Comments on: Defending a Bad Attitude

By: Linda

Linda — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:59:24 +0000

I agree with Joe Hastings comment about some of the tension may be around supervising former peers. The transition that must take place in the relationship when a peer or friend becomes the supervisor needs to be handled with care. Transparency surrounding the issue may help. Find out if there are concerns/feelings surrounding the new reporting structure. The most openly they address these topics, the better they can work together to make it a win, win situation. The 500 elephant needs to be addressed.

By: Joe Hastings

Joe Hastings — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 15:23:36 +0000

In response to Crucial Skills Newsletter, March 9th, 2010, Kerry’s article

Kerry,
I think another dimension to this is the situation where a peer is promoted over the other peers. The writer pointed out issues with one of their former peers, but reading between the lines there might be a possibility of some minor tension with the other former peer(s).

How is the best way to handle when a person has been promoted over their peers to help address the potential resentments? Also equally important, for the peers who are not promoted, what is a healthy way for them to deal with this also? What is the perspective that each side should have? It can be very difficult when you feel you have been passed over for a promotion and someone you were working with is now in a position of authority over you. Again, how can both sides address the tension, in a healthy way that might be expected from situations like this?

Thanks

By: Paul Meeker

Paul Meeker — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 15:00:44 +0000

Last week you suggested that our new cost-cutting plan was stupid and when I tried to explain why I thought it might work you rolled your eyes and called me naïve.”

I was taught that the word “you” is almost guaranteed as an attack and that nothing is heard past that point. So, re-structuring might lead to: “Last week was a discussion on the new cost cutting plan and the comment was made that “the plan was stupid.” Then there was a rolling of the eyes and then the “naive” comment. While there may be good thoughts about why this plan may not work, and I would love to know those thoughts, the comments and the rolling of the eyes interrupted an attempt to explain the plan more clearly and it was seen as insulting and demeaning by myself and others….

Leaving out “I” and “me” is also good. The conversation has less chance to be seen as personal, yet there can be a cold harshness to it that may or may not be wanted in the situation.

Love your writing!!! Thanks for these lessons.

By: ken

ken — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:56:16 +0000

I commend your giving the advice in Defending a Bad Attitude to work with HR but we have a different issue. Hopefully they will get HR support.

Our HR and Labor Relations does not support supervisors, the senior managers pull the rug out from under the 1st line supervisors and poor performers are allowed to on their merry way. I even had one employee who no question should have been fired years ago, everyone protects him but guess the Inspector General was involved with misconduct and no action was taken even than.

As a first line supervisor I do not even waste my time and just move the work to people who can do it. The others I just bypass.

I cover myself with emails to my management so when they try to point the finger I indicate that I raised the issue for discussion and the discussion was refused.

Most people want to get out of this organization and now you know why.