Singapore Expats Forum

Troubled at work with people issues, pls kindly advise!

Discuss about getting a well paid job or career advancement. Ask about salaries, expat packages, CPF & taxes for expatriate.

Karl06
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat, 10 Jan 2009

ByPass

Postby Karl06 » Sun, 11 Jan 2009 5:21 pm

Nu1 says her hubby tells his subordinate

... pls kindly discuss with me before you contact with biggest boss. But he never listens, and continues to sideline him.


I am just wondering how this can come about. Perhaps the hierachy is too vague. If the rebel (the one who bypasses Nu1's hubby, henceforth Reb) is directly under Nu1's hubby (henceforth Mr N) then clearly Bossman is too lax not to ask Reb to course his report through Mr N.

Mr N might find a suitable occasion to sound out Bossman's position with regard to the line of reporting. Based on Bossman's reaction, perhaps Mr N would make a better secure his own position. If he is a strong position and Reb continues to bypass him, then sack him. Do it at a time when the Bossman is on leave and cannot countermand Mr N's act.

The alternative is a gradual erosion of Mr N's status which might make his position entenable. And he might decide to find a more suitable environment.


[/quote]

TennoHekka
Regular
Regular
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed, 07 Jan 2009
Location: Twilight Zone?

Postby TennoHekka » Mon, 12 Jan 2009 6:21 am

ksl wrote:
Bafana wrote:Sack or transfer your husbands staff. He won't stop and will probably only get worse if your husband tried to handle this in a politically correct manner/.

Your husband is his boss and therefore has the right to get rid of him and your husbands boss will go along with the call as this is the right way to do things. If your husbands boss does not support him than your husband knows he should look for a better opportunity. in the least the big boss may chew the guy out as he will loose face by not support your husband and having to deal with the mess he is creating.

14 year means nothing - Not anymore.


I have to agree with Bafana on this, the best possible action is to pull him to one side and explain the conditions, that if he doesn't play the ball, then he's not a team player, he's got no other alternative but to have him removed.


I don't agree one bit with that notion. To begin with, its unprofessional and flippant to suggest firing a staff of 14 years just because a new superior has leadership problems in his new post. In addition, for a foreigner to troop in and expect immediate subservience from a local staffer of such seniority would be akin to expecting a gunnery sergeant/gunny of 14 years in the USMC to take orders without question from a junior officer on exchange from the SAF to his unit. That's not gonna happen, and should never happen! If you want to manage and lead, EARN the respect, quit crying when locals don't give it to you by default just coz you're a grand ol' foreigner.

User avatar
sundaymorningstaple
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 34782
Joined: Thu, 11 Nov 2004
Location: Still Fishing!
Contact:

Postby sundaymorningstaple » Mon, 12 Jan 2009 6:57 am

TennoHekka wrote:I don't agree one bit with that notion. To begin with, its unprofessional and flippant to suggest firing a staff of 14 years just because a new superior has leadership problems in his new post. In addition, for a foreigner to troop in and expect immediate subservience from a local staffer of such seniority would be akin to expecting a gunnery sergeant/gunny of 14 years in the USMC to take orders without question from a junior officer on exchange from the SAF to his unit. That's not gonna happen, and should never happen! If you want to manage and lead, EARN the respect, quit crying when locals don't give it to you by default just coz you're a grand ol' foreigner.


Unfortunately we're not talking about the military here are we? So based on your premise then all CEO's should only be hired from within the company and all should be senior staff? The fact that a worker has been there 14 years only means a couple of things. 1) he's a casualty of the Peter Principle or 2) He's just a middle level worker drone who is happy with the status quo or has never been able to move up or on as (s)he has no ambition. Some of the best leaders/bosses are younger and more forward looking and therefore shouldn't be held back solely due to tenure. If a long-stay employee leaves because of a young'un coming in and being place above him, maybe he should start asking himself why.

Oh, by the way, I'm ex-military as if the young'un was promoted over me I followed his order regardless. That's the military chain of command. We don't have to like it, but that's life.

TennoHekka
Regular
Regular
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed, 07 Jan 2009
Location: Twilight Zone?

Postby TennoHekka » Mon, 12 Jan 2009 7:26 am

sundaymorningstaple wrote:
TennoHekka wrote:I don't agree one bit with that notion. To begin with, its unprofessional and flippant to suggest firing a staff of 14 years just because a new superior has leadership problems in his new post. In addition, for a foreigner to troop in and expect immediate subservience from a local staffer of such seniority would be akin to expecting a gunnery sergeant/gunny of 14 years in the USMC to take orders without question from a junior officer on exchange from the SAF to his unit. That's not gonna happen, and should never happen! If you want to manage and lead, EARN the respect, quit crying when locals don't give it to you by default just coz you're a grand ol' foreigner.


Unfortunately we're not talking about the military here are we? So based on your premise then all CEO's should only be hired from within the company and all should be senior staff? The fact that a worker has been there 14 years only means a couple of things. 1) he's a casualty of the Peter Principle or 2) He's just a middle level worker drone who is happy with the status quo or has never been able to move up or on as (s)he has no ambition. Some of the best leaders/bosses are younger and more forward looking and therefore shouldn't be held back solely due to tenure. If a long-stay employee leaves because of a young'un coming in and being place above him, maybe he should start asking himself why.

Oh, by the way, I'm ex-military as if the young'un was promoted over me I followed his order regardless. That's the military chain of command. We don't have to like it, but that's life.


Well, the military is considered one of the highest regarded and most professional employers in the US, so there are some lessons other corporations can pick up from them, the big three autos included in terms of accountability and competitiveness. As for CEOs being hired in-house, the Japanese have had a habit of doing that, with proven results versus the golden parachute boys of AIG and Lehman, so there you go! As for your dissing a blue-ribbon employee of 14 years, I get a feeling you won't share the same sentiments if you were one of them. Its always easy for mercs to piss all over the experienced lifers, but then, firms who run along those lines wind up like the the dotcoms of old, here today, gone tomorrow. If a long-standing employee in my company left on account of a new guy, let alone a foreigner, I sure as hell would be asking some tough questions of our management policy, not taking any joy over such loss.
I was also ex-military, and you can claim you would take the orders with alacrity, but based on my experience with my alma mater's ROTC training and my buds still serving worldwide in the US military, I seriously doubt it'll go down so happily without serious reservations! :twisted:

User avatar
ksl
Governor
Governor
Posts: 6005
Joined: Mon, 19 Jul 2004
Location: Singapore
Contact:

Postby ksl » Mon, 12 Jan 2009 9:13 am

Tennohekka say:staff of 14 years just because a new superior has leadership problems in his new post. In addition, for a foreigner to troop in and expect immediate subservience



To some extent i would agree! Even the grunts, would take orders, lightly and with suspicion of contempt, everyone deserves a chance for their respect to be earned, but after a year, come on, either the new leader is a superior wkr, or everyone else is playing ball, yet the manager of 14 years, believes he's inherited the right to ignore his boss and being completely disrespectful, after his superior has spoken to him.

I hardly see the new superior, expecting immediate subservience, after one year service, Although it is difficult to make any judgement without the full particulars, in fact, for it to end up on a public forum, i would also be questioning a superior, that goes home and has to discuss these issues with his wife, because of stress.

But none the less, a case study is a case study, and the options are open, yet you haven't made any attempt at all to solve the problem yourself, on how you would go about earning the respect which is required to resolve the situation. I think sending an email too, is disrespectful with such a serious breech in rank, after one year, he should have had him in the office to find out why the manager has been going above him.

Personally i do know, that many high fliers have never taken the opportunities to educate themselves in personnel psychology and man management skills, and lack the abilities to cope, finding the balance in employee disputes is one of tact and discretion under the organisation model structure applied.

Has a consultant that needs to make the changes within companies that suffer these kind of staffing problems, especially within the restructuring phase's, one would allow a time frame for adaption, combined with the cost effectiveness of the managers position.

Which after 14 years experience, wouldn't be difficult to evaluate his contribution, so you are right to a certain extent, within the Military a reprimand would be enough, through the CO for insubordination.

The superior has notified the manager, so he must look at the next step, of solving the problem, normally i would suspect company policy to be 3 warnings for a person that has value to offer if the value is mediocre.

So there are many variants to evaluate has a leader, if you are an educationally informed, skilled man manager, which isn't the norm, for managers in most Companies, because they normally are promoted on productive abilities and experience, without taking fully into account, their abilities to deal with manpower issues and leadership qualities, which is a more refined and tact approach to skilled man management and leadership qualities.

However one must be accountable for ones own mistakes, and be able to recognise these facts, as others may see them, and evaluate if a better solution could have been applied, there is also MOM and employment act to take into consideration, and the ability for wrongful dismissal and human rights, which could cost.

Only leadership experience comes from mistakes and experience admitting the mistakes, so the importance of listening to the team also plays a major role, but should not be seen as a weakness on the superiors part.

Finding the balance is not always easy, although if one is diplomatic and respectful, with firmness, it will be accepted by employees, it is wrong of any boss to show too much favouritism, although motivation drivers and lots of praise and encouragement should be offered, rather than negative talk, negative talks is always a spanner in the works, so diplomacy and encouragement with a firm hand with not too much familiarity.

familiarity within the unit breeds the contempt that we are discussing, and a sign of weakness observed by a stronger minded person will take advantage of that weakness almost always, to demonstrate his or her superior abilities it is human nature. So it's a matter of keeping control rather than just sacking, although like i say, a mediocre manager maybe expendable at the right time.

TennoHekka
Regular
Regular
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed, 07 Jan 2009
Location: Twilight Zone?

Postby TennoHekka » Mon, 12 Jan 2009 1:44 pm

ksl wrote:
Tennohekka say:staff of 14 years just because a new superior has leadership problems in his new post. In addition, for a foreigner to troop in and expect immediate subservience



To some extent i would agree! Even the grunts, would take orders, lightly and with suspicion of contempt, everyone deserves a chance for their respect to be earned, but after a year, come on, either the new leader is a superior wkr, or everyone else is playing ball, yet the manager of 14 years, believes he's inherited the right to ignore his boss and being completely disrespectful, after his superior has spoken to him.

I hardly see the new superior, expecting immediate subservience, after one year service, Although it is difficult to make any judgement without the full particulars, in fact, for it to end up on a public forum, i would also be questioning a superior, that goes home and has to discuss these issues with his wife, because of stress.

But none the less, a case study is a case study, and the options are open, yet you haven't made any attempt at all to solve the problem yourself, on how you would go about earning the respect which is required to resolve the situation. I think sending an email too, is disrespectful with such a serious breech in rank, after one year, he should have had him in the office to find out why the manager has been going above him.

Personally i do know, that many high fliers have never taken the opportunities to educate themselves in personnel psychology and man management skills, and lack the abilities to cope, finding the balance in employee disputes is one of tact and discretion under the organisation model structure applied.

Has a consultant that needs to make the changes within companies that suffer these kind of staffing problems, especially within the restructuring phase's, one would allow a time frame for adaption, combined with the cost effectiveness of the managers position.

Which after 14 years experience, wouldn't be difficult to evaluate his contribution, so you are right to a certain extent, within the Military a reprimand would be enough, through the CO for insubordination.

The superior has notified the manager, so he must look at the next step, of solving the problem, normally i would suspect company policy to be 3 warnings for a person that has value to offer if the value is mediocre.

So there are many variants to evaluate has a leader, if you are an educationally informed, skilled man manager, which isn't the norm, for managers in most Companies, because they normally are promoted on productive abilities and experience, without taking fully into account, their abilities to deal with manpower issues and leadership qualities, which is a more refined and tact approach to skilled man management and leadership qualities.

However one must be accountable for ones own mistakes, and be able to recognise these facts, as others may see them, and evaluate if a better solution could have been applied, there is also MOM and employment act to take into consideration, and the ability for wrongful dismissal and human rights, which could cost.

Only leadership experience comes from mistakes and experience admitting the mistakes, so the importance of listening to the team also plays a major role, but should not be seen as a weakness on the superiors part.

Finding the balance is not always easy, although if one is diplomatic and respectful, with firmness, it will be accepted by employees, it is wrong of any boss to show too much favouritism, although motivation drivers and lots of praise and encouragement should be offered, rather than negative talk, negative talks is always a spanner in the works, so diplomacy and encouragement with a firm hand with not too much familiarity.

familiarity within the unit breeds the contempt that we are discussing, and a sign of weakness observed by a stronger minded person will take advantage of that weakness almost always, to demonstrate his or her superior abilities it is human nature. So it's a matter of keeping control rather than just sacking, although like i say, a mediocre manager maybe expendable at the right time.


I concur in general with what you're saying, and I might add that as a new manager, you have to draw the ground rules early in the game, and do so unobtrusively but firmly, with no grandstands or high drama. Once that's done, things generally go on even keel, and its a matter of fine tuning from there. By the time a year has passed, its too late to change courses. Oftentimes, the culture of the organization has a part to play too, and unless you understand what you're working with, its very hard to institute changes while you are an "outsider". I think in this particular case, the manager was hired for reasons different from what was officially stated, and he has either to adjust to the backdrop, or simply find another company which he finds more in congruence with his career and managerial goals.

User avatar
sundaymorningstaple
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 34782
Joined: Thu, 11 Nov 2004
Location: Still Fishing!
Contact:

Postby sundaymorningstaple » Mon, 12 Jan 2009 9:09 pm

TennoHekka wrote:I think in this particular case, the manager was hired for reasons different from what was officially stated, and he has either to adjust to the backdrop, or simply find another company which he finds more in congruence with his career and managerial goals.


The only problem with that premise is that if this manager that was hired was not able to adjust to the backdrop after a year, you would think that the Top Management would have gotten rid of him don't you think? Your are presuming that this new manager is not a good cultural corporate fit but obviously the senior management thinks otherwise - he's still there. Might do good to look at it from a slightly different perspective. You, or even a 14 years old-timer, may well not be privvy to the unspoken plans or hopes of the senior management. Something to chew on....

TennoHekka
Regular
Regular
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed, 07 Jan 2009
Location: Twilight Zone?

Postby TennoHekka » Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:24 pm

sundaymorningstaple wrote:
TennoHekka wrote:I think in this particular case, the manager was hired for reasons different from what was officially stated, and he has either to adjust to the backdrop, or simply find another company which he finds more in congruence with his career and managerial goals.


The only problem with that premise is that if this manager that was hired was not able to adjust to the backdrop after a year, you would think that the Top Management would have gotten rid of him don't you think? Your are presuming that this new manager is not a good cultural corporate fit but obviously the senior management thinks otherwise - he's still there. Might do good to look at it from a slightly different perspective. You, or even a 14 years old-timer, may well not be privvy to the unspoken plans or hopes of the senior management. Something to chew on....


Well, they didn't fire the other guy either, even though he was bypassing the chain of command. No one knows what senior management is thinking, and more often or not, they probably just don't give a rat's behind either ways! :cool:


  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “Careers & Jobs in Singapore”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests