Do My Job

One school of thought among management theorists and practitioners holds that we can optimize organizational performance by focusing on only three factors: defining each job carefully, hiring people who have demonstrated success in previous similar positions, and finally providing people the resources we think they need to succeed. Then all we need do is have supervisors ensure that their subordinates do their jobs.

Or so the theory goes. In practice, things sometimes work out a bit differently.

For example, some supervisors require not that their subordinates do their own jobs; rather, they require that the subordinate perform some part of the supervisor's job as well. In effect, the message from supervisor to subordinate isn't, "Do your job." Instead, it's, "Do my job." When this happens, trouble is inevitable.

An intra-organizational scenario

Here's an example of a do-my-job scenario involving players who all work in the same organization.

Consider a supervisor — call him Kukla — who suspects that a subordinate — call her Fran — might be revealing still-confidential product development plans to favored members of the sales force. The revelations happen out of the supervisor's awareness, but not out of awareness of other subordinates. So Kukla approaches another subordinate — call him Ollie — and directs Ollie to report on Fran's transgressions. And Kukla tells Ollie that he (Kukla) has asked other subordinates to report on Fran also, so if Kukla hears about Fran's misbehavior from others, but not from Ollie, he (Kukla) will not be happy.

Ollie is now in a bind. He and Fran were friends. Ollie now avoids Fran, because he doesn't want to be present when she talks with sales people. If he is present, and if Fran reveals secrets, Ollie will need to report on his friend. Meanwhile, Fran detects Ollie's new coolness, and their friendship is in peril.

That's just the beginning. It gets really ugly when Ollie witnesses one of Fran's transgressions.

In the above Some supervisors require not only that
their subordinates do their own jobs;
rather, they require that the subordinate
perform some part of the supervisor's jobscenario, Kukla is requiring Ollie to do what is more properly Kukla's job. Supervisors who use this ploy must endure the consequences of fractured relationships among the people they supervise. But some of them do this anyway because they're uncomfortable with the difficult conversations that would otherwise be necessary.

A multi-organizational scenario

Avoiding difficult conversations is just one reason why supervisors require subordinates to shoulder some supervisory responsibilities. Offloading political risk is another. Consider this scenario:

As part of a reorganization, all product development teams have been matched with sales and marketing teams to ensure that the products developed match customer needs. Kukla, the technical Director for the Time Travel product line, has been directed to work closely with Fran from Marketing and Ollie from Sales. But neither Fran nor Ollie have been cooperative. They've told Kukla, "Just you do your job, and we'll do ours." So Kukla delegated his collaboration responsibility to his subordinate, Max, saying, "Make it work with Fran and Ollie."

Now Max, who is subordinate to Kukla, is even less likely to succeed than Kukla, because Fran and Ollie outrank Max. But Kukla was reluctant to press Fran or Ollie, so he offloaded this entire nasty mess to poor Max. Essentially, Kukla's message to Max was, "Do my job."

Here Kukla is delegating to Max work that is properly Kukla's. Kukla does that because of the political risk associated with calling out Fran or Ollie for being uncooperative when all three have been directed to collaborate. Max is even less likely to succeed, not only because he's outranked, but also because of the message the delegation sends to Fran and Ollie. They will assume, rightly, that Kukla is unlikely to stand up for Max if Max tries to report Fran or Ollie as non-cooperative.

Last words

If you notice one of your subordinates running the "do-my-job" play, or if you're on the receiving end yourself, be aware that these scenarios rarely turn out well. The Maxes of the world tend to view these plays as opportunities to perform. That is one possible outcome. Here's another: Kukla can claim that delegating the work to Max was Kukla's very own brilliant idea, and that Max would not have succeeded without Kukla's steadfast support. If Kukla does this, Max gets little credit for his work.  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

Footnotes

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.

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 Workplace Politics:

Managing Pressure: The Unexpected

When projects falter, we expect demands for status and explanations. What's puzzling is how often this happens to projects that aren't in trouble. Here's Part II of a catalog of strategies for managing pressure.

The Deck Chairs of the Titanic: Obvious Waste

Among the most futile and irrelevant actions ever taken in crisis is rearranging the deck chairs of the Titanic, which, of course, never actually happened. But in the workplace, we engage in activities just as futile and irrelevant, often outside our awareness. Recognition is the first step to prevention.

Grace Under Fire: II

When we debate at work, things sometimes turn unpleasant. Out of control, one party might maneuver the other into losing control. If we have better tools for recognizing these tactics, we're better able to maintain self-control. Here's Part II of such a toolkit.

When the Answer Isn't the Point: I

When we ask each other questions, the answers aren't always what we seek. Sometimes the behavior of the respondent is what matters. Here are some techniques questioners use when the answer to the question wasn't the point of asking.

Unethical Coordination

When an internal department or an external vendor is charged with managing information about a large project, a conflict of interest can develop. That conflict presents opportunities for unethical behavior. What's the nature of that conflict, and what ethical breaches can occur?

See also Workplace Politics and Organizational Change for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming February 1: The Big Power of Little Words

Big, fancy words, like commensurate or obfuscation, tend to be more noticed than the little everyday words, like yet or best. That might be why the little words can be so much more powerful, steering conversations where their users want them to go. Available here and by RSS on February 1.

And on February 8: Kerfuffles That Seem Like Something More

Much of what we regard as political conflict is a series of squabbles commonly called kerfuffles. They captivate us while they're underway, but after a month or two they're forgotten. Why do they happen? Why do they persist? Available here and by RSS on February 8.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenZLkFdSHmlHvCaSsuner@ChacbnsTPttsdDaRAswloCanyon.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