The OP could be out of line, but there is another factor in play. Remember that when a company wants to keep someone, they will tolerate no end of ridiculous b

The OP could be out of line, but there is another factor in play. Remember that when a company wants to keep someone, they will tolerate no end of ridiculous behavior. When they don't care or want someone out, they tolerate nothing, or invent things not to tolerate. There is a personality type who cherry picks easy problems from other peoples queues and then front runs the news of solving them. They create a race to the bottom environment where to survive in the org, people start competing to claim credit for insignificant problems and create pressure to neglect the valuable and hard ones. It also creates "turf," instead of collaboration. There is a lot of advice that will say, "things are dynamic, be yourself, be authentic, collaborate," but what advice really means is, "no, the situation isn't changing, we're not making the jerk accountable, you are the bottom dog." A manager who lets this happen is also encouraging it. Maybe the culture is such that it doesn't matter, and the jerk has protection higher in the chain, but the effects are clear. In principle, you can always ask a manager to clarify roles and rules. In conversations, you can always ask that colleague for clarification of principles, e.g. "thanks for the insight, and while I balance it with other priorities, to be clear, do I have a reporting relationship to you, or has your manager given you direct accountability for this work?" In practice, this can alienate people by asserting your interest and forcing a decision, and they may resent you for it. If they do, find a new job, there are better places.