Employee feels micromanaged if I give her tasks with deadlines

[calmama]

I manage a person who is generally difficult. She objects to… well everything and undermines me at every chance she gets.

When she first started working for me we sat down together and established a work plan to get our job done and keep us on track to meet deadlines. We agreed I would assign daily tasks and we would meet weekly to discuss progress on projects along with anything new we had to take on, along with any business changes, leave, etc.

Weeks down the line she exploded at me for colour coding priorities, saying the urgent (red) tasks were ‘very unfriendly and freaking her out’. I took the red out.

A few weeks later she exploded at me for ‘micromanaging and bullying her’ by sending her daily priorities, despite this being agreed upon from the very start. I asked for an alternative way of progressing projects. She had none.

Today she exploded at me for setting deadlines because they ‘stress her out’. Again, I asked her for an alternative way of doing things and she had none.

I’m at a loss. She’s doing honestly the bare minimum and can’t seem to cope. I’m having to pick up her slack because otherwise my team looks bad, yet I’m still copping the brunt of her rage and there’s no end in sight.

AIBU to throw my hands in the air and take a long vacation?

Have you read all of the OP's posts? She is having to get more involved in managing this employee because the employee is not doing her job.

It’s the only way to manage someone who refuses to do their job.

OP works in events management, where each project will have a series of external deadlines. It’s fine if you wouldn’t want to work like that, but OP’s employed has chosen to. And should switch fields to something non-project based if she doesn’t like deadlines.

A manager dividing project work, with accompanying deadlines, between their team members, is an entirely normal part of many jobs. I work like that (hospital medicine), DH works like that (IT contractor), DBro works like that (advertising). How else would you suggest work be allocated?

Honestly, talk to HR or your own manager. Find your capability policy and follow it. In our place she would get an action plan and if she doesn’t meet that she is out. However this is local government and it takes time. If you are private sector and she is under 2 years discuss with her how she is managed out.

her blowing up at you behaviour is unacceptable and unprofessional- you could get your disciplinary policy and take her down that route.

she clearly is not capable and while you have made allowances unless you don’t give her anything or tasks without deadlines then nothing will work from her pov. You need to get assertive tell her her behaviour is unacceptable and she needs to focus on the tasks you have given her in priority order.

Have to say, i'm loving the 'i couldn't possibly tolerate being told what to do by my manager'. Really??

OP, there is always a lot of anti-manager bollocks posts when there is thread like this. Your employee is clearly very practiced at this type of deflection and distraction - I would guess she has been doing it for years, either in employment or at school or even with mummy and daddy. She wont be able to believe that you are not just going away - I once had a difficult employee basically say as much (NHS). In the end I told her she WOULD have to have her regular meetings with me, but would have to come into head office because I refused to sit with her 1 to 1 because of her explosions - and that since dignity at work covered me as well as her, if she ever shouted at me again, I would take her through disciplinary action. So zero tolerance of explosions, no blank slates and into a performance plan. She has showed you clearly that she is not going to be reasonable.

I couldn't tolerate daily deadlines, coloured charts and constant meetings with zero autonomy.

It's different though. Imo, it's ott.

Presumably you don’t behave like this.

Which is absolutely great if you are a self-employed sculptor or in some other job where you know what you have to do and can do it entirely according to your own criteria and timescales. However, from the few details the OP has provided this is a very junior post where the difficult colleague should be doing some extremely simple but time-sensitive tasks. The fact that she hasn't been doing them is causing problems for the OP and other colleagues. In a busy job organising events it may well be that the OP and her team are told by someone else to get on and organise something, working to a strict deadline and to other people's constraints. Information may be trickling in to a central point of contact (OP). OP's job will involve a lot of dissemination to other members of the team, and trying to keep a close eye on where they've got to with each event. If that kind of working environment isn't for the difficult colleague, she should do the decent thing and move on, making way for someone who would enjoy it and be good at it.

This isn't micromanaging. It's a manager who has tried everything else to manage and support a clearly ineffective member of staff to get them to do their actual job. All of you saying that you would hate this are no doubt doing your jobs very well. And I agree, when you are doing a good job, being micromanaged is horrible - I've been there, but this isn't what is happening here.

If the member of staff has any issues or needs which might require reasonable adjustments to be put in place then it is up to the employee to flag those up, to communicate with their Manager and to ask for support. Whilst Managers should be alert to any potential issues with team members they aren't mind readers and even initiating those conversations can be a minefield.

It seems to me like the OP has done everything possible to provide support and has consulted the member of staff to ask how she can best be supported. None of which the member of staff has found acceptable.

OP - at this stage you really, really need to get your Manager and HR involved. You've done all you can up to now. She's been there less than 2 years and can be dismissed. I'll be honest that I don't understand why you haven't escalated it before now. She's clearly useless and taking the piss.

But the longer that this goes on, that you don't speak to your manager or HR to escalate when her performance isn't improving after everything you have put in place, then you unfortunately run the risk as being viewed as a manager who cannot deal effectively with poor performance. You being kind and patient with her, whilst she doesn't step up might backfire on you.

She has the whole day to do that? Unless the 'social media' post is a literary epic I'd struggle to fill a couple of hours with that work.

@calmama OP why aren't you responding to pp asking why you a) aren't referring this to HR, or b) aren't putting her on notice of dismissal because she's been there less than 2 years.

Why are you being so passive? You don't need to twist yourself up into a pretzel. You just say she's being kept go, and you get someone in who can actually do the job.

Unless there are reasons why you can't do that you're not sharing?

I wonder if all the posters claiming the OP is micromanaging are the type who need to be managed this way?

It is abundantly clear from the OP's posts that this employee needs more steering because she isn't pulling her weight.

The post claiming that the employee may be ND isn't helpful.

Given that they obviously aren't used to being micromanaged in their own jobs don't you think it more likely that they don't need to be?

You are probably right @coffeeaddict77

I haven't said that no job requires daily meetings/deadlines or coloured charts but I wouldn't do one that did and I don't think many people would. That level of micromanagement often wastes time and hinders work progress rather than facilitates it. It's not working in OPs case and is probably wasting her time as much as anything. If the employee is not working she should be dismissed.

Ditto, that seems like a couple of hours work maximum. I think it depends on the role, age of employee and pay but no one should require micromanagement. After a couple of months they should also be getting into the swing of things and being proactive and taking initiative.

People who can't tolerate being set "daily tasks by line manager".... why not? If that's the nature of the job? If the manager says, "Can you do 'XYZ today, thanks'" what's the big deal? It's work. I understand it if it's checking every little thing but if they're just at the beginning of the day asking you to work on something, what's the problem? Especially if you're junior. Also it's totally mental saying you're triggered by the colour red.

I agree @EllieBellieSmellie1

Wow... I wonder how much work I'll get if I tell all my clients that I find deadlines stressful and triggering and can't be given any (and I mean, I do but tough shit, I freelance, i have deadlines all over the place!)...

I've seen a few comments about whether shes ADHD/ND etc - she may be but in that case its up to her to suggest things that will help, not up to others to constantly play a guessing game only for her to explode at them for trying to find a solution!

It's not project management that's the issue. Digital teams work on sprint cycles, often fortnightly. Team members are clear about what they are doing and have accountability for what they produce in that period.

This! She sounds unprofessional, lazy, useless and manipulative.

Exactly, many of these replies are amazing, the OK should not give a list of tasks for the employee to do when the employee seems to be unwilling to do the job being employed to do. I would get rid before it deteriorates into catching stress and sitting at home in full pay for months.

I was that person tbh. I was mortified about not being able to manage somone who was an absolute aresehole. In the end, i had a breakdown. But, i recognise it was my failing. I wasn't up to managing that cnut. Still doesn't mean he should be facilitated in his shitness imo.