Junior employee being crapped on
Discussion
What I saw happen.
Manager said to software developer Julie(not her real name) that he wanted her to demonstrate the application she’d just developed. She agreed, made a note and continued working on the job she was in the middle of. The following day the manager reminded her and Julie said yes, she would demonstrate it. Manager made it clear he wanted her to stop what she was doing and demonstrate it there and then. Julie hadn’t previously realised that was what he meant. Neither had I, though I hadn’t been listening closely.
The app involved communicating over a network. Julie ran through what she wanted to demonstrate prior to the meeting and all was fine. Then for the actual demo the manager had arranged a new network connection specially for the purpose. The first time Julie tried to run her application it wouldn’t communicate. Julie suggested (don’t recall the exact words) that since the only thing that had changed since the successful run half an hour before was the network, perhaps that should be the first thing to check. Network guy came, found the problem straight away and fixed it. Then the demo went perfectly.
What the manager read from his notes when discussing Julie’s upcoming appraisal a few weeks later.
‘Julie initially failed to demonstrate xxx despite numerous requests. When she finally did demonstrate it, it didn’t work. Julie’s excuse was ‘it worked before’.
This sounds outrageous to me. Saying she should have realised the demo was required straight away might be reasonable. But taking the a reference to the app working before as an excuse, when if she did say it, it was in the context of diagnosing the problem is totally unfair. It also implies her work was poor, when it went subsequently went through QA without touching the sides. I can only imagine the manager had previous experience with Julie leading him to suspect the application wouldn’t work. But this preconception shouldn’t be allowed to distort an appraisal.
What does everyone else think?
Manager said to software developer Julie(not her real name) that he wanted her to demonstrate the application she’d just developed. She agreed, made a note and continued working on the job she was in the middle of. The following day the manager reminded her and Julie said yes, she would demonstrate it. Manager made it clear he wanted her to stop what she was doing and demonstrate it there and then. Julie hadn’t previously realised that was what he meant. Neither had I, though I hadn’t been listening closely.
The app involved communicating over a network. Julie ran through what she wanted to demonstrate prior to the meeting and all was fine. Then for the actual demo the manager had arranged a new network connection specially for the purpose. The first time Julie tried to run her application it wouldn’t communicate. Julie suggested (don’t recall the exact words) that since the only thing that had changed since the successful run half an hour before was the network, perhaps that should be the first thing to check. Network guy came, found the problem straight away and fixed it. Then the demo went perfectly.
What the manager read from his notes when discussing Julie’s upcoming appraisal a few weeks later.
‘Julie initially failed to demonstrate xxx despite numerous requests. When she finally did demonstrate it, it didn’t work. Julie’s excuse was ‘it worked before’.
This sounds outrageous to me. Saying she should have realised the demo was required straight away might be reasonable. But taking the a reference to the app working before as an excuse, when if she did say it, it was in the context of diagnosing the problem is totally unfair. It also implies her work was poor, when it went subsequently went through QA without touching the sides. I can only imagine the manager had previous experience with Julie leading him to suspect the application wouldn’t work. But this preconception shouldn’t be allowed to distort an appraisal.
What does everyone else think?
Julie has just learned a valuable lesson about confirming requests in writing to avoid ambiguity/misunderstandings
('This is my understanding of what you want'). This serves as a record of what has been agreed and then can be used in the event terms verbally change.
As for the appraisal, he sounds extremely petty/bit of a bell. Wasn't it him that got the network connection setup ?
('This is my understanding of what you want'). This serves as a record of what has been agreed and then can be used in the event terms verbally change.
As for the appraisal, he sounds extremely petty/bit of a bell. Wasn't it him that got the network connection setup ?
Are you sure the manager didn't outline his expectations of when he wants the demo?
One day heads-up is short but not impossible depending what stage the app is at.
Anyway from your description does sound like the manager has a bone to pick. New network but not be configured to allow app to communicate so wasn't the dev's fault. I would query the feedback - were all the numerous requests documented? Also does the manager believe the fault is directly related to the app or Julie's prep for the demo?
One day heads-up is short but not impossible depending what stage the app is at.
Anyway from your description does sound like the manager has a bone to pick. New network but not be configured to allow app to communicate so wasn't the dev's fault. I would query the feedback - were all the numerous requests documented? Also does the manager believe the fault is directly related to the app or Julie's prep for the demo?
Edited by anxious_ant on Friday 11th February 14:33
anxious_ant said:
Are you sure the manager didn't outline his expectations of when he wants the demo?
With the network engineer?Sounds like the guy's a tool. While there are lots of avenues to explore, I tend to think most are dead ends and Julie should get used to it or find a job elsewhere.
I think all the answer are listed above...
1. Julie learned an important lesson in life, a lot of people are w
kers
2. Julie learned to put things in writing, especially when dealing with wkers
3. Julie needs to suck it all up and get her experience and c.v. sorted
4. Julie needs to keep her head down until the right moment
5. Julie should then decide on the following 3 options:
a: move on with little fuss when the time is right
b: engage boss in relationship, engineer something unsavoury, get unfair dismissal
c: bring knitting needles into the office and stab boss in both eyes
6. I think the most important questions still to be asked are:
a: Is there a photo of Julie
b: Does your wife know about Julie
1. Julie learned an important lesson in life, a lot of people are w
kers2. Julie learned to put things in writing, especially when dealing with w
kers3. Julie needs to suck it all up and get her experience and c.v. sorted
4. Julie needs to keep her head down until the right moment
5. Julie should then decide on the following 3 options:
a: move on with little fuss when the time is right
b: engage boss in relationship, engineer something unsavoury, get unfair dismissal
c: bring knitting needles into the office and stab boss in both eyes
6. I think the most important questions still to be asked are:
a: Is there a photo of Julie
b: Does your wife know about Julie
768 said:
anxious_ant said:
Are you sure the manager didn't outline his expectations of when he wants the demo?
With the network engineer?Sounds like the guy's a tool. While there are lots of avenues to explore, I tend to think most are dead ends and Julie should get used to it or find a job elsewhere.
I used be a dev.
Sometimes I get informal requests for demo, mostly "hey, could you show me where you got to" sort of thing.
Sometimes the PM wants a proof of concept demo or something more beefy. I usually ask questions ahead so I can manage expectations.
"What do you want to see? When do you want to see it? Who would be there? etc etc".
I would also document this (meeting agendas) if the person is known to be difficult.
Managing expectations is easier said than done, but it's just one of those things you learn throughout your career.
Julie has certainly learnt the hard way to ask 'when do you want it?'.
She prepared for the demo as best she could, there was no suggestion of a new network link until she actually came to perform the demo. For the manager to take the observation that the application worked before the network change as some kind of pathetic excuse when it was perfectly reasonable in the context of diagnosing the problem wasn't a misunderstanding. It was whatever the opposite of cherry picking is.
She prepared for the demo as best she could, there was no suggestion of a new network link until she actually came to perform the demo. For the manager to take the observation that the application worked before the network change as some kind of pathetic excuse when it was perfectly reasonable in the context of diagnosing the problem wasn't a misunderstanding. It was whatever the opposite of cherry picking is.
Taken at face value Julie's obviously had the stty end of the stick here.
Boss sounds like a tool both for the their approach to the demo and their appraisal skills (if something is to be used against you at an appraisal the appraisal probably shouldn't be the first time you hear about it).
tty end of the stick here.Boss sounds like a tool both for the their approach to the demo and their appraisal skills (if something is to be used against you at an appraisal the appraisal probably shouldn't be the first time you hear about it).
Dr J, where are you in this? Peer of Julie, peer of the manager, Julie’s team lead? Are you looking to give advice, or intercede on her behalf?
Julie’s learned to clarify timescales and requirements for a demo, and has suffered for having an appraisal soon after something didn’t go as well as it could have.
Her boss is a bit of a tt - they could easily have put a positive spin on the network thing, rather than a negative. Julie should object, and point out that her comment was in the context of diagnosing the issue, and was correct in that the network was the problem.
If she feels that this is going to be career limiting, and/or a pay review after this assessment means she’s noticeably behind market pay, she’s best looking for a new role. If she’s 2+ years with the firm, she’s probably due the pay bump that comes from moving firms anyway.
Julie’s learned to clarify timescales and requirements for a demo, and has suffered for having an appraisal soon after something didn’t go as well as it could have.
Her boss is a bit of a t
t - they could easily have put a positive spin on the network thing, rather than a negative. Julie should object, and point out that her comment was in the context of diagnosing the issue, and was correct in that the network was the problem.If she feels that this is going to be career limiting, and/or a pay review after this assessment means she’s noticeably behind market pay, she’s best looking for a new role. If she’s 2+ years with the firm, she’s probably due the pay bump that comes from moving firms anyway.
DanL said:
Dr J, where are you in this? Peer of Julie, peer of the manager, Julie’s team lead? Are you looking to give advice, or intercede on her behalf?
Julie’s learned to clarify timescales and requirements for a demo, and has suffered for having an appraisal soon after something didn’t go as well as it could have.
Her boss is a bit of a tt - they could easily have put a positive spin on the network thing, rather than a negative. Julie should object, and point out that her comment was in the context of diagnosing the issue, and was correct in that the network was the problem.
If she feels that this is going to be career limiting, and/or a pay review after this assessment means she’s noticeably behind market pay, she’s best looking for a new role. If she’s 2+ years with the firm, she’s probably due the pay bump that comes from moving firms anyway.
Peer of the manager. I'm looking to see if others agree with my assessment of the managers behaviour and hoping to learn from others experiences of similar situations.Julie’s learned to clarify timescales and requirements for a demo, and has suffered for having an appraisal soon after something didn’t go as well as it could have.
Her boss is a bit of a t
t - they could easily have put a positive spin on the network thing, rather than a negative. Julie should object, and point out that her comment was in the context of diagnosing the issue, and was correct in that the network was the problem.If she feels that this is going to be career limiting, and/or a pay review after this assessment means she’s noticeably behind market pay, she’s best looking for a new role. If she’s 2+ years with the firm, she’s probably due the pay bump that comes from moving firms anyway.
I manage technology teams for a living. I would never speak to any of my staff like that, to be honest the manager doesn't sound like a good manager. We have scheduled demo slots for developers to showcase their work and while we might sometimes ask to take a look at something on an ad-hoc basis it would be a very informal affair and would not even be worth mentioning as part of an appraisal.
Ok. Well, as presented the manager is a bit crap, but now I reread your first post the feedback on what happened doesn’t seem to have been to Julie, but rather at an internal level setting meeting?
If it’s also been said to Julie in that way, it’s very poor - it’s a long way from coaching. If it’s in an internal managers meeting, what’s motivating this person to paint things in this light? Are they trying to shift some blame, trying to downgrade Julie’s assessment to allow them budget to give more to someone else, or something else?
As you knew the facts, did you question this person’s version of events in the meeting? It can be hard to do - office politics are rarely fun!
If it’s also been said to Julie in that way, it’s very poor - it’s a long way from coaching. If it’s in an internal managers meeting, what’s motivating this person to paint things in this light? Are they trying to shift some blame, trying to downgrade Julie’s assessment to allow them budget to give more to someone else, or something else?
As you knew the facts, did you question this person’s version of events in the meeting? It can be hard to do - office politics are rarely fun!
Dr Jekyll said:
Peer of the manager. I'm looking to see if others agree with my assessment of the managers behaviour and hoping to learn from others experiences of similar situations.
Taken as read, the behaviour is way off, I’m sceptical that it’s coachable and probably part of a pattern of behaviour. I’ve seen similar situations go one of two ways. Word or at the very least sentiment spreads and the organisation gets little choice in who leaves as a result. Often good staff who can find other roles easily and have the confidence to are first out and it’s not always those directly under that manager, sometimes it’s their peers.Or, occasionally, a hook is found to move people sideways to other managers until the point that person no longer manages anyone. I’ve seen managers moved sideways to other sites only for the same situations to reoccur. Particularly brutal at one place where they decided to let staff choose their line manager, but personalities are different and sometimes you might be surprised that someone would want a certain individual for a manager. Perhaps this guy has his favourites for whatever reason. Eventually a manager with no one to manage might get the hint and leave but sometimes self awareness isn’t strong.
I’d want them turfed out pdq but I’m yet to see that happen.
DanL said:
Dr J, where are you in this? Peer of Julie, peer of the manager, Julie’s team lead? Are you looking to give advice, or intercede on her behalf?
Julie’s learned to clarify timescales and requirements for a demo, and has suffered for having an appraisal soon after something didn’t go as well as it could have.
Her boss is a bit of a tt - they could easily have put a positive spin on the network thing, rather than a negative. Julie should object, and point out that her comment was in the context of diagnosing the issue, and was correct in that the network was the problem.
If she feels that this is going to be career limiting, and/or a pay review after this assessment means she’s noticeably behind market pay, she’s best looking for a new role. If she’s 2+ years with the firm, she’s probably due the pay bump that comes from moving firms anyway.
Do agree that Julie may benefit from not being afraid to push back on managers or question decisions there and then. Difficult to say without being there.Julie’s learned to clarify timescales and requirements for a demo, and has suffered for having an appraisal soon after something didn’t go as well as it could have.
Her boss is a bit of a t
t - they could easily have put a positive spin on the network thing, rather than a negative. Julie should object, and point out that her comment was in the context of diagnosing the issue, and was correct in that the network was the problem.If she feels that this is going to be career limiting, and/or a pay review after this assessment means she’s noticeably behind market pay, she’s best looking for a new role. If she’s 2+ years with the firm, she’s probably due the pay bump that comes from moving firms anyway.
When I read stuff like this it makes me sad a little for the underdog - people need to know their worth - sounds like she is a good dev and could get a job elsewhere, market hot at moment. Also sad that s
t tends to float to the top. Dont think ive ever had a terrible manager. Or at least the ones that were bad I was able to manage.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff