To think they learning to do everything of everyone's job is stupid!

[Tinkeratunk]

We have a newish manager and she has decided without asking us that our team should learn everything of each others jobs and have no ownership of any tasks.

Our team is split into 2 sub teams and we know the crux of each others jobs when we need to cover when on leave / absence etc. Each sub team doesn't know the others work as although the work is for the same department its quite different. Things work well currently.

I am worried that this is going to mess things up and increase the likelihood of mistakes. In addition, I also like having autonomy over my own work which I know isn't a valid reason to not do this.

A few of my colleagues have voiced their concerns but it' has fallen on deaf ears. I have a meeting with her and would like to bring this up but need help in what today to her. I don't know how to get her to see that it's not a good idea. Any suggestions?

Sorry that's supposed to say "to think that" in the title

Does she actually want to make it so everyone can do any job or does she want to ensure everyone is fully aware of the jobs of the other team so you have a better base of cover?

Older people in the work place can be very resistant to change. The "we always do it this way" culture has held so many businesses back. Do not be one of these people

I would completely understand if it was so we had better cover for both teams but it's not that. She thinks it's like in the 1950s where you'd have an intray in an office and could see what needed doing and you just picked up the work from the tray 😂

She wants none of us to have ownership of anything. We all have to do everything everyday

I'm slightly offended that you think I'm old 😂

I'm not resistant to change. I actually like change but not for the sake of change or if it's not going to help.

We have said that we can learn the more intricacies of each others jobs which might help it anyone was off unexpectedly long term but that's not enough.

You need to clearly articulate your concerns. I think it's perfectly reasonable to want to have responsibility/ownership for certain tasks or processes as it would give me more job satisfaction but you need to argue it in terms of business benefits or disbenefits. Could it impact on delivery if ownership is shared? Do you have performance related pay? How would this new way of working fit?

Sometimes this precedes a recruitment freeze, followed by restructuring and redundancies. She may be trying to improve the team's overall resilience.

It really depends on the complexity of the work. If it's fairly simple, multi-skiilling makes sense because resource can then be allocated according to demand. If it's complex work, there is a risk it will lead to a dilution of expertise.

Well small companies often operate like this and it is quite an old fashioned way of working, but it actually makes perfect sense, and it gives the company an edge of others. Can't stand "that's not my department" attitude of big corporate companies. Customers will be thrilled!

You can take the negatives and resist change... or you can look at this as a huge opportunity for yourself. You will be considerably more employable in the future if you're multi-skilled.

Does she come from a public sector background. It is one of the approaches taken during austerity.

Exactly how much difference is there really. So is it all administrative or is it adminstrative and warehousing?

This was my immediate thoughts. One team who cover all works reduces the need for contingency in either team and could lead to loss of headcount OR could be interpreted as making the team more resilient. Depends on what's being planned but I'd expect change to be coming

It's not really possible to tell without knowing more about the teams responsibilities and activities. It could work well in some areas and not others.

It could also be that she is trying to re-balance the teams' workload if one seems to be doing a lot more than the other.

Ive seen teams like this.

What is often happening is each "specialist" is doing about 60% of a productive job. It becomes obvious when all the work is pooled, no one can hide and suddenly more gets achieved

Why not try it then when it doesn’t work you can explain with examples the issues doing it this way is causing you and the team

Totally depends on the work.

Hands up who's had the " sorry the staff that deal with that are off sick /annual
leave "

So nothing can be done until that particular person returns to work.

Isn't this just to make any of you dispensable?

I worked in a place that did this anyway and didn't stay very long. While it was lower stress in that the buck didn't always stop with me, I still felt like a worker drone rather than an experienced person in my field and stopped having any motivation