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

Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.

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 Workplace Politics:

The "What-a-Great-Idea!" Trap

You just made a great suggestion at a meeting, and ended up with responsibility for implementing it. Not at all what you had in mind, but it's a trap you've fallen into before. How can you share your ideas without risk of getting even more work to do?

Devious Political Tactics: Cutouts

Cutouts are people or procedures that enable political operators to communicate in safety. Using cutouts, operators can manipulate their environments while limiting their personal risk. How can you detect cutouts? And what can you do about them?

Ethical Influence: I

Influencing others can be difficult. Even more difficult is defining a set of approaches to influencing that almost all of us consider ethical. Here's a framework that makes a good starting point.

The Politics of the Critical Path: II

The Critical Path of a project is the sequence of dependent tasks that determine the earliest completion date of the effort. We don't usually consider tasks that are already complete, but they, too, can experience the unique politics of the critical path.

Bottlenecks: I

Some people take on so much work that they become "bottlenecks." The people around them repeatedly find themselves stuck, awaiting responses or decisions. Why does this happen and what are the costs?

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

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming December 11: White Water Rafting as a Metaphor for Group Development

Tuckman's model of small group development, best known as "Forming-Storming-Norming-Performing," applies better to development of some groups than to others. We can use a metaphor to explore how the model applies to Storming in task-oriented work groups. Available here and by RSS on December 11.

And on December 18: Subgrouping and Conway's Law

When task-oriented work groups address complex tasks, they might form subgroups to address subtasks. The structure of the subgroups and the order in which they form depend on the structure of the group's task and the sequencing of the subtasks. Available here and by RSS on December 18.

Coaching services

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