job") to formally request from your boss a title change and compensation increase based on your good performance in the role to date. Have some basic language and criteria on hand to describe team successes and your performance. Lean heavily into skills and tasks that were not included in your original job description.
Best case, you get both, and things settle down with clarity about your role. Worst case, you now know how unlikely it is that those will be forthcoming any time soon. Management often trots out the "now is not a great time but maybe in six months" response. Ask very pointedly, what conditions would need to be in place at an organizational level for you to get a title that reflects your actual role? What conditions need to be met at an organizational level for you to get a salary increase? What criteria do you personally need to meet in your role for you to get one or both of those things? (Does your boss even know? If not, ask them to find out and set up another meeting for them to share them with you.) Write all these things down during the meeting. If your manager can't spell it out clearly, then the org is following a well-trod path of attrition due to layoffs and 'austerity' due to a cowed employee base. (Lay offs often provide these two benefits, not just one.)
Too many organizations take advantage of your exact mindset ("I know, but this is a good springboard for me to grow into the next position up, so I’m not too bothered.") to get years' (decades!!) worth of work across many employees at a discount rate. The time to negotiate title and compensation is when they ask you to do the job. That is when your negotiation power is at its greatest. The alternative in that case is that you get laid off, which often comes with some benefits. As it is now, you're looking at quitting or being fired.
posted by cocoagirl at 7:44 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]
Best case, you get both, and things settle down with clarity about your role. Worst case, you now know how unlikely it is that those will be forthcoming any time soon. Management often trots out the "now is not a great time but maybe in six months" response. Ask very pointedly, what conditions would need to be in place at an organizational level for you to get a title that reflects your actual role? What conditions need to be met at an organizational level for you to get a salary increase? What criteria do you personally need to meet in your role for you to get one or both of those things? (Does your boss even know? If not, ask them to find out and set up another meeting for them to share them with you.) Write all these things down during the meeting. If your manager can't spell it out clearly, then the org is following a well-trod path of attrition due to layoffs and 'austerity' due to a cowed employee base. (Lay offs often provide these two benefits, not just one.)
Too many organizations take advantage of your exact mindset ("I know, but this is a good springboard for me to grow into the next position up, so I’m not too bothered.") to get years' (decades!!) worth of work across many employees at a discount rate. The time to negotiate title and compensation is when they ask you to do the job. That is when your negotiation power is at its greatest. The alternative in that case is that you get laid off, which often comes with some benefits. As it is now, you're looking at quitting or being fired.
posted by cocoagirl at 7:44 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]
What's their motivation to do things the way you want? What's the benefit other than pleasing you? Better client communication? Fewer rounds of edits? Something else? Whatever it is, you need to get them on board with that goal, rather than primarily relying on positional authority. How are these changes going to help them?
New managers/supervisors also tend to be promoted because they excel, and then flounder for a bit when they realize that not everyone else has the same "I want to do everything perfectly" motivation. Make sure you're picking your battles and thinking long term -- you may be able to get to 98% perfection most of the time, but it's not going to happen in the first two months. I like the PTR Method for assessing what's a requirement vs a preference or just a tradition. Focus on requirements for now; if you start winning them over then you can add in preferences or mess with traditions. That method can also help you clarify to the team why you're asking for things to be a certain way.
And yes, dump the sandwich thing. It undermines your criticism as well as your praise. Do praise them on stuff they're doing well, though, preferably more than you're criticizing them. But it has to be authentic so don't fake it for the sake of the ratio.
posted by lapis at 7:48 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]
New managers/supervisors also tend to be promoted because they excel, and then flounder for a bit when they realize that not everyone else has the same "I want to do everything perfectly" motivation. Make sure you're picking your battles and thinking long term -- you may be able to get to 98% perfection most of the time, but it's not going to happen in the first two months. I like the PTR Method for assessing what's a requirement vs a preference or just a tradition. Focus on requirements for now; if you start winning them over then you can add in preferences or mess with traditions. That method can also help you clarify to the team why you're asking for things to be a certain way.
And yes, dump the sandwich thing. It undermines your criticism as well as your praise. Do praise them on stuff they're doing well, though, preferably more than you're criticizing them. But it has to be authentic so don't fake it for the sake of the ratio.
posted by lapis at 7:48 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]
I think you could reevaluate what is happening in your work environment on the whole and how you are being utilised within that. I think it is unlikely that someone who has been around for three months could have proven their merit for supervision of longer standing employees. Your short post speaks to so much terrible management and it looks like you are being used, intentionally or not, in the derogation of your “junior” colleagues. It’s possible one or two of your colleagues were even offered the role before you but saw it as a poison chalice.
I think it's possible you could improve relations if you were able to take on the humbling, even humiliating possibility that you have this role for reasons that are little do with your skills and talents.
posted by spibeldrokkit at 8:17 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]
I think it's possible you could improve relations if you were able to take on the humbling, even humiliating possibility that you have this role for reasons that are little do with your skills and talents.
posted by spibeldrokkit at 8:17 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]
My second job out of college was a major corporation (first was a small company) in a Lead Programmer position. Initially I took that literally, answering questions, sending informational memos, interacting with the users, attending meetings plus doing my own programming.
But eventually people started asking me to sign approvals, but my position did not have signing authority, so I just politely asked them to go to person X. Not totally surprisingly I was shortly thereafter promoted to a position with signing authority.
I gather you are in my original position, so yeah, worst of both worlds, responsibility without authority. I know people above have addressed this quandary. Humorous footnote, it used to tick off another Lead Programmer that I reviewed his work. I said I couldn't sign off on it if I didn't at least give it a general review. He was, of course, in the spot I used to be in.
posted by forthright at 8:24 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]
But eventually people started asking me to sign approvals, but my position did not have signing authority, so I just politely asked them to go to person X. Not totally surprisingly I was shortly thereafter promoted to a position with signing authority.
I gather you are in my original position, so yeah, worst of both worlds, responsibility without authority. I know people above have addressed this quandary. Humorous footnote, it used to tick off another Lead Programmer that I reviewed his work. I said I couldn't sign off on it if I didn't at least give it a general review. He was, of course, in the spot I used to be in.
posted by forthright at 8:24 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]
You've been put in an impossible situation where the managers are ok "talking to them" but leaving you to deal with the fact that none of the employees are changing. This is not acceptable behavior in a workplace, and others are letting you deal with it. It's easier for them to "train this new team lead" to manage a toxic team rather than stepping in and handling it themselves. (Ugh, I'm so annoyed. I'd cry too.)
For dealing with the team, I'd suggest treating them like kids. Avoid power struggles. They correct your grammar to embarrass you? Ignore it. They roll their eyes? Act like you didn't see it, look them in the eye, say "Thanks!" or whatever is appropriate, and walk away.
Then document everything. Make sure communication is clear and in writing. Prepare to talk to managers etc and present what's happening factually without emotion. Focus on work outcomes.
And keep pushing towards (a) a formal job title, (b) clearly laid out expectations for your role and your team, and (c) clear next steps for you (as a manager) or the actual manager to cut this off. They can complain at happy hour but they can't talk shit in the bathroom or try to humiliate you in public group chats. You're going to work every day with middle schoolers, and that is not a healthy working environment where anyone can do their best work for the company.
posted by violetish at 8:30 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]
For dealing with the team, I'd suggest treating them like kids. Avoid power struggles. They correct your grammar to embarrass you? Ignore it. They roll their eyes? Act like you didn't see it, look them in the eye, say "Thanks!" or whatever is appropriate, and walk away.
Then document everything. Make sure communication is clear and in writing. Prepare to talk to managers etc and present what's happening factually without emotion. Focus on work outcomes.
And keep pushing towards (a) a formal job title, (b) clearly laid out expectations for your role and your team, and (c) clear next steps for you (as a manager) or the actual manager to cut this off. They can complain at happy hour but they can't talk shit in the bathroom or try to humiliate you in public group chats. You're going to work every day with middle schoolers, and that is not a healthy working environment where anyone can do their best work for the company.
posted by violetish at 8:30 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]
Yeah yeah, I know, but this is a good springboard for me to grow into the next position up, so I’m not too bothered.
I don't think this is actually true. As others have noted, this is a very difficult position to be in and it seems like you're being set up to fail (either intentionally or unintentionally due to poor management). I also agree that others may have turned down this terrible "promotion" before they asked you.
Agree with everyone else to 1) stop using "juniors" to describe your colleagues. This is not modern professional language and it is infantilizing. Say colleagues, team members, etc.
2) Stop with the "compliment sandwich". It erodes trust and can be confusing. Strong agree with the recommendation for Radical Candor on how to give feedback.
3) Agree that you need to press for role clarity and appropriate title and compensation. There needs to be a common understanding of your role between you, the team and the team's managers.
3a) A team lead often doesn't "manage" people. They may manage the work and provide support and guidance to the team members. It may help to reframe the role from "managing juniors" to more of a project manager function.
4) Imagine how these team members are feeling. You've been there 3 months, and then get a non-promotion promotion and start holding everyone to your "very high standards." I'm sure it feels ridiculous and very unfair. It also sounds like you might be nitpicky or micromanaging, so all those things together with recent layoffs make people angry and upset.
What you can do is take a HUGE step back and recognize that this "promotion" is not a recognition of your greatness but a sign of poor management, that people who have been at the org longer than you may have real knowledge and skills you don't, and that being unofficial team lead doesn't put you "above" people. I would starting thinking of my role as facilitating rather than managing.
Some concrete steps:
- Work with the team to set standards and then don't nitpick things that fall within the established standards but you personally would do differently. If you are producing reports, get feedback from everyone on the standard for the report and then hew to it.
- Share leadership tasks (rotate who leads a meeting, for example, or have people peer review work according to established standards if everything is going through you).
- Give team members good exposure. Bring them to client meetings sometimes. Give them chances to present results to higher-ups.
- Figure out how to fix things everybody hates. Streamline a process. Make it easier to get approvals, communicate with clients, submit PTO - something that feels like a win to them.
It is quite possible that none of this will work. When people escalate to openly shittalking without consequence, there's no real reason for them to stop. The best way to end this is to manage a ringleader out.
posted by jeoc at 10:14 AM on March 1 [18 favorites]
I don't think this is actually true. As others have noted, this is a very difficult position to be in and it seems like you're being set up to fail (either intentionally or unintentionally due to poor management). I also agree that others may have turned down this terrible "promotion" before they asked you.
Agree with everyone else to 1) stop using "juniors" to describe your colleagues. This is not modern professional language and it is infantilizing. Say colleagues, team members, etc.
2) Stop with the "compliment sandwich". It erodes trust and can be confusing. Strong agree with the recommendation for Radical Candor on how to give feedback.
3) Agree that you need to press for role clarity and appropriate title and compensation. There needs to be a common understanding of your role between you, the team and the team's managers.
3a) A team lead often doesn't "manage" people. They may manage the work and provide support and guidance to the team members. It may help to reframe the role from "managing juniors" to more of a project manager function.
4) Imagine how these team members are feeling. You've been there 3 months, and then get a non-promotion promotion and start holding everyone to your "very high standards." I'm sure it feels ridiculous and very unfair. It also sounds like you might be nitpicky or micromanaging, so all those things together with recent layoffs make people angry and upset.
What you can do is take a HUGE step back and recognize that this "promotion" is not a recognition of your greatness but a sign of poor management, that people who have been at the org longer than you may have real knowledge and skills you don't, and that being unofficial team lead doesn't put you "above" people. I would starting thinking of my role as facilitating rather than managing.
Some concrete steps:
- Work with the team to set standards and then don't nitpick things that fall within the established standards but you personally would do differently. If you are producing reports, get feedback from everyone on the standard for the report and then hew to it.
- Share leadership tasks (rotate who leads a meeting, for example, or have people peer review work according to established standards if everything is going through you).
- Give team members good exposure. Bring them to client meetings sometimes. Give them chances to present results to higher-ups.
- Figure out how to fix things everybody hates. Streamline a process. Make it easier to get approvals, communicate with clients, submit PTO - something that feels like a win to them.
It is quite possible that none of this will work. When people escalate to openly shittalking without consequence, there's no real reason for them to stop. The best way to end this is to manage a ringleader out.
posted by jeoc at 10:14 AM on March 1 [18 favorites]
Another way forward with this is to shift the workspace to a project management app. You'll have access to see all projects, progress, notes, etc., and so will your managers, possibly other colleagues--anyone you want.
This will make their sniping public. Once they realize that it is, they will stop. If they don't, they won't be able to argue with the reasons why they're being terminated or moved.
posted by yellowcandy at 10:14 AM on March 1
This will make their sniping public. Once they realize that it is, they will stop. If they don't, they won't be able to argue with the reasons why they're being terminated or moved.
posted by yellowcandy at 10:14 AM on March 1
There is a ludicrous lack of clarity all around on why your role actually is! Management failure.
You say your manager appreciates your high standards. BUT. Is it actually your job to raise the standards of everyone on the team?
If so, management should have told them that unequivocally, and made compliance with these new standards a requirement of their role.
If they didn’t do this before you started, they need to say it now.
“Hey team, Anon is team lead now. Her job is to supervise (every single specific thing you have authority over.) She’s in this role specifically to reduce our error rate in (every single specific thing you’re tasked with improving.) So you’ll be hearing from her about (those things) and success in your role will depend on your listening to her feedback and improving (specific improvements.) I know we used to do x but we’re doing y now, and that may be tough to adjust to. But that’s the way it is and I expect all of you to treat Anon with respect.”
If raising the standards is not actually expected of you: don’t do it.
I know it’s hard to let go, but at this point what can you do? You’re not being paid for it, nobody asked for it, and the team is torturing you! Find a functional workplace where high standards are a positive!
Eye rolling and insults aren’t acceptable in any event. Unprofessional. You address it in the moment, once per person, by telling them it’s not acceptable. And then escalate it to their managers as insubordination if it continues.
I too believe in addressing things yourself but if they have managers, and if these people don’t actually report to you, it’s entirely appropriate to escalate egregious behavior if it continues. Their managers should be embarrassed. If one of my direct reports were behaving like that I’d want to know and it wouldn’t matter if you were the worst team lead in the world, that behavior alone is actionable.
posted by kapers at 11:16 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]
You say your manager appreciates your high standards. BUT. Is it actually your job to raise the standards of everyone on the team?
If so, management should have told them that unequivocally, and made compliance with these new standards a requirement of their role.
If they didn’t do this before you started, they need to say it now.
“Hey team, Anon is team lead now. Her job is to supervise (every single specific thing you have authority over.) She’s in this role specifically to reduce our error rate in (every single specific thing you’re tasked with improving.) So you’ll be hearing from her about (those things) and success in your role will depend on your listening to her feedback and improving (specific improvements.) I know we used to do x but we’re doing y now, and that may be tough to adjust to. But that’s the way it is and I expect all of you to treat Anon with respect.”
If raising the standards is not actually expected of you: don’t do it.
I know it’s hard to let go, but at this point what can you do? You’re not being paid for it, nobody asked for it, and the team is torturing you! Find a functional workplace where high standards are a positive!
Eye rolling and insults aren’t acceptable in any event. Unprofessional. You address it in the moment, once per person, by telling them it’s not acceptable. And then escalate it to their managers as insubordination if it continues.
I too believe in addressing things yourself but if they have managers, and if these people don’t actually report to you, it’s entirely appropriate to escalate egregious behavior if it continues. Their managers should be embarrassed. If one of my direct reports were behaving like that I’d want to know and it wouldn’t matter if you were the worst team lead in the world, that behavior alone is actionable.
posted by kapers at 11:16 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]
You say "I never “boss them around”"
But then you say "I hold my team to the same [high] standards I do myself"
which is a contradiction, whether you realize it or not, and I think this is actually the hidden obstacle in your way.
Instead of thinking in terms of telling people what to do, or defining the high standards they need to reach in order to meet your approval, see whether you can help them do the things they want to do. Think of yourself as the person with the broom in curling. You're not telling them how to hurl the rocks, you're smoothing out their trajectory. They still get to have agency and autonomy. They still get to set their own standards and define their own goals. Your main contribution is enabling them and advocating for them.
This is especially important in a situation like yours, where you're not officially their boss, but it's even important in hierarchies that are well-defined. The days of ordering people around are over, except in horrible orgs or the fantasies of people who venerate Trump or Musk. In good orgs, people do things because they want to do things, not just do them because a higher-up said so. Having this bottom-up autonomy and agency is what separates a great org from a bad one. A good manager is one who nurtures this self-agency and intrinsic motivation, not someone who tries to externally impose it.
New managers always need a little time to get this. Bad managers are ones who never get it.
posted by splitpeasoup at 11:18 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]
But then you say "I hold my team to the same [high] standards I do myself"
which is a contradiction, whether you realize it or not, and I think this is actually the hidden obstacle in your way.
Instead of thinking in terms of telling people what to do, or defining the high standards they need to reach in order to meet your approval, see whether you can help them do the things they want to do. Think of yourself as the person with the broom in curling. You're not telling them how to hurl the rocks, you're smoothing out their trajectory. They still get to have agency and autonomy. They still get to set their own standards and define their own goals. Your main contribution is enabling them and advocating for them.
This is especially important in a situation like yours, where you're not officially their boss, but it's even important in hierarchies that are well-defined. The days of ordering people around are over, except in horrible orgs or the fantasies of people who venerate Trump or Musk. In good orgs, people do things because they want to do things, not just do them because a higher-up said so. Having this bottom-up autonomy and agency is what separates a great org from a bad one. A good manager is one who nurtures this self-agency and intrinsic motivation, not someone who tries to externally impose it.
New managers always need a little time to get this. Bad managers are ones who never get it.
posted by splitpeasoup at 11:18 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]
PS: I should mention that I've been a manager for 7+ years now, and what I write above is based on my personal experience. It took me a while to understand this when I was new to managing. I've been in your shoes.
posted by splitpeasoup at 11:27 AM on March 1
posted by splitpeasoup at 11:27 AM on March 1
In good orgs, people do things because they want to do things, not just do them because a higher-up said so
This is mostly true in my experience. But there are orgs and cultures (and ppl at various career stages and in various careers) where “things people want to do” don’t always align with “work that keeps us in business.” As an example, most martial arts instructors really want their classes to be exciting! So many will take beginners and for a few minutes show them “better” higher-level moves. But this will lead to quitting, because a) the instructor has just given the idea that beginner moves are boring and b) the students will “learn” the higher level moves wrong or without the right foundation (or worst case, get injured.)
The real beginner class skill is disguising repetition- doing basic strikes in fun ways, not teaching a cool kick. But 90% of sort of early-stages martial arts instructors will make that mistake. This is where you kind of have to either ban teaching too far ahead in curriculum or have them clear their ideas with a lead instructor first. If all your newer instructors are 16-18 years old, even more so.
Some office jobs, like journalism, come with a set of professional standards and particular personalities- when I was supervising editors my job was to support them or try to get them to take breaks. But some fields don’t come with that culture baked in. So being aware of that is good.
posted by warriorqueen at 11:48 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]
This is mostly true in my experience. But there are orgs and cultures (and ppl at various career stages and in various careers) where “things people want to do” don’t always align with “work that keeps us in business.” As an example, most martial arts instructors really want their classes to be exciting! So many will take beginners and for a few minutes show them “better” higher-level moves. But this will lead to quitting, because a) the instructor has just given the idea that beginner moves are boring and b) the students will “learn” the higher level moves wrong or without the right foundation (or worst case, get injured.)
The real beginner class skill is disguising repetition- doing basic strikes in fun ways, not teaching a cool kick. But 90% of sort of early-stages martial arts instructors will make that mistake. This is where you kind of have to either ban teaching too far ahead in curriculum or have them clear their ideas with a lead instructor first. If all your newer instructors are 16-18 years old, even more so.
Some office jobs, like journalism, come with a set of professional standards and particular personalities- when I was supervising editors my job was to support them or try to get them to take breaks. But some fields don’t come with that culture baked in. So being aware of that is good.
posted by warriorqueen at 11:48 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]
you were punished, not promoted. some of it undoubtedly was because you do good work, but much of the reason you were chosen was, even less doubtedly, because if your bosses had offered any of these old battleaxes giving you such a hard time the “opportunity” to take more shit for no more money, they wouldn’t have done it. age and experience in low-level positions can make you mean, as you are seeing, but it also makes you smart. too smart for this shit.
if you are really convinced that this is just a step on that bright ladder up to actual fair compensation and real promotion, you will not want to start kicking yourself now for not negotiating for a salary change commensurate with your new responsibilities or requiring clarification of your new title. but what you can do - what I did, when I was in a very very similar position - was decide for myself what middle management (“team lead” - I did get the title but like you I got no money) - meant. morally, philosophically, practically. since you are not being compensated, you must make this your own form of compensation.
how I did this was, it seemed to me that the purpose of a team lead was to represent my team’s interests to upper management, to vigorously argue for their interests whenever I was granted face-to-face meetings they were not, and to tell them not to worry about management bullshit because i would worry about it for them, whenever I was able. now, if they had not respected me at all to begin with, this would not have made them like me. but they did, so it worked great. some of em also probably felt sorry for me and that helped too. I felt great about it. it is the right way to “lead” a team.
this is not your bosses’ idea of your function. they think you are supposed to do your representing in the opposite direction, be an enforcer of authority downward upon your subordinates rather than be their agent upwards. but they aren’t paying you to debase yourself that way, so don’t. ideally, don’t manage like that ever, but certainly don’t do it for free.
posted by queenofbithynia at 5:35 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]
if you are really convinced that this is just a step on that bright ladder up to actual fair compensation and real promotion, you will not want to start kicking yourself now for not negotiating for a salary change commensurate with your new responsibilities or requiring clarification of your new title. but what you can do - what I did, when I was in a very very similar position - was decide for myself what middle management (“team lead” - I did get the title but like you I got no money) - meant. morally, philosophically, practically. since you are not being compensated, you must make this your own form of compensation.
how I did this was, it seemed to me that the purpose of a team lead was to represent my team’s interests to upper management, to vigorously argue for their interests whenever I was granted face-to-face meetings they were not, and to tell them not to worry about management bullshit because i would worry about it for them, whenever I was able. now, if they had not respected me at all to begin with, this would not have made them like me. but they did, so it worked great. some of em also probably felt sorry for me and that helped too. I felt great about it. it is the right way to “lead” a team.
this is not your bosses’ idea of your function. they think you are supposed to do your representing in the opposite direction, be an enforcer of authority downward upon your subordinates rather than be their agent upwards. but they aren’t paying you to debase yourself that way, so don’t. ideally, don’t manage like that ever, but certainly don’t do it for free.
posted by queenofbithynia at 5:35 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]
So I've been a relatively younger minority manager who has had older people work under me, as well as having to wrangle teams that don't directly report to me, and I've mostly managed to avoid the outright hostility you describe. There have been colleagues who have been disappointed in my perceived lack of empathy towards them, or those who have been terrified of me, those who have quiet quit, and on the other spectrum, many others who loved working for me and have maintained relationships years afterwards. Many of my staff have received rapid promotions, while I have also gotten a reputation for rapidly managing underperformers out of the organization.
A few direct comments:
I don't like the sandwich feedback thing at all, it comes across as transparently insincere. Positive feedback is much more motivating than you think. Even if a person does something well only 20% of the time, helping them feel genuinely good about doing it right can light them on fire and create incredibly strong motivation. You don't ever have to tell them the 80% they did was bad, they already know it. If they can't even tell the difference between a good job and a bad job then that's not a feedback issue, that's simply training / technical skill which is something else. It IS important to talk about something that went badly, but the purpose of that talk is to help them manage and contextualize their emotions to feel LESS bad and demotivated by it, not to make them feel worse.
Fighting you on feedback - I think the whole angle is wrong. My juniors all know they don't have to impress me. The decisions on promotions, terminations and pay rises is a collective decision by senior executives. My job is to ensure my juniors are perceived in the best light by the organization. This means they can take risks and make mistakes within our team as they stretch their capabilities, which is an opportunity for growth, and I act as a shield to prevent missteps from being seen by anyone else in the organization. We only present the "best side" of them to everyone else. I make it clear that as a leader I'm no longer judged on my individual contribution, I am judged on how fast my juniors develop and get promoted, so we are most definitely on the same team.
"I hold my team to the same standards I do myself" - this is a big red flag to me. There could be a workaholic who works 14 hours a day, they can't impose that same standard on others. I am a top 1% achiever, how do you think it is going to work out if I impose my own standards on the 99% of the rest of the population who are less smart than me? I often think of that advice that you only look at someone else's plate to make sure they have enough. I use my experience, energy and intellect to achieve my own personal goals, of course, but my responsibility is to also use it to help others achieve their goals. I'm not imposing it on others. Whenever I'm in the office (we have hybrid work at the moment) everyone wants to sit next to me, sometimes for hours at a time, to get ideas how to plan out tasks, get knowledge of the historical execution of these tasks and what pitfalls there were in the past, to solve really tricky math / analytics problems, to ask me about networks or to introduce them to someone (who can help with this issue, or that issue, who has influence to alter this decision?). That's what being a "top achiever" is meant to be - you're someone that everyone automatically goes to for help and loves having in their immediate team.
I personally think 90% of stress at work is self inflicted based on some internal expectations people made up in their head. Be very clear about what your bosses really want (and not just what they say they want). Manager / Team Lead stress cascades down into junior employees in the worst way. It's like a child living in a home with stressed parents fighting all the time. It's toxic. You know you're a so called "high achiever". So what's the worst that can happen, you get fired? As a high achiever all companies would love to hire you instead. I'd be wearing the biggest smile on my face each day to work and bring a totally relaxed vibe, and be taking my juniors on long lunches every day and come back 30 minutes after everyone else, I did this for years and years. I'd be fine if the company fired me. You should not be crying!
As for your actual question - based on all my interactions with executive directors - the first words out of my mouth or the first line in an email (besides describing the problem, if they don't know it already) is telling them THIS is how you intend to solve it, and if you need their support. They have 99 things to worry about and solve, they don't need you adding another problem to their plate for them to solve. What is the problem really, just your feelings? Is their under-performance impacting the company's bottom line in some measurable way that you can quantify and prove? At the end of the day their overriding goal is to deliver 10% EBIT to shareholders or whatever, and I struggle to think of any way you could possibly justify saying this issue is worth using senior management time to solve rather than more existential issues (layoffs are a bad sign for company health).
posted by xdvesper at 6:19 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]
A few direct comments:
I don't like the sandwich feedback thing at all, it comes across as transparently insincere. Positive feedback is much more motivating than you think. Even if a person does something well only 20% of the time, helping them feel genuinely good about doing it right can light them on fire and create incredibly strong motivation. You don't ever have to tell them the 80% they did was bad, they already know it. If they can't even tell the difference between a good job and a bad job then that's not a feedback issue, that's simply training / technical skill which is something else. It IS important to talk about something that went badly, but the purpose of that talk is to help them manage and contextualize their emotions to feel LESS bad and demotivated by it, not to make them feel worse.
Fighting you on feedback - I think the whole angle is wrong. My juniors all know they don't have to impress me. The decisions on promotions, terminations and pay rises is a collective decision by senior executives. My job is to ensure my juniors are perceived in the best light by the organization. This means they can take risks and make mistakes within our team as they stretch their capabilities, which is an opportunity for growth, and I act as a shield to prevent missteps from being seen by anyone else in the organization. We only present the "best side" of them to everyone else. I make it clear that as a leader I'm no longer judged on my individual contribution, I am judged on how fast my juniors develop and get promoted, so we are most definitely on the same team.
"I hold my team to the same standards I do myself" - this is a big red flag to me. There could be a workaholic who works 14 hours a day, they can't impose that same standard on others. I am a top 1% achiever, how do you think it is going to work out if I impose my own standards on the 99% of the rest of the population who are less smart than me? I often think of that advice that you only look at someone else's plate to make sure they have enough. I use my experience, energy and intellect to achieve my own personal goals, of course, but my responsibility is to also use it to help others achieve their goals. I'm not imposing it on others. Whenever I'm in the office (we have hybrid work at the moment) everyone wants to sit next to me, sometimes for hours at a time, to get ideas how to plan out tasks, get knowledge of the historical execution of these tasks and what pitfalls there were in the past, to solve really tricky math / analytics problems, to ask me about networks or to introduce them to someone (who can help with this issue, or that issue, who has influence to alter this decision?). That's what being a "top achiever" is meant to be - you're someone that everyone automatically goes to for help and loves having in their immediate team.
I personally think 90% of stress at work is self inflicted based on some internal expectations people made up in their head. Be very clear about what your bosses really want (and not just what they say they want). Manager / Team Lead stress cascades down into junior employees in the worst way. It's like a child living in a home with stressed parents fighting all the time. It's toxic. You know you're a so called "high achiever". So what's the worst that can happen, you get fired? As a high achiever all companies would love to hire you instead. I'd be wearing the biggest smile on my face each day to work and bring a totally relaxed vibe, and be taking my juniors on long lunches every day and come back 30 minutes after everyone else, I did this for years and years. I'd be fine if the company fired me. You should not be crying!
As for your actual question - based on all my interactions with executive directors - the first words out of my mouth or the first line in an email (besides describing the problem, if they don't know it already) is telling them THIS is how you intend to solve it, and if you need their support. They have 99 things to worry about and solve, they don't need you adding another problem to their plate for them to solve. What is the problem really, just your feelings? Is their under-performance impacting the company's bottom line in some measurable way that you can quantify and prove? At the end of the day their overriding goal is to deliver 10% EBIT to shareholders or whatever, and I struggle to think of any way you could possibly justify saying this issue is worth using senior management time to solve rather than more existential issues (layoffs are a bad sign for company health).
posted by xdvesper at 6:19 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]
oh but also - one legitimate way you could make use of your semi-real role is to request editing passes over your own work from the team member you think is best suited to do it. alternately, you could request a read-through from the person you think is sloppiest and most likely to benefit from an exercise in attention to detail. one sincerely hopes that you are not exempting your own work, and only your own work, from peer review or informal proofreading or whatever it is called in whatever your field is. if you want them to be nicer you have to demonstrate respect for their professional capabilities. if they all suck maybe you will have to fake it. but asking for their critiques is both a great way to fake it and a great way to render ineffectual their attempts to get your goat by offering you unsolicited corrections. solicit them!
also, they should be developing competence in reviewing each other’s work rather than passing it all through the bottleneck of you, unless editorial review actually is or becomes your formal dedicated function. this too is something I have specific experience of. making yourself indispensable as the only person trusted to correct other people seems like a good idea, and is, right up until someone notices and prudently hires a second competent person. which they will do, sooner or later.
posted by queenofbithynia at 8:09 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]
also, they should be developing competence in reviewing each other’s work rather than passing it all through the bottleneck of you, unless editorial review actually is or becomes your formal dedicated function. this too is something I have specific experience of. making yourself indispensable as the only person trusted to correct other people seems like a good idea, and is, right up until someone notices and prudently hires a second competent person. which they will do, sooner or later.
posted by queenofbithynia at 8:09 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]
You say your managers are offering support, but the proper and obvious "support" is to promote you.
I say the proper and obvious support would be to fucking smash the first person you complained about (assuming there was some substance to the complaint). You're already doing me a favor by managing this "team" (doesn't sound like "team" is quite what it is, frankly) without being paid for it. The least I could do is make it crystal clear that you're doing it for ME and I won't put up with any of THAT SHIT, to me, or to my extension (you).
Should only take one or two times for them to get the message and either lose the high school bullshit or quit. Either is fine.
posted by ctmf at 12:54 AM on March 2
I say the proper and obvious support would be to fucking smash the first person you complained about (assuming there was some substance to the complaint). You're already doing me a favor by managing this "team" (doesn't sound like "team" is quite what it is, frankly) without being paid for it. The least I could do is make it crystal clear that you're doing it for ME and I won't put up with any of THAT SHIT, to me, or to my extension (you).
Should only take one or two times for them to get the message and either lose the high school bullshit or quit. Either is fine.
posted by ctmf at 12:54 AM on March 2
Also the criticism sandwich thing is the most terrible advice ever invented. If you're unhappy, say what you're unhappy with. it's that simple, and it's doing the other person a favor to not have to guess if your critiism is just an "oh by the way" or a "no, seriously, this is unacceptable". They tend to guess the former when you mix it with insincere compliments.
posted by ctmf at 1:02 AM on March 2 [3 favorites]
posted by ctmf at 1:02 AM on March 2 [3 favorites]
There are a lot of ways to be a good manager, and they are based on a good fit for your personality, what your team needs and what the role needs. You should do some reading on different manager styles because it may give you insight into your situation. Based on the description of your situation, you have smart and experienced people working for you, whose work needs a proofreader. Consider looking into the term "snowplow parenting", yes it is a style of parenting , but parenting is a type of management. A positive interpretation of this style is that you are removing obstacles from the people you supervise so they can do their best work. They will be appreciative of this and respect you for it. Right now, you are the obstacle. Stop it. For reviewing work, consider it less about managing and giving "sandwich feedback" (agree with others, this is super lame, just be honest with people), consider (and maybe explicitly say) your work as a "second set of eyes" and explain that everyone (including you) needs a second set of eyes on things. You may consider seeing if they will act as a second set of eyes for each other or even for you.
Last, figure out one strong attribute that each team member has (notice I said "team member"?) and then remark, highlight and draw on it as much as necessary. If someone has a strong background and knowledge, call it out - "you have a strong background in this, which I always appreciate, so I'm hoping you'd be open to us drawing on it for x, y or z." "You have such a good eye for detail, I appreciate that you always see things that I overlook."
It looks like you were set up by your managers, sorry, that happens. It's ok to be mad at them. And it's very hard to come back from a bad managing situation - like, it may not ever happen unfortunately. You may consider leveraging this current position into a real position with salary and title somewhere else, and starting fresh with what you learned.
posted by Toddles at 3:44 AM on March 2 [3 favorites]
Last, figure out one strong attribute that each team member has (notice I said "team member"?) and then remark, highlight and draw on it as much as necessary. If someone has a strong background and knowledge, call it out - "you have a strong background in this, which I always appreciate, so I'm hoping you'd be open to us drawing on it for x, y or z." "You have such a good eye for detail, I appreciate that you always see things that I overlook."
It looks like you were set up by your managers, sorry, that happens. It's ok to be mad at them. And it's very hard to come back from a bad managing situation - like, it may not ever happen unfortunately. You may consider leveraging this current position into a real position with salary and title somewhere else, and starting fresh with what you learned.
posted by Toddles at 3:44 AM on March 2 [3 favorites]
I think this ends up being about having the status/ muscle/ power to get people to jest deal. You're female, young, not a jerk, you may not have enough pull. With co-workers, as well as with the company not giving you more compensation. Also, you're a newcomer who survived a layoff that others who'd been there didn't, and people resent that with good reason. Things that give you higher status - better office or whatever, will help.
Be less nice, less accommodating. Stop trying to please everyone. figure out what you need to do, and do that, and try to let people know that you intend to do the job, and are not going to take crap. Tell the company you expect compensation for additional responsibility. Don't be a jerk, but don't try so hard to make it work.
I haven't read it, but there's a book about not giving a fuck.
I'd be job-hunting; the company is a dick.
posted by theora55 at 10:57 AM on March 6 [1 favorite]
Be less nice, less accommodating. Stop trying to please everyone. figure out what you need to do, and do that, and try to let people know that you intend to do the job, and are not going to take crap. Tell the company you expect compensation for additional responsibility. Don't be a jerk, but don't try so hard to make it work.
I haven't read it, but there's a book about not giving a fuck.
I'd be job-hunting; the company is a dick.
posted by theora55 at 10:57 AM on March 6 [1 favorite]
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by chesty_a_arthur at 5:45 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]