How would this behaviour go down in your workplace?

[Iwanttenofthose]

Just interested in some other perspectives on what would be an acceptable way to handle this in your workplace.

I'm a project manager, x is in a junior admin position. X used to hold a slightly more senior role (not management) but threatened redundancy, took the admin role rather than leave.

Every time I communicate a project decision to x (that has been ratified by the project stakeholders, steering group etc) and ask them to help with the resulting action, for example by sending out a calendar invite, they challenge the strategy behind it and end up pulling loads of different people into the conversation to try to support their case against whatever approach we're taking with the project. The only reason I tell them anything about the project is because I need them to do the occasional task like book an event or send out an email. They'll then refuse to do the work until I've had multiple conversations with them, and all the other people they've pulled into the situation who aren't even part of the project, to clarify that the decision has already been assessed by people with the relevant expertise, signed off, and the thing I've asked them to do now just needs to happen.

For context, I work in an organisation where everyone's in the trade union and the organisation is extremely averse to the risk of upsetting anyone. If I did say anything more assertive than what I've put above, x would probably go to the union saying something about their wellbeing being compromised then I'd be the one having to justify my actions to HR etc.

How would this play out in your workplace?

I'd just respond that the steering group have already looked at several approaches and have decided on this one. Discussing it again outside of the group for several hours is only going to delay the project.

@Iwanttenofthose I personally would push for X to be involved in those meetings, even if they're there 'officially' to take minutes or something so they can see the rationale behind the decisions that are made and will just do their job when you need them to

I would raise this with their line manager and ask them to deal with it. Have done so in the recent past, it did work and we have managed to retrieve a working relationship.

To me it sounds like the person is in the wrong role. Resentful of their changed responsibilities and unable to engage with the new role. Still trying to prove a point. They would have been selected for redundancy due to underperformance? Its a bitter pill to swallow for anyone.

I would channel all admin support requests via the line manager in future, just asking for 'one of the team' to help you, unless this person is specifically assigned to be your support.

But in the realms of project management it actually often doesn't matter. Anyone can have good ideas or an opinion. The point of having a project team and stakeholders is that you reduce the number of options to a manageable amount without compromising the success of the project (ie they are carefully picked).

The problematic colleague, although he may have some knowledge, is actually a hindrance to the project due to his attitude and therefore is not a stakeholder.

That's the approach I've been taking so far but I get constant replies challenging the decision despite that, and they don't do the necessary work until I've had lengthy discussions with them going over every approach we discussed and rejected. It's genuinely starting to become a project risk because of the time that's taking, but them not doing their work also delays the project so it feels no-win without escalating it more formally.

They're so aggressive and confrontational that I honestly think they'd de-rail things and not be respectful of other voices. And selfishly, I don't want to waste my time trying to facilitate that. But at least if that happened, there'd be witnesses ...

X would not last in my organisation.

I would suggest you give feedback to their line manager and state your desired outcome rather than getting into whether they should have been put in that position. I can’t imagine you’re the only one complaining.

Yeah I'm coming around to that idea now having read the various responses on this thread. I don't want to be a complainer but x is essentially a project risk now. It doesn't help their case that the previous person in their role was very efficient and service focused, so I can't be the only one feeling the difference.

@Iwanttenofthose people who aren't PMs often think your role is Mammy and being unofficial mentor and coach for people you don't line manage.

Bottom line here is this person isn't doing the job they're paid for and are likely stopping you from being able to switch your laptop off at 5pm.

So let their LM do the job they're paid for and manage this person.

Ironically if they could schedule the meetings for you and do their actual job well, they'd probably end up promoted again quite quickly.

Do you need to work with X at all? Are there other staff members who can do the admin? Or maybe involve X at a later point in time once arrangements are already in place?

That last point is exactly why I'm starting to think they were shunted across by their previous department under the guise of redundancy. It's difficult to get rid of people any other way in this sector. I don't think their behaviour would be any less problematic at a higher level tbh because they'd still be obstructive and get in the way of delivery.

@rookiemere that was clearly a swipe at me. If you don't want someone's input, you be firm enough to get past that very quickly. If they're a potential asset, you make use of that. I've been a PM. Getting admin on side is pretty beneficial...

It sounds like you need to have some conversations earlier in the process. It sounds like you arranging these meetings us the first time these people have heard of these projects and they're panicking. Is that the case?

They're so aggressive and confrontational that I honestly think they'd de-rail things and not be respectful of other voices. And selfishly, I don't want to waste my time trying to facilitate that.

How senior are the people in the meeting? Could it end up with everyone seeing what a liability she is and moving her away from the project?

Sorry @girlmom21 it wasn't meant as a swipe at you honestly. There's a difference between a junior with good ideas that needs nurturing and a malcontent who has been demoted. In the former situation you're right, the person needs a wee bit of redirecting and some encouragement.

Do not bring the person into meetings. The business got rid of problem person by offloading them into change. It will reflect badly on you if they are there derailing the meeting, just as it reflects badly on you if project isn't delivered because you're busy smoothing Brian's ego. He doesn't care about your feelings, so don't worry about his.

@rookiemere I think it just depends on the reason for the redundancy/demotion. If he was demoted and they used the threat of redundancy to do that you're right. If they needed the job and the redundancy was genuine, they're probably desperate to climb the ranks again and I can imagine it'd be hard to let go of the job you used to do and, presumably, quite enjoy.

Sorry for assuming you were taking a swipe!

She's not his manager.

I suspect that they resent being told what to do by you, especially if you were promoted at the same time they were threatened with redundancy and ended up being demoted. A not wholly unreasonable way for them to feel, all things considered.

Maybe either stop asking them to do things altogether, or always go via their line manager instead.

X is new in role and I set up a meeting in their first week to explain the project and how we'd interact so I'm not sure what else I could have done earlier really

Sadly yes I do they very much hold the strings as admin staff hold certain admin privileges such as the ability to email the whole organisation and use generic rather than personal email addresses

Yes her director would be in that meeting so it would probably be effective, but I'm reluctant to do something that would sabotage her career when she's clearly so unhappy about how she's been treated

Yeah I completely agree and I can accept their resentment as I'd probably feel the same in their shoes (although I hope my behaviour wouldn't reflect that and I'd make the difficult decision to move on)

They'll then refuse to do the work

Technology, in Broadcast Media.

Staff are treated very well, because that is the right thing to do and also because the organisation is not keen on trade unions, none are recognised. .

We do of course have some difficult people and make a point of treating each person as an individual with strengths & try to play to those strengths.

In practise this means that in the situation you describe, if a gentle word, followed by a gentle word with their manager, is not enough to sort it out we would find a way to bypass them. Can you have a discrete word with others who are suffering the same issue to check that it's not just an issue with you, which might need more specific approach.

Anyone who needs a lot of working around tends to find themselves in a different department and then, if no change, is managed out. The turnover rate is pretty low, many long term staff so the quiet words usually work because no-one wants to be bypassed and out of the loop.

That was a pretty long winded way to explain that I wouldn't have any patience with what you describe. I would expect to close down the kind of discussion you describe pretty quickly.

In practise, though, I can't imaging it happening because everyone is busy getting their own stuff done. They might by accident be sucked in to review a decision which had already been taken.

As soon as they realise that the discussions are not leading anywhere (absence of follow up actions agreed and status updates on those actions) no one would be interested. Who can you get who is senior enough to make sure everyone is aware of the issue and doesn't get involved, to remove their power base.

We are always recruiting. DM me if you might be interested in a change. 😀

Yes her director would be in that meeting so it would probably be effective, but I'm reluctant to do something that would sabotage her career when she's clearly so unhappy about how she's been treated

That's very kind of you but I really don't think you should feel responsible for protecting someone else or cover for their unwillingness to do the job. They know who is in the meeting so if they kick off and it backfires they've done it to themselves. It would be good to delegate the work to them in the meeting so they either raise questions with the people making the decisions or go off and do the job without questioning if you know what you're doing.