Some Hazards of Skip-Level Interviews: II

As we noted last time, skip-level interviews can enhance organizational performance. But whether supervisors initiate them, or subordinates do, there are risks. Next time, we'll explore some hazards of subordinate-initiated skip-level interviews. For now, we resume our discussion of the hazards of supervisor-initiated interviews, using the name Frodo for the subordinate, Bilbo for Frodo's supervisor, and Gandalf for Bilbo's supervisor.

Misinterpreting the event itself

When everyone understands that Gandalf conducts routine skip-level interviews, the mere fact that Gandalf has interviewed Frodo (or wants to do so) is unlikely to cause speculation about Gandalf's purpose. But when these interviews are rare, or when they're sudden or unexpected, or when Gandalf takes care to conceal the event, people begin to suspect that Bilbo might be in jeopardy, or might be in the running for a major promotion, or goodness knows what.

To limit this risk, supervisors should conduct skip-level interviews with predictable regularity, though not very often. Making clear that skip-level interviews do occur — and that they're routine — limits the risk of subordinates misinterpreting the event as a sign of anything in particular. Supervisors who conduct surprise skip-level interviews almost certainly generate speculation about their own direct subordinates' job performance.

If Bilbo knows that Gandalf is one who conducts surprise skip-level interviews, he can gain some protection from misinterpretation by advising his subordinates well in advance of any announcement that these things do happen. In effect, Bilbo would be making the interviews a part of the organizational routine, thereby removing the surprise and limiting — but not eliminating — the possibility that subordinates might try to manufacture meaning for the event.

Misrepresentations

In some situations, Frodo might use the skip-level interview to tell Gandalf something that Frodo knows to be incorrect or exaggerated, to disparage Bilbo's performance. If Gandalf has an agenda, and if Frodo can divine it, Frodo can tailor his misrepresentation to what he believes Gandalf wants to hear. If he does, his effort is more likely to be effective.

In any case, Gandalf When everyone understands that the
supervisor conducts routine skip-level
interviews, the mere fact that one occurs
is unlikely to cause speculation
about the supervisor's purposemust be neither too trusting nor too skeptical. He is wise not to accept at face value anything he learns from Frodo, but just as important, he cannot seem to Frodo to be skeptical or distrustful of Frodo. He must take Frodo seriously, but he must take action only after confirming Frodo's assertions with third parties (other than Bilbo).

If Gandalf does confront Bilbo with allegations obtained from Frodo — allegations that are unconfirmed, and which Bilbo knows to be false — then Bilbo must accept that he has a problem. Whether Gandalf is naively eager to find fault with Bilbo, or Gandalf is trying to assemble a case against him, Bilbo's remaining tenure as Gandalf's subordinate isn't likely to be a happy one.

We'll continue next time, exploring subordinate-initiated skip-level interviews.   First issue in this series    Next issue in this series   Top    Next Issue

Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Devious Political Tactics:

Why People Hijack Meetings

When as chair of a meeting, you have difficulty completing a reasonable agenda, you might be the target of a hijacking. Here's Part I of a series exploring meeting hijacking.

Narcissistic Behavior at Work: III

People who behave narcissistically tend to regard themselves as special. They systematically place their own interests and welfare ahead of anyone or anything else. In this part of the series we consider how this claimed specialness affects the organization and its people.

Narcissistic Behavior at Work: VII

Narcissistic behavior at work prevents trusting relationships from developing. It also disrupts existing relationships, and generates toxic conflict. One class of behaviors that's especially threatening to relationships is disregard for the feelings of others. In this part of our series we examine the effects of that disregard.

Narcissistic Behavior at Work: IX

An arrogant demeanor is widely viewed as a hallmark of the narcissist. But truly narcissistic arrogance is off the charts. It's something beyond the merely annoying arrogance of a sometimes-obnoxious individual. What is narcissistic arrogance and how can we cope with it?

Career Opportunity or Career Trap: II

When an opportunity seems too good to be true, it might be. Although we easily decline small opportunities, declining an enticing career opportunity can be enormously difficult. Here's Part II of a set of indicators that an opportunity might actually be a trap.

See also Devious Political Tactics and Devious Political Tactics for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming February 26: Devious Political Tactics: Bad Decisions

When workplace politics influences the exchanges that lead to important organizational decisions, we sometimes make decisions for reasons other than the best interests of the organization. Recognizing these tactics can limit the risk of bad decisions. Available here and by RSS on February 26.

And on March 5: On Begging the Question

Some of our most expensive wrong decisions have come about because we've tricked ourselves as we debated our options. The tricks sometimes arise from rhetorical fallacies that tangle our thinking. One of the trickiest is called Begging the Question. Available here and by RSS on March 5.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenjTnUayrCbSnnEcYfner@ChacdcYpBKAaMJgMalFXoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info