You sound like a nightmare to manage lol
This Business and Moment...
- Thread starter randomshenans
- Start date
I'm a yes man to my boss tbh. Very easy. I just basically get all his stupid cascaded objectives done anyway because he's incompetent and doesn't really understand anything. I do all the BAU stuff as well just because I'm so awesome. It's just easier that way.
EDIT: It's my colleagues that are having the above issues mainly. They've actually done some awesome work, but because they didn't get some other stuff done that was put down on paper as being more important, they are suffering for it.
Last edited:
Sounds like you're doing the easy stuff a graduate could have a go at and ignoring the really high value stuff.
The high value stuff in my opinion, is actually keeping the house in order. Where I'm at, we take on more and more stuff without having good foundations first. It will all come crumbling down in time. Other people can't see it though.
Sounds like some people value their check boxes more than understanding the issues. Also people need to manage their manager by working the check boxed.
We need to train the new guy.
It will take 4 months.
Can you do it Monday.
That's his first day he'll remember nothing.
Yes but can you train him Monday.
...
Trains new guy on his first day
Did you train the new guy on Monday
Yes
Checks Checkbox "new guy trained"
The other version of this is Hitler moving divisions that only exist on paper around. Then wondering why he's not winning.
We need to train the new guy.
It will take 4 months.
Can you do it Monday.
That's his first day he'll remember nothing.
Yes but can you train him Monday.
...
Trains new guy on his first day
Did you train the new guy on Monday
Yes
Checks Checkbox "new guy trained"
The other version of this is Hitler moving divisions that only exist on paper around. Then wondering why he's not winning.
The high value stuff is whatever achieves the business goals, if by doing BAU achieves that more than whatever he's coming up with, then explain that to him. However if you're constantly fixing things because everything is on fire, delegate that to someone more junior and start looking into way to stop the fires from happening in the first place, and do it in a non-technical business goal way to get people to actually listen.
Soldato
Been running my test lab a year - I set it up in 2021 and was then on the software dev team and not involved. I largely applied for this role so I could get it in order as zero maintenance has been done.
I am supposed to schedule and perform regular health and safety, and fire safety checks. These should be documented.
I am supposed to ensure everything has been PAT tested.
I need to keep a stock of ~300 TVs in order - half on shelves and connected, half in storage cupboards. I also need to do an audit/stock take and sort through this lot, get rid of some, etc.
All of this that should be BAU has been treated as deprioritised while we work on our giant new product launch. Which is now over the line and will have a long tail of setup activities, additional partner onboarding, testing, etc until probably Christmas.
Being real about it yes we should bring in an admin to do all of the above tasks but, I am one person running a lab with two direct reports and a contractor who is miles above my pay grade. If I don't do it no one will. So we wouldn't be H&S compliant, bills wouldn't be getting paid, the lab would be a mess and no one could do any work. I'd happily take a 22k bump to keep killing myself trying to do BAU and "real" work, or give me a ****ing junior admin who will smash all that work for 22k.
Nope, let's just put it on my PDP as "future growth"! Grrr.
Get it in writing. Then buy popcorn and watch it burn. Some only learn that fire is hot by getting burnt.
Yeah all their objectives are in writing. It is a live document which can be updated, but should show all the version history which is good. I guess this is the way. Work purely on objectives as per priority and when things break, ask for confirmation (preferably again in recorded form via email) that this is now above the priority of your other objectives. I mean it all helps if you have a competent and good boss. I've generally had quite good bosses over the years. My current one is the worst I've had in a long time sadly. Very weak.
You know when you have a meeting on Friday where the senior (level) employee decides to derail your meeting, then precede to dictate changes (removing metrics that are part of product management - themes) and basically saying the CEO sees it without X or Y (ie no new product development), Friday my actual boss seems happy that people have agreed, then on the Monday in a public teams chat basically plays verbal chess to make you look bad finishing up by saying that (a) his dictation was "a suggestion" and (b) it was my meeting. 1:1 with my boss seems to use language of "this was agreed by X date" and "not done" really sounds like this is a game of 2D chess between them both (one sets the rules, one causes as much dissension and noise). Read into that what you will.. I would also state that they're friends out of the office (supposedly) and one is doing the lighting for my boss's stage show as a favour..
The issue I have is simply I'm expected to be own and be accountable, however said individual cannot step away and leave the team to function or make their own mistakes. I've already highlighted to the boss months ago. The individual is recognised to be ambitious and manages up to make himself the centre point of it all (with no time to communicate - just bark orders), our boss wants him to move and do something else, yet funding and politics puts the individual's carefully cultivated image at risk. To add - the individual was put at risk during the reorg and the the reorg saw my boss absorbed some of my role to save his position, the result is I'm being pushed into far more technical detail without being privy to the individual's discussions with internal customers or and politics hence I struggle and there's only 3rd party to provide that lower level skillset.
I suspect that the original idea was the boss to have the individual as a product manager, but I don't believe there's any product managers in the target operational model following the reorg (to my point the only slides have show a decentralisation strategic goal - I'm in that centre hence seeing the sheer effect). So this means nothing has changed and I don't believe the organisation wants to change unless there's some executive replacements.
It should be noted that two of 4 perm product managers/owners have been fired (scapegoats) and the remaining two seem to be having a similar experience, and those roles have not been backfilled. The danger is if they make my role redundant it breaks the option to have that role for 6 months. So the only options they have are to remove me by building a performance case - probably as party of the jun mid year review cycle.
Logically - I have a role, I don't have funding and the 3rd party teams are working at risk (not my responsibility or my authorisation) hence I can't predict when I have resources or not and if I will in future. It's a bit hard to point fingers when you don't have the team to deliver the product.. so the only option they have is go for me on specific tasks not related to the delivery.
It's funny - the boss is playing a game, where he has options but can tailor what he does based his need - down size, replace me, replace the other guy (to a separate project) or scale up. Without the financial certainty he's playing all sides.
So it makes sense to look around, do the day job to get people moving and then leave. I have to say the observation about the culture and individuals by a previous associate technical director of the previous role was correct. Quite surprised how long they can continue to function at this level of burning fires of their own making. I'm used to organisations where people are vying for budget but fundamentally aligned (unless a pivot is put on the table). This is mobster/convict rule.
The issue I have is simply I'm expected to be own and be accountable, however said individual cannot step away and leave the team to function or make their own mistakes. I've already highlighted to the boss months ago. The individual is recognised to be ambitious and manages up to make himself the centre point of it all (with no time to communicate - just bark orders), our boss wants him to move and do something else, yet funding and politics puts the individual's carefully cultivated image at risk. To add - the individual was put at risk during the reorg and the the reorg saw my boss absorbed some of my role to save his position, the result is I'm being pushed into far more technical detail without being privy to the individual's discussions with internal customers or and politics hence I struggle and there's only 3rd party to provide that lower level skillset.
I suspect that the original idea was the boss to have the individual as a product manager, but I don't believe there's any product managers in the target operational model following the reorg (to my point the only slides have show a decentralisation strategic goal - I'm in that centre hence seeing the sheer effect). So this means nothing has changed and I don't believe the organisation wants to change unless there's some executive replacements.
It should be noted that two of 4 perm product managers/owners have been fired (scapegoats) and the remaining two seem to be having a similar experience, and those roles have not been backfilled. The danger is if they make my role redundant it breaks the option to have that role for 6 months. So the only options they have are to remove me by building a performance case - probably as party of the jun mid year review cycle.
Logically - I have a role, I don't have funding and the 3rd party teams are working at risk (not my responsibility or my authorisation) hence I can't predict when I have resources or not and if I will in future. It's a bit hard to point fingers when you don't have the team to deliver the product.. so the only option they have is go for me on specific tasks not related to the delivery.
It's funny - the boss is playing a game, where he has options but can tailor what he does based his need - down size, replace me, replace the other guy (to a separate project) or scale up. Without the financial certainty he's playing all sides.
So it makes sense to look around, do the day job to get people moving and then leave. I have to say the observation about the culture and individuals by a previous associate technical director of the previous role was correct. Quite surprised how long they can continue to function at this level of burning fires of their own making. I'm used to organisations where people are vying for budget but fundamentally aligned (unless a pivot is put on the table). This is mobster/convict rule.
Last edited:
Soldato
Strange week. I was off last week and whilst we should've been signing our contract for Netsuite to start the implementation early June, it seems the organization above is now conducting a group wide project co-ordinated with PWC on a successor to Microsoft Great Plains.
As such our interim CFO has pulled the plug until we find the outcome. Annoying for multiple reasons
1 - It's 99% likely to be Netsuite anyway, so this just delays our switch over as PWC aren't going to do anything quick
2 - By the time we get the confirmation, our quote will probably have jumped up
3 - Worst case is the organisation above decide on a central instance of Netsuite which will make life difficult for any changes we want to make at a company level
4 - I was really looking forward to it
Spoke with the Project sponsor at the level above our operating group who seemed uninterested in the whole thing but best case i think it's going to delay by ~12 months.
Positive now is that my old CFO who moved to another portfolio in the wider group who are already in the middle of a Netsuite implementation want me to do 2-3 days a week helping them out as she's arrived to the whole thing being an absolute mess.
As such our interim CFO has pulled the plug until we find the outcome. Annoying for multiple reasons
1 - It's 99% likely to be Netsuite anyway, so this just delays our switch over as PWC aren't going to do anything quick
2 - By the time we get the confirmation, our quote will probably have jumped up
3 - Worst case is the organisation above decide on a central instance of Netsuite which will make life difficult for any changes we want to make at a company level
4 - I was really looking forward to it
Spoke with the Project sponsor at the level above our operating group who seemed uninterested in the whole thing but best case i think it's going to delay by ~12 months.
Positive now is that my old CFO who moved to another portfolio in the wider group who are already in the middle of a Netsuite implementation want me to do 2-3 days a week helping them out as she's arrived to the whole thing being an absolute mess.
Sounds like you're being drafted.
We're still going through the financial approvals, I had that individual barking that I'd been doing the ways of working for 4 weeks (on the public leader channel). This was always a progressive, iterative move and one that he is not responsible for. Couple with the lack of progress for financial sign off and the final delivery is as important that has been done. I'd be happy to be a complete B contractually too but that would simply result in no staff as they'd have pulled the staff whilst working at risk due to the financial delays. I have a 1:1 with the boss on Monday as per normal.
There's too much work for the Business Analysts todo (capacity here was due to financial down pressure - again overruled) as a result of the individual's prioritisation and involvement previously (he placed himself in the critical path and as a result delayed things).
Today is another day in paradise, after the wife's referral to A&E (4 hours) due blood pressure complications.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Sep 2007
- Posts
- 5,180
My suggestion:
Keep a detailed time log of everything you do for 3 days (or maybe a week if you think that's better). This will show that all your time is currently being taken up by criticial BAU tasks. Then ask your manager for a brief meeting, and show him the time log. You can then demonstrate that all your time is being taken up by critical tasks and discuss what to do about it.
The key thing is to raise this issue well before any review process, so that the problem can be addressed well before your review, and you cannot be blamed for not meeting objectives that you can't spend time on.
Finally had some news - round 2 interview will be a panel interview with 2 or 3 of the existing managers/senior team leads.
The panel will definitely be the two other team leads in US, and potentially also my current manager in UK.
Since all 3 already support me getting the role, hopefully this means this is just a formality.
Man of Honour
Starting a new job in August. I'm moving away from consultancy firms for a while and going to work as a Product Owner & Administrator at a company that uses Salesforce in-house.
No idea how it will pan out but right now the implementation partner arrangement feels like it's struggling and has been for about two years really - there just aren't that many projects and increasingly firms are recruiting their own Salesforce people and seem to be shifting away from using partners.
No idea how it will pan out but right now the implementation partner arrangement feels like it's struggling and has been for about two years really - there just aren't that many projects and increasingly firms are recruiting their own Salesforce people and seem to be shifting away from using partners.
Popcorn time for the steerco.
Financial approvals falling through due to squabbles over the bill.
That is if there is a steerco - it will be a lot of fingerpointing about subjects I’m not part of.. but I will have to give them the news.. sit back and watch the body language and red faces.
Financial approvals falling through due to squabbles over the bill.
That is if there is a steerco - it will be a lot of fingerpointing about subjects I’m not part of.. but I will have to give them the news.. sit back and watch the body language and red faces.
Last edited:
Our place gets less appealing ever day. They've let the numbers in IT degrade to the point there's going to be support crisis for at least year. They are dragging us off our projects to cover systems we have no knowledge of. Knowledge it will take months to acquire.
Instead of promoting the most experienced people into vacant roles, they hire new people with even less experience, and sometimes without required technical skills. Meaning people with experience spend their time covering more of other peoples roles.
I think I'm covering at least part of 3 managers roles, and part of a 4th dev role. This is across DevOps, Infrastructure and now Application Development. This is addition to my own existing main role which is 50:50 between two different areas. I've been given new support work across at least 4 different systems, 3 of which I have no experience of.
Feels like time to move on either out of IT to another dept or out the place entirely. Nearly left last year but withdrew at the 2nd round of interviews as I felt I wasn't ready to take the leap.
Instead of promoting the most experienced people into vacant roles, they hire new people with even less experience, and sometimes without required technical skills. Meaning people with experience spend their time covering more of other peoples roles.
I think I'm covering at least part of 3 managers roles, and part of a 4th dev role. This is across DevOps, Infrastructure and now Application Development. This is addition to my own existing main role which is 50:50 between two different areas. I've been given new support work across at least 4 different systems, 3 of which I have no experience of.
Feels like time to move on either out of IT to another dept or out the place entirely. Nearly left last year but withdrew at the 2nd round of interviews as I felt I wasn't ready to take the leap.