Under performance at work

[GreatHazelDuck]

When you are under performing at work is it your fault or your managers?

Our team leader was at our level but she's applied for the job and got it. She's not my direct manager but I will speak like she is.

She's under performing, who's fault?

I'm confused by the wording in your post. Underperformance, could also be a combination of reasons.

It could be either or both in my opinion.
Some people underperform despite their managers best efforts. Some underperform because no support etc from management. Some underperform because they are crap and no support from management:

She’s under performing but got a promotion?

You have to give newly promoted people a chance to grow into a role and accept they will most definitely make mistakes.

But the role of the manager is to mentor the team and help people develop. So if someone is left to sink or swim that is the manager's fault. If someone is given support but they never write anything down, appear to have zero short term memory and in fact never listen to a word anyone says then that is their own fault.

How are you assessing this under performance?

Me too. Sorry I don't want to describe the situation in detail but the Team Leader is under performing at work. I have witnessed her behaviour with customers and it's poor, but not all the time. Her Team leader work has also lead to failings.

Now, could blame it all on her which is the easy option, but could it be due to a new manager as well?

But the new manager is doing well.

My last one meant they are crap/ not bothered and management also just let it go without pulling them up.

Not sure I understand who you mean is underperforming, but two things I can tell you.

1. Noone here can answer that question because it depends on knowing a LOT of specifics that you won't know, let alone us, and,

2. Even if you did, it's none of your business.

Shit like this is why I hate working with people.

None of my business? She's managing the team I work with, it's all my business if it's not being managed well

There is a difference between underperforming (which is not meeting objectives), and underdeployment (which is not having enough work to do).

Bear in mind that people are usually promoted on the basis of their performance in a previous (lower) role, not their new one.

So, unless they are developed by their managers, she will underperform. This is probably the biggest problem in NHS/Public Sector management.

She's under performing in new role. I don't know how she was in other role.

Thank you. Great explanation.

Then raise your concerns with HR. That's the extent of your options here. The whys and hows are absolutely none of your business.

💯

Someone underperforms for many reasons. Sometimes it's their fault, sometimes it's not.

However, if the manager allows the poor performance to continue without support, it then becomes their fault.

Yes, I would agree with this summary too.

Is this a reverse? If not, sounds like you're envious and shit-stirring. Butt out.

Your posts make no sense, OP.

How do you know she is underperforming? How do you know what her objectives are if she is not within your direct team? What are measuring her against.

Why would you think any underperformance has anything to do with her manager’s performance? You said her manager is doing well, how do you know? Have you seen the manager’s objectives?

You are speaking in code and expect people here to assess two strangers performance and the reasons for their performance based no information at all. Very strange.