<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:s="http://www.techrepublic.com/search" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"  xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
    <title><![CDATA[Discussion on A subordinate refuses an assignment ]]></title>
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461]]></link>
    <atom:link rel="hub" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" />
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461/rss" />

    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>2013-05-26T01:21:43-07:00</lastBuildDate>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I know this is almost a year later, but...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2666931]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[as a former supervisor, I can see two sides to this.Did the employee handle it well?  No, he didn't.Did the manager handle it well?  No, he didn't.Simply put, the employee should have just nodded and talked to the manager about this in private.However the thing I don't see you realizing is, the manager in this case should not have put any responsibility of review and decision on the tech helpdesk personnel.  Personnel management and policy is the decision solely of management.  To put your helpdesk people (especially senior people who do their job well, and most likely don't want the added responsibility or to feel like they are going to be &quot;babysat&quot;) in that position, it is just unprofessional.Any good manager would have reviewed the software themselves.  You know in general how your helpdesk works.  Find pieces of software that fit the general scope of your needs.  Then call a sitdown with your helpdesk supervisor and/or lead(s) and show them to them and see what they think.But to give one of your staff a role of choice when that is your position to do, that is just not cool IMHO.But if public insubordination can't be tolerated (as you stated), then neither should management that won't step up to the plate and make a decision.Besides, being a leader doesn't mean control.  Teams usually work together and are lead, not dictated.No one likes a Genghis Khan for a boss.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2666931]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jck]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2008 06:26:17 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: A subordinate refuses an assignment]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2666887]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[It depends what type of image you want to project to your staff about yourself and your management style.As a Type A manager, you'd get him into your office, given him a speech and make sure he actually does what he was told. If he's a repeat offender - he's out.A more modern, coach/manager, would first tell the employee to mind his tone of voice and then, very calmly, ask the employee to elaborate his views - in front of everyone. You discuss it and, win or draw, he'll have to do what he's asked. Should you &quot;lose&quot;, other employees will have actually more confidence in you. This is because they'd understand that- you don't ask of them to do stupid things without their input- you listen- you're ready to admit your mistakesThis kind of environment encourages employees to express their ideas.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2666887]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[lcdata@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2008 05:53:00 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[A Positive Word of Rebuke]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2666618]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[In this case, all the PEOPLE in the room were affected by the incident.We have the advantage of time as we weigh in, but the manager in this situation did not.  In such a crisis, we, as managers draw on fundamental beliefs and experiences alone.The real concern here is not the manager or the confrontational employee, but the team.  They can identify with both the manager and the employee on some level. The confidence in leadership is, for the moment, at stake. What do they really want to see? What ?sells? (what the team will buy into) to hell.  A real leader instills and inspires vision. The team is not necessarily looking for what they themselves would say, but something (someone!) they can respect.  A positive word of rebuke towards the rebel is in order.  He should be told that innovation always begins in part with revolt.  But ?mavericks? like us, need not be negative to be passionate. In fact, negativity can be destructive if we don?t take our gifts to the next level.  -Status quo, never! But we cannot afford or tolerate the luxury of anger, it impedes change.  Let?s work together to find the best solution.  Maverick#1, you have until 5pm (not 2:30pm) to come up with a better solution.  Moving on to the next order of business?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2666618]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[LAN Cruiser]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 13:58:32 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Right on Target]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2666489]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[If the subordinate had been working in the Federal sector, he would have been out the door so fast. The Feds view insubordination as a firing offense and it?s one of only three ways for immediate termination.Nobody is indispensable and the sooner the subordinate understands that, the easier you life as a manager will be.  Nobody is indispensable and though you may go through some pain and agony if the guy decides to walk, you as a manager and your IT Shop will survive.Ending the meeting immediately will asking the subordinate to stay sends a clear message to your while maintaining your subordinate?s rights to privacy.  Public humiliation is never good and that goes both ways.  The manager should never humiliate a subordinate in front of their peers but on the other hand a subordinate should never humiliate their boss in front of their peers too.What this sounds like it the typical ?I?m PO?ed that the company passed me over to hire this wet-behind-the-ears newbie.  I?ve been here longer and know more than anyone else, that job should have been mine!?  What employees forget that just because you?re a great super techie, doesn?t mean you?ll management material.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2666489]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Antediluvian Paladin]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:16:01 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Too severe]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2628114]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Certainly adjourning the meeting and having a one-to-one with the employee would have eben appropriate steps, but asking for an apology in front of the whole team smacks of parental discupline, rather than good management.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2628114]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[junglegeorge45@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2008 06:16:08 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[A Subordinate refuses an assignment]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2486543]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Did you ever consider the possibility that you, the manager, may have been the one who screwed up, not the employee? Effective management is not about flexing power/authority muscles. It is also about admitting own failures/mistakes candidly. So doing only makes you, the manager grander and increases your people's trust.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2486543]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jperick.mbei@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2008 09:18:57 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I agree]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2483641]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I agree with your assessment. People need to come together to work out goals, and be able to take pride in what they can accomplish. No one knows everything. Why not keep it simple? What job?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2483641]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[networkoverwork@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:32:06 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[ROTFLMAO]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2457474]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Tony, if you've been in continuous employment, as you say, then I think you're a FOS passive aggressive who CLAIMS to have the FU attitude, but in reality sucks it up and does what hes told like a nice little laddy like the rest.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2457474]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[bspallino@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2008 08:38:30 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Dependency makes things wrong]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2457161]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Well, this is a very tough situation for a Manager when a subordinate refuses to obey an order.We can take this in 2 different ways..1. Refuses to obey the orders.2. Refuses to do that particular work.If he refuses to obey any of your orders then there is a problem with him and talking with him personally will not do things .This is purely because of dependency. We will look into this afterwards.Secondly, if he refuses to do that particular work then there can be some issue in both the sides.As a manager you/We should have positive thinking and broad mind. Your subordinate can be cleverer than you and his view/method of analyzing the problem may be different. I do have some subordinates; Sometimes I do assign work in meetings itself but I moved them in a friendly way..Assume the following conversation in our meeting...Me : &quot;Bala today your task is to install this desktop software. I have sent the details on the mail just before we came for the meeting. In case of any doubt you please ping me. Ok. But we (Should not tell ???you??? ; ???we??? is more important here) should complete it today itself&quot;Bala (having good experience in the company) :Sorry Raja. I am not in the position to do that...Me:Hei Bala! Why yar ? Tell me the problem frankly.Bala will tell some reasons.. ; Though the reasons are acceptable or unacceptable???Me : Bala, you just go through the details in the mail and this will not take more than 1 hr. Don't worry , we are here to help you out and if I am not there you can take help of Ram (another guy who can be fresher or having just 1 year exp. in the company). &quot;We will help you&quot; or &quot;Ram will help you&quot; will stop him instead of doing an argument. And it gives an appearance to others that you have assigned the job to him.Now we take the first case &quot;Not obeying any orders&quot;. This is very dangerous. This is purely because of Dependency on him. We should plug this guy out from the team or from the company. He will spoil the entire team..How to plug him out.... Others should not know or realize or feel that you are plugging him out. Its a time consuming effort.. but solid...How to do that....here is the way..(Assume the problem making guy's name is &quot;Milbin&quot;)For the first 15 days to 1 month give Milbin importance in the team. In parallel put a person (1 year exp.- Opposite sex is preferable) under him and ask him to get the knowledge from him. Milbin should not realize that he is giving KT to that 1 year exp. person. Slowly the dependency on him will go. Now slowly assign the work to the person who acquired knowledge from milbin. Milbin realizes that team or the Manager is not depending on him and now he will get panic.The psychology here is if the dependency goes they will become panic and they surely come into your control. If he is adamant still, don???t assign him any work and slowly take him out of billing and slowly take him out of your team.So ???Slowly??? only do things for the first case.Don???t argue or force your subordinate to take up the job in offline because that will not give you a good image to others and also the quality of work will go down.This method will take some time but it will give you a good result.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2457161]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[mannairajj@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2008 02:46:01 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Yes and I'm an eotistical stroppy bighead as well]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2446047]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[With obvious justification as well. ]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2446047]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Tony Hopkinson]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2008 08:41:56 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[You're one of those arrogant ones...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2445965]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[that's it.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2445965]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[The Truth]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2008 06:55:19 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[How did I get there?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2445819]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Too often personnel is promoted as reward for 1):seniority   2):outstanding skills on a field.The flaw of this system is the lack of formal training in the skills necessary for the new duties. A good carpenter does not automatically become a good foreman. The manager should acknowledge his/her need of additional assets and prepare accordingly. The employer is responsible for preparing its workforce for the new skills required by a promotion. Do we agree?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2445819]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[previso@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2008 04:13:29 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Bottom line now reads]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2445690]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Update: Thank you for all the comments.  The rest of the story is in a new post, ?When management is wrong.?Links to this discussionhttp://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/techofalltrades/?p=123]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2445690]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Tearat]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 19:11:23 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Projections'R'us]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2445575]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Yep, that's projecting, and exactly what I was getting at.  Thanks for recognizing it - so often in situations, people may not see that.I think maybe part of where I've been going in my reactions to this article are that I think the OP had a whole lot of projection going on... but then, I tend to do it a lot myself, so maybe I'm projecting on the OP?  *grin*Gosh, I wish we'd hear back from the author, this could be very interesting to flesh out if we got more info...]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2445575]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[PonderousMan]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 15:06:20 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Context is always key]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2445574]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[As with Tony, agreed on all points.  In referring to the &quot;art&quot; of conflict management, I expected that would be taken into account.  What frustrates me is how far from the real intent of &quot;conflict management&quot; many management cultures are.  I work for a state university, so we get both the &quot;flexibility&quot; of an academic culture mixed with the messed up incentives and whacked out power plays of a government bureaucracy.   We can spend eons talking about how we could make our culture better - but things have not changed a whole lot in the 10 years I've been here.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2445574]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[PonderousMan]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 15:03:23 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Cocky IT Pros?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2445352]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Very well said. Unfortunately, many managers encourage this attitude, since some might owe their professional longevity to the cockiness of some staff. Many IT people sdon't like documentation! Don't even ask them to document how they solved an incident. Yet, some practices have obvious business value.(1). They facilitate in-training of new hires(2). They prevent a team from being &quot;stranded&quot; simply because one team member is out temporary or has left the company. When procedures and so on are documented, team members can support processes/projects even if the main primary contact, or the person who developed the solution is absent(3). Solutions to incident can be easily replicated, since the team has a documented history of the incident (e.g., what caused it? how was the incient identified? how was it resolved? and so on)(4). Shared knowledge, which benefits the team and organization as a whole becomes reality.This culture will not self-establish. There needs to be clear leadership and direction.I still don't agree with the idea that management is reduced to a show of one's authority. That macho style is probably obsolete. Effective management is also--and probably more, about negotiating. The ability to convince your team that the culture you want to build will not just benefit them individually, but the organization at large, is a rare skill/asset. The old style IT pros think that the more information they hold, the longer they will keep their job. The 21st (call it renaissance) IT pros believe that the more know how they share with teammates, colleagues, the more successful they are (because if the team is successful, they too are, but if the team fails, they too will fail).Erick]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2445352]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jperick.mbei@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 10:10:10 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[He who pays the piper.....]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2445020]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[...calls the tune.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2445020]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[andy.nelson@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 05:56:02 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Chain of Command]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2444045]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I find it very interesting that my usage of that phrase has touched off such a negative response. Every organization has a chain of command or an organizational structure of some sort. To immediately attach a military connotation says more about the reader to me. I also agree with you Tony, about the concept of &quot;management giving orders&quot; I have told all of the staff I have ever had that people work WITH me, not FOR me, I do not consider myself to be a dictator..even if I do believe in chain of command..(I too have been gainfully employed since I left school, uninterrupted since 1989) Because, at the end of the day the ultimate responsibilty for whether or not the work is done, done right and done on time rests with that manager. As a direct result of that responsibility, he has the right to make tough calls and delegate work (in as amicable manner as he can) in order to meet whatever goals and objectives have been imposed on him by those people he is accountable to. So, I DID think about it and FU back.... (Glad to see you've got a sense of humor...)]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2444045]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[JPCoz]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 06:52:40 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: The Boss is not]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2443161]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[You seem to be talking to a group of professionals like to a group of K12 kids? A significant segment of respondents here believe that they might not know enough about the case presented. Are you the manager who posted the orginal story?None thus far has condoned indiscipline. However, you ought to acknowledge one fact. Managing is not equal to dictating, and organizations are not the military.If you think--your reaction is indicative of such belief- that the issue is that simple, straight forward, why do you think that the manager chose to post and seek insight?Just seeking pracical knowledge/solutions to practical challenges.Erick]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2443161]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jperick.mbei@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 06:50:51 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Oh, yes!]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2441169]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[For the manager to distract from the objective in order to enforce a power structure is deficient behavior. Unfortunately, deficient behavior on the part of both employees and managers is more common than not.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-255461-2441169]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[NickNielsen]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 03:59:55 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

