4 ms·

I doubt that this comment will surface to the point where the OP can find it, but just in case -- I'm not sure if it's obvious whether they're saying that you n

I doubt that this comment will surface to the point where the OP can find it, but just in case -- I'm not sure if it's obvious whether they're saying that you need to improve communicating or improving something technical. One of the things I needed to learn in a real job was that if things aren't going well they need to know loudly and early in order to fix it. They can't allocate resources if they don't know things are behind. If they don't see progress, what I hear is that they want more regular updates about what is being done because while you may be making progress on things it's not being recorded in a way that reminds them about it. That is frustrating and takes some effort to handle. You could send them more emails that feel unnecessary to you but are intended to make them feel involved and up to date. You could simply write down what you accomplished each week so that you can be specific about it. I hope it works out okay, it sounds like either your manager needs to do a much better job backing you up or else there may be some maybe not too bad communication steps that can be taken to make them more confident about what is going on.

dazeandconfuse 5y ago
Thanks. I'm reading all the comments. I definitely felt like what the boss was upset about at the meeting had more to do with the technical side, rather than communication. I feel like my communication with my manager was good. We have all-team meets (that the boss isn't a part of) where I gave weekly status updates, and there's a group chat on slack with my manager where me and the other person on the project discussed what we were working on. I also maintain a github project that shows the status of everything I'm working on that takes me more than one day (and try to keep it up-to-date with what the other person on the project is doing too). But there was virtually no communication between me and my skip boss. My feeling is that I should have been doing more to keep him in the loop. I think, viewing from the outside, some might say that the management hierarchy exists for a reason and just communicating with my direct manager should be fine, but I think the skip boss would have appreciated being kept more directly in the loop.
- neltnerb 5y ago
  That's very weird. I don't know much about office politics but it seems suspicious that your manager wasn't there to directly address your complaints. Here's how I figure it. Let's say they felt they had conveyed the issues to you and that they could not get you to understand it. It happens, whose fault doesn't matter so much. But if that were the case I'd think a good manager would want to be in the room so that they can reinforce the thing being said and make sure everyone is on the same page. Or what if they knew exactly what was going on but didn't see any issues. So then a good manager would go in and defend you because you did your best and if your manager knew what you were doing and didn't, well, manage you then who screwed that up really? But a bad manager might just conveniently not be there and who knows what they've been telling your boss you've been doing. It really sounds like you three need to be in the room at the same time and agree on exactly what you're going to do and with what tools and how you'll explain what you're doing and get it approved. I don't see how else you can cover your butt, they need to take ownership of your technical choices or they aren't really managers or bosses. But I suppose they could just honestly doubt your technical skills. If that were the case though then why would your manager and boss not both be there? No matter what happens it's really weird that the person who knew what you were doing and what needed to be done was absent.

dazeandconfuse 5y ago

Thanks. I'm reading all the comments. I definitely felt like what the boss was upset about at the meeting had more to do with the technical side, rather than communication. I feel like my communication with my manager was good. We have all-team meets (that the boss isn't a part of) where I gave weekly status updates, and there's a group chat on slack with my manager where me and the other person on the project discussed what we were working on. I also maintain a github project that shows the status of everything I'm working on that takes me more than one day (and try to keep it up-to-date with what the other person on the project is doing too). But there was virtually no communication between me and my skip boss. My feeling is that I should have been doing more to keep him in the loop. I think, viewing from the outside, some might say that the management hierarchy exists for a reason and just communicating with my direct manager should be fine, but I think the skip boss would have appreciated being kept more directly in the loop.

neltnerb 5y ago
That's very weird. I don't know much about office politics but it seems suspicious that your manager wasn't there to directly address your complaints. Here's how I figure it. Let's say they felt they had conveyed the issues to you and that they could not get you to understand it. It happens, whose fault doesn't matter so much. But if that were the case I'd think a good manager would want to be in the room so that they can reinforce the thing being said and make sure everyone is on the same page. Or what if they knew exactly what was going on but didn't see any issues. So then a good manager would go in and defend you because you did your best and if your manager knew what you were doing and didn't, well, manage you then who screwed that up really? But a bad manager might just conveniently not be there and who knows what they've been telling your boss you've been doing. It really sounds like you three need to be in the room at the same time and agree on exactly what you're going to do and with what tools and how you'll explain what you're doing and get it approved. I don't see how else you can cover your butt, they need to take ownership of your technical choices or they aren't really managers or bosses. But I suppose they could just honestly doubt your technical skills. If that were the case though then why would your manager and boss not both be there? No matter what happens it's really weird that the person who knew what you were doing and what needed to be done was absent.