[loginptsa]

Anyone with a name like "Dale Carnegie" is not to be taken seriously. I mean, come on. Next you'll be telling me that the descendents of irish moonshiners are one of the most powerfull political families in America.

Oh wait!

Anyway, "Dale Carnegie". Gotta be a poof eh?

[lidya-sggf]

Is there a written departmental procedure written for your area? Could that not be added?

[Celeliamend]

1. Do you two have a mutual boss?
2. Does your method of documentation/version control/whatever make her job in any way more difficult?

Knowing nothing about what you do for a living, nothing about the structure of your work hierarchy, my off the cuff reaction is this:

Find a way for the changes you made to be praised to high heaven, but in a way that credits her department. Best is to get a third party to talk about how much this new method is great for protecting the whole company in unpredictable situations, just a superior process, blah blah.

The key is you not taking credit for it, but making her the hero. It's the price of peace, and could actually turn her into an ally in the future. What you're doing is playing the "team player" card. If she's smart, she'll jump on that bandwagon while taking the credit.

I'm not a big fan of what you did -- mostly because you didn't seem to have a plan for the inevitable conflict. So you've got to make lemonade.

Just some random thoughts to keep the discussion moving. God, I'm so glad I don't work in corp world anymore...

[Laqswrnm]

Good advice, Pekka. Well, except maybe for the kicking part...

[Roker]

Tell her the baby is YOURS!

[heinz_1966]

A more confrontational, but potentially effective strategy:

Call a Documentation Requirement Review meeting of everyone who needs the documentation to be whatever it needs to be. The purpose of the meeting would be for everyone to discuss what they need from the documentation, and why. Make sure your problem person is there. What will happen is that, organically, a broad-based consensus for your way of doing things will be articulated publicly, by lots of people, in front of her. Then, in the future, when you tussle, you can say "well, you'll remember from our meeting that everyone agreed blah blah blah." Turn it from a tug-of-war between you two into her-versus-the-good-of-the-company; it'll be a lot harder for her to stand her ground.

[slima]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Japher


The approach I will try is that I will undo what I've done if she can HELP me figure out a better way to do it, and use the fact that when I did it she was gone and I had no idea what I was doing. Big mistake there. Negotiate from strength not weakness. Show her what you've done, why you did it, and the what effects it's had. Try to bring her onboard with "there's always room for further improvements" but be clear that you're not going back to the old way.

Something I have learned the last 3 years or so; the best way to achieve power is to relinquish control. Most people hold the mindset that in order to be powerful you must have control. However, the same people who think this will also think that those who give up control must have power or they would fight for the control. Look at CEOs, or corp execs... all the do is delegate. I don't care for control, I care for results. Did you pick that up from the democrat manifesto on how to deal with threats to this country?

I think what you're trying to say is that you find that a permissive management style works best for you (so far).

[RicardoHun]

Well, what Japher says is pretty much common sense. By delegating you are also GIVING responsibility to others. When people get responsibility, they are a) accountable b) feel more important. Furthermore they get more satisfaction when they do a good job, because it is recognized and even if not, the worker does not feel necessarily that it doesn't matter what they do. It matters.

Check out prisons for example and how inmates run their inner circles and things. Do you think the guy who has to polish some shank and is at the same time "high ranking Captain" corresponds with our understanding of high ranking?

Of course not.

But that task is important within their context and organization and it is not to be given to someone who can't be trusted.

Basically giving responsibility is showing that you trust that person, you trust their skills and you think they are good enough to be trusted.

People often feel frustrated if they don't think their action has any meaning at all. So even a bit of responsibility can be good, as long as you're not flooding someone with it, when it becomes a burden. Sometimes the difference between a superior and his worker is just the title. SOmetimes the boss does exactly the same kind of job, maybe he was a peer before, but now the only difference is that the boss is responsible for the result and the process they do. If that's the step, you don't do much else but you are held accountable and you thus lead your peers, why does it seem like a big step? Their behavior changes, they suddenly have authority etc.

My point is, what Japher has noted is a good perception. When you give others some control of things, it's a good thing if done right. Besides, if YOU are the one giving control, YOU HAVE to have more power to begin with. If I have less power than you, I can't give you responsibilities that lifts you up. It means I have power, and it is a demonstration of power when I give you control and responsilibity. It is like the president. If I have mercy on you and release you from prison when you send me a letter and overturn the sentence, I am showing power. Because I can't do that unless I have power. It is the ultimate, in some ways, show of power. The concrete power to forgive is a demonstration of power, and notice, that you need more power to forgive than to punish.

JUst like if I have the power to say, give you a ticket for speeding and everything points to the fact that I should give you the ticket, but I choose not to give you the ticket. I choose to let you go, but I'll give you a message, it is a demonstration of power, far more than giving you the ticket.

In fact the only below average points I got in the army in the leading training was that my peers felt that I didn't give them enough responsibilities. I learned the power of it in practice, because I got the official feedback. It didn't come naturally to me, but since I got feedback from peers, it felt kind of heavy. So, once I got my privates, I could see how you give some control to someone, and they'll whip their own peers into shape. Usually it can the guy who is protesting and not doing anything, the troublemaker kind of a guy. So, make him in charge for some low priority task and they can surprise you how well they do. They might have been against your authority to begin with, and maybe they really are competent people, more than average, but they just need that certain control and trust, so then they'll try their best and it's usually good enough.

You give people importance. No one likes to be underestimated and most people likes to be appreciated and you can do that by giving them trust. They understand that bond, you don't want to break it. You don't want to break trust, because it'll be a looong time before that one is restored. It is like a gift given to you, and now you give back and show you are worthy. It is a step forward, you have been recognized.

But this is mostly a leadership thing and how to motivate people. Although important, I'm not sure if this is very applicable for Japher right now.

If I was Japher, I would decide that this thing gets done no matter what. THere's always a way. Maybe it's not her fault at all, maybe there really are rules that forces her to do things this way and she can't get around it. Then it's a problem with the guidelines. Maybe someone higher up doesn't realize the problem this guideline creates.

If so, take this up to the person who can help with it. Give them a reason to think about it. Explain how it makes your life difficult and how your processes are being hindered, and how it affects your work and the results. This bit can be exaggarated if needed within reason. Business people understand that these kinds of obstacles needs to be taken cared of. Even better, if you have a solution to change the process into something better and smooth, there's no reason why it wouldn't be changed. Then just take it up to someone who can change it or present the idea to the ones who have the power to do that. And once you're doing that, give a good word in for the document lady as well, because that kind of word comes back. Even if it's not really true, she will msot likely like you more because of it, because she knows you wanted to give her a good word where it means something, but didn't claim credit for it. And these kinds of things she will likely hear from the person you told, if it's her superior.

So in the future, you are able to make her do things that needs to be done. Little things, makes your life easier.

It's like being polite. Being polite is just an easier way to solve problems. It doesn't matter if we are angry inside. Politeness just makes it easier.

But back to business, I mean you can twist thsi situation to your advantage. You see a problem, but no one is willing to help you fix it. So, if it's in the guidelines, they need to change it if the lady isn't going to help you. OR if the guidelines do permit it, then you'll bend the lady instead. And if it really is a huge problem, like it really bothers you a lot, take it up to her and take it up to her boss if she doesn't do her job.

Make her understand, that the work is about using resources to get something done. That means all of us, the tecnology, time, money, we are all resources. These resources has been _designed_ to produce our product or service. Now, if some component, a human for example, doesn't follow that idea and is goign their own way, well then we aren't going to get the benefits of that model we just designed. The figures won't match. We might be even doing everything more stupid because we didn't calculate the effects of someone being a problem in our machine.

So, she is not special in that sense. She is there to do work, and whether that work is managing those documents, the product or service of the business is something else, so the document managing needs to be the one that fits the core processes of your business. It does not exist in void! It is supposed to HELP, not be an obstacle, and if she don't understand it, she can go back home and beat that toddler up, because it's welfare baby, welfare for being an idiot.

[furillo]

I'm not sure if this is very applicable for Japher right now. No, but it would of been. Had we had her here when I needed the paperwork created I could of and should of asked her. In hindsight there is nothing I could of done, but I should of done something other than just do it myself. If she had been on the project, and done her role I wouldn't have this resistance now. It's a good lesson.


You see a problem, but no one is willing to help you fix it. Yes, and she roadblocked me before on this same sort of issue. She doesn't care if the paper work is made to support my functions better, she only cares if it supports her functions better. I am attempting to find a middle ground, but I am confounded to fine one. I think I might need to talk to my managers on this one.


Make her understand, that the work is about using resources to get something done. That means all of us, the tecnology, time, money, we are all resources. And that's why I should involve my superiors, which I hate doing if I absolutely have to. I am tasked with process improvement, optimization, and waste reduction. She's tasked with compliance and documentation. I need her job done well and in a fasion to support my efforts. It's really a matter of resources, mainly in her time to do something (her job) and my ability to do my job (increase productivity while reducing waste). Which resource is better? Her time or potential production savings? Really, that's not my call, because I'm biased.

My guess is that her real objection is not to the "tiny amount of extra work," but rather to Any Type Of Change. Yeah, it is. Many people face this. I have asked my line supervisor to give the document a shot. It's not like they'll be using it a lot, and if it becomes a problem we'll figure out another way. This lady though isn't for that, my gremlins have told me she is already asking questions about it elsewhere. I have built my counter argument with a coworker and will present it to my manager to handle it.

[ErubTiereedig]

Originally posted by SpencerH
Anyone with a name like "Dale Carnegie" is not to be taken seriously. I mean, come on. Next you'll be telling me that the descendents of irish moonshiners are one of the most powerfull political families in America.

Oh wait!

Anyway, "Dale Carnegie". Gotta be a poof eh? While I admire your ability to render an opinion on a subject you know absolutely nothing about, I have read this book and have found it to contain some of the most valuable interpersonal tools I have ever learned.

[Waymninelia]

I think Spencer was trying to imply Joe Kennedy was a moonshiner. He wasn't. He was a bootlegger and rumrunner but not a moonshiner.

[VogsHoock]

Tiamat is right, honey. Try speaking to her in French, chicks dig that.

[DoctoNilsonDen]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
I think Spencer was trying to imply Joe Kennedy was a moonshiner. He wasn't. He was a bootlegger and rumrunner but not a moonshiner. Way to split hairs. Its much better to be a bootlegger and rumrunner than moonshiner. The associations with such sophisticates as Al Capone are more worthwhile.