3 ms·

From my experience rude + under-performing = termination, if those people who you work with are not performing why does your companies management keep the aroun

From my experience rude + under-performing = termination, if those people who you work with are not performing why does your companies management keep the around? I didn't put it in my original post but incompetent managers who use "boasting" as a success metric instead of objective metrics can lead to such an issue as well.

dvtrn 7y ago
if those people who you work with are not performing why does your companies management keep the around? I'm asking this question presently as a team lead. We have a contributor who is a drain on just about every aspect of our team's operations. They frequently miss meetings, they don't seem to take instruction well (example I brought up once to another team member, this person will ask for help, cut you off constantly, suggest their way is better, or do the direct opposite of whatever recommendation you offer and spend days on a problem set delaying sprints), have delayed multiple projects, caused numerous production outages so on and so forth. All of this combined has made trying to train this person or help them improve difficult and frustrating--very few on the team wants to work with them anymore. It's not a secret among the team that this person just is not the contributor we need, and it's pretty evident from his reactions a few times that our department head is not pleased either, but he doesn't seem interested in letting this person go--none of us are quite sure how to have that talk with our leader that we think this person should be cut loose and a replacement found. Suggestions on broaching that topic?
- mharroun 7y ago
  As team lead are you the persons manager? If so you should have every right to go to hr to either terminate or start a performance improvement plan. If your a team lead with no hire/fire power you need to go to your department head (and rally those whoa agree with you to do the same) and be blunt. "X is is not performing to expectations on top of that the way X is not performing is disrupting, impeding, and alienating other members of the team and its now become not just a performance issue but one of employee attrition". This makes it about X vs the rest of the team/department and allows him to clearly see what is actually at risk. Its very unlikely 1 person is so valued that a manager would accept major turnover in their department.
EliRivers 7y ago
"From my experience rude + under-performing = termination, if those people who you work with are not performing why does your companies management keep the around?" So many reasons. Outside the US and inside parts of Europe, it's actually often a lot of work to fire someone for being so rude that they're damaging the company. It's possible and not actually difficult, but it requires the gathering of evidence and uncomfortable conversations and so on. Far less work and easier to either ignore it, or try to shuffle the person sideways. If they can't be shuffled sideways, there's always the option of promoting them. Additionally, these people often look like hard-driving, no-bullshit "get it done" workers to management. Look at Dave there, he didn't mess around; he simply told everyone else that they're idiots who don't know what they're talking about, and then he left the meeting and started furiously rewriting something independently at his desk. What a guy.

dvtrn 7y ago

if those people who you work with are not performing why does your companies management keep the around? I'm asking this question presently as a team lead. We have a contributor who is a drain on just about every aspect of our team's operations. They frequently miss meetings, they don't seem to take instruction well (example I brought up once to another team member, this person will ask for help, cut you off constantly, suggest their way is better, or do the direct opposite of whatever recommendation you offer and spend days on a problem set delaying sprints), have delayed multiple projects, caused numerous production outages so on and so forth. All of this combined has made trying to train this person or help them improve difficult and frustrating--very few on the team wants to work with them anymore. It's not a secret among the team that this person just is not the contributor we need, and it's pretty evident from his reactions a few times that our department head is not pleased either, but he doesn't seem interested in letting this person go--none of us are quite sure how to have that talk with our leader that we think this person should be cut loose and a replacement found. Suggestions on broaching that topic?

mharroun 7y ago
As team lead are you the persons manager? If so you should have every right to go to hr to either terminate or start a performance improvement plan. If your a team lead with no hire/fire power you need to go to your department head (and rally those whoa agree with you to do the same) and be blunt. "X is is not performing to expectations on top of that the way X is not performing is disrupting, impeding, and alienating other members of the team and its now become not just a performance issue but one of employee attrition". This makes it about X vs the rest of the team/department and allows him to clearly see what is actually at risk. Its very unlikely 1 person is so valued that a manager would accept major turnover in their department.

EliRivers 7y ago

"From my experience rude + under-performing = termination, if those people who you work with are not performing why does your companies management keep the around?" So many reasons. Outside the US and inside parts of Europe, it's actually often a lot of work to fire someone for being so rude that they're damaging the company. It's possible and not actually difficult, but it requires the gathering of evidence and uncomfortable conversations and so on. Far less work and easier to either ignore it, or try to shuffle the person sideways. If they can't be shuffled sideways, there's always the option of promoting them. Additionally, these people often look like hard-driving, no-bullshit "get it done" workers to management. Look at Dave there, he didn't mess around; he simply told everyone else that they're idiots who don't know what they're talking about, and then he left the meeting and started furiously rewriting something independently at his desk. What a guy.