Iyfjky

Question

Is it strange to have 1:1's are with someone who is not a direct manager?

Context: I have my 1:1's with a manager of another totally separate group. I do not think they are very effective because this other manager does not have context of my day-to-day work and the conversation usually ends up being about things unrelated to work. My manager directly oversees about 50 software developers so his schedule is busy.

Is this complaint legitimate? If so, how can someone bring this up in a professional manner? If not then what is the reason for having these 1:1's?

It depends on what th 1-1 is for... To me they're not about your day-to-day work at all, but about you. — Nov 4 '14 at 6:44
if your manager directly oversees 50 software developers, then he needs to delegate some team leaders - managing 5 direct reports keeps you busy - 50 direct reports would take more time than you would have available. Which is probably why he's palmed you to a different manager. — Nov 4 '14 at 23:28

Chris E 40.5k22129166 · Answer 1 · 2014-11-04 10:11:22Z

While I think the complaint is legitimate, the reality is that you also don't want him badmouthing you to your boss or other people in the company. And yes, I agree that it's a waste of time but the benefits of just "dealing with it" outweigh the potential negatives of (even diplomatically and professionally) brushing him off.

So brush up on what I call your "nod and smile" skills.

lean forward a bit when you're talking to him. It lets him know (or think) that you're interested.

take some notes. It also makes him think that you're interested.

ask a question. See interested above.

Thank him when it's over.

A lot of times when people complain or even just talk about non-work stuff, they just want to be heard. So let him know or at least believe that he's being heard. You may actually change his opinion of you and even gain an ally (for whatever that's worth). I've had it happen more than once. Don't underestimate the value of building a rapport with someone.

And your risk is minimal because, as you said, he's not your boss.

score 4 · Answer 2 · 2014-11-04 14:49:18Z

I think you need to think about the purpose of the meetings. It is unusual for a person who is not your direct manager to do one on ones with you. So there must be a compelling reason for this. If it is because your boss is too busy (and 50 people is too many to supervise effectively), then they are still trying to make sure any concerns you have are heard and that is a good thing.

Or it is possible that he is doing one on ones because they are planning to reorganize the workplace as 50 people is too many to supervise and he might be your new boss in the near future or he might be evaluating you for inclusion in his team. In this case, this is your chance to shine and impress him.

Or it could be that very senior managment is looking to find out what people think of your current boss.

In any event, you need to make sure you do your best to talk to the manager and make sure your concerns are heard and that your accomplishments are noticed. It is trickier since you don't directly work for this person, so be more careful about what you say and how you say it. Be assured that complaints about your current boss will get back to him, so don't say anything about him that you wouldn't and haven't said to his face. Do not assume confidentiality in this meeting (or any one on one for that matter).

@DJClayworth make an excellent point:

I would suggest asking something like "Could you tell me something
more about what you expect from these meetings, so I can be properly
prepared?"

I would suggest asking something like "Could you tell me something more about what you expect from these meetings, so I can be properly prepared?" — Nov 4 '14 at 14:44
+1 - Use it as an opportunity to voice concerns and educate someone in another group about what you do. It is good PR for your team. — user8365, Nov 4 '14 at 19:18

keshlam 41.5k1267144 · Answer 3 · 2014-11-04 14:44:49Z

Depends on what the meetings are for. If they're to evaluate you, yeah, it's less effective to have someone who isn't directly involved with your work doing that. If they're to mentor you, and in particular to give you a chance to ask for assistance dealing with company policy or techniques for managing the work, another manager is sometimes a better choice since they can give suggestions that consider advancing your career rather than just resolving the immediate crisis.

My 1:1's with my own manager are much more of the latter sort. Since I'm working remotely, it's good that I'm speaking directly to him since it's one of the few opportunities I have to develop a personal relationship with the man, but if I was seeing him on a daily basis anyway that aspect wouldn't be as important and I wouldn't much care who my 1:1 was with.

One point: If you're doing the meetings with someone else, it's that much more your responsibility to make sure your own boss knows exactly what you're working on, what your big successes are, and what's blocking your progress so he can help clear the path. Drop him e-mail periodically, or make a point of finding a time when he isn't overloaded to chat with him. Good investment.

Keltari 1,83621218 · Answer 4 · 2014-11-04 20:28:35Z

I agree with the other answers here. However, I want to add that there is some advantage to have 1:1s with someone who isnt your manager. If you are comfortable with this other person, it gives you an opportunity to bring up subjects that you arent comfortable to discuss with your supervisor. Then he/she can anonymously bring those suggestions to your manager. Also, having an outsider's opinion can bring some insight to a situation you arent aware of.

score 0 · Answer 5 · 2014-11-06 20:51:20Z

I've worked for a company like this. My manager had 125 developers working for them. Needless to say, they didn't have time to do all the paperwork involved with managing that number of people. That's where the group leaders came into play.

Group leaders are assigned 7 or 8 people to their team. The group leaders were responsible for monitoring, guiding and promoting the accomplishments of the people on their team. This also involved doing most of the paperwork that the manager would have ordinarily had to do.

If you want to succeed in a company organized like this then you had better become well acquainted with your group leader and make sure they are well acquainted with you and your accomplishments on the job. When it comes time for raises and promotions, generally what happens is the group leaders and the manager all meet in a room and start "stacking" the employees. Every group leader tries to get "their" people ranked highest on the stack because that determines whether you get promoted and/or how good of a raise you get. Your job as an employee is to make sure your group leader has the "ammunition" they need to get your ranking as high as possible. Making sure they have a clear-cut bullet list of accomplishments and responsibilities is how you do that.

The other aspect that is critical, is that the rankings are done based on your current position/title. So if you are looking to rank high then you'd better be doing the responsibilities that would ordinarily be performed by a person in a position 1 level higher than you currently are. You need to make sure that your group leader's bullet list emphasizes those responsibilities. You can be doing quite exceptional at doing exactly the job you are supposed to be doing. However, if someone at your same level is doing a good job performing the duties ordinarily expected of someone a level higher then they'll be ranked higher than you.

So, to more directly answer your questions, it is a legitimate process. The reason for doing it this way is because your manager has a different set of responsibilities than a manager at a company with a traditional smaller team organizational structure. Managers like this are working on higher level issues than the day to day interactions of a typical manager. In particular, making sure that they have enough work to keep 125 SW developers off of overhead and making sure they have enough developers to do all the work that is required. They need to make sure of all this not only for the now, but also for the upcoming year or 2 ahead. Given that your manager can't meet individually with everyone on a regular basis then your group leader is essentially your representative to your manager. The manager does meet on a regular basis with their group leaders.

The reason for the 1:1s is:

to raise any of your concerns. Your group leader can then raise those to your manager "anonymously if desired".

To give the opportunity to promote yourself

IMPORTANT: to build a relationship with your group leader so they will take a personal interest in strongly promoting you during the "stackings".

You really should be thinking of your group leader as your manager from a performance evaluation standpoint.

Also, while your group leader isn't responsible for assigning projects to you, they could be your best friend in helping to get you assigned to the type of projects you really want to work on.

But even with this structure and having 125 developers working for them, I never heard that the manager was not willing to have a meeting with a developer if they asked for one. I was always also quite amazed at how much my manager knew about me despite my seldom having any interaction with them. So the process works, even though there are some obvious downsides.

Chris E 40.5k22129166 · Answer 6 · 2014-11-04 10:11:22Z

While I think the complaint is legitimate, the reality is that you also don't want him badmouthing you to your boss or other people in the company. And yes, I agree that it's a waste of time but the benefits of just "dealing with it" outweigh the potential negatives of (even diplomatically and professionally) brushing him off.

So brush up on what I call your "nod and smile" skills.

lean forward a bit when you're talking to him. It lets him know (or think) that you're interested.

take some notes. It also makes him think that you're interested.

ask a question. See interested above.

Thank him when it's over.

A lot of times when people complain or even just talk about non-work stuff, they just want to be heard. So let him know or at least believe that he's being heard. You may actually change his opinion of you and even gain an ally (for whatever that's worth). I've had it happen more than once. Don't underestimate the value of building a rapport with someone.

And your risk is minimal because, as you said, he's not your boss.

score 4 · Answer 7 · 2014-11-04 14:49:18Z

I think you need to think about the purpose of the meetings. It is unusual for a person who is not your direct manager to do one on ones with you. So there must be a compelling reason for this. If it is because your boss is too busy (and 50 people is too many to supervise effectively), then they are still trying to make sure any concerns you have are heard and that is a good thing.

Or it is possible that he is doing one on ones because they are planning to reorganize the workplace as 50 people is too many to supervise and he might be your new boss in the near future or he might be evaluating you for inclusion in his team. In this case, this is your chance to shine and impress him.

Or it could be that very senior managment is looking to find out what people think of your current boss.

In any event, you need to make sure you do your best to talk to the manager and make sure your concerns are heard and that your accomplishments are noticed. It is trickier since you don't directly work for this person, so be more careful about what you say and how you say it. Be assured that complaints about your current boss will get back to him, so don't say anything about him that you wouldn't and haven't said to his face. Do not assume confidentiality in this meeting (or any one on one for that matter).

@DJClayworth make an excellent point:

I would suggest asking something like "Could you tell me something
more about what you expect from these meetings, so I can be properly
prepared?"

I would suggest asking something like "Could you tell me something more about what you expect from these meetings, so I can be properly prepared?" — Nov 4 '14 at 14:44
+1 - Use it as an opportunity to voice concerns and educate someone in another group about what you do. It is good PR for your team. — user8365, Nov 4 '14 at 19:18

keshlam 41.5k1267144 · Answer 8 · 2014-11-04 14:44:49Z

Depends on what the meetings are for. If they're to evaluate you, yeah, it's less effective to have someone who isn't directly involved with your work doing that. If they're to mentor you, and in particular to give you a chance to ask for assistance dealing with company policy or techniques for managing the work, another manager is sometimes a better choice since they can give suggestions that consider advancing your career rather than just resolving the immediate crisis.

My 1:1's with my own manager are much more of the latter sort. Since I'm working remotely, it's good that I'm speaking directly to him since it's one of the few opportunities I have to develop a personal relationship with the man, but if I was seeing him on a daily basis anyway that aspect wouldn't be as important and I wouldn't much care who my 1:1 was with.

One point: If you're doing the meetings with someone else, it's that much more your responsibility to make sure your own boss knows exactly what you're working on, what your big successes are, and what's blocking your progress so he can help clear the path. Drop him e-mail periodically, or make a point of finding a time when he isn't overloaded to chat with him. Good investment.

Keltari 1,83621218 · Answer 9 · 2014-11-04 20:28:35Z

I agree with the other answers here. However, I want to add that there is some advantage to have 1:1s with someone who isnt your manager. If you are comfortable with this other person, it gives you an opportunity to bring up subjects that you arent comfortable to discuss with your supervisor. Then he/she can anonymously bring those suggestions to your manager. Also, having an outsider's opinion can bring some insight to a situation you arent aware of.

score 0 · Answer 10 · 2014-11-06 20:51:20Z

I've worked for a company like this. My manager had 125 developers working for them. Needless to say, they didn't have time to do all the paperwork involved with managing that number of people. That's where the group leaders came into play.

Group leaders are assigned 7 or 8 people to their team. The group leaders were responsible for monitoring, guiding and promoting the accomplishments of the people on their team. This also involved doing most of the paperwork that the manager would have ordinarily had to do.

If you want to succeed in a company organized like this then you had better become well acquainted with your group leader and make sure they are well acquainted with you and your accomplishments on the job. When it comes time for raises and promotions, generally what happens is the group leaders and the manager all meet in a room and start "stacking" the employees. Every group leader tries to get "their" people ranked highest on the stack because that determines whether you get promoted and/or how good of a raise you get. Your job as an employee is to make sure your group leader has the "ammunition" they need to get your ranking as high as possible. Making sure they have a clear-cut bullet list of accomplishments and responsibilities is how you do that.

The other aspect that is critical, is that the rankings are done based on your current position/title. So if you are looking to rank high then you'd better be doing the responsibilities that would ordinarily be performed by a person in a position 1 level higher than you currently are. You need to make sure that your group leader's bullet list emphasizes those responsibilities. You can be doing quite exceptional at doing exactly the job you are supposed to be doing. However, if someone at your same level is doing a good job performing the duties ordinarily expected of someone a level higher then they'll be ranked higher than you.

So, to more directly answer your questions, it is a legitimate process. The reason for doing it this way is because your manager has a different set of responsibilities than a manager at a company with a traditional smaller team organizational structure. Managers like this are working on higher level issues than the day to day interactions of a typical manager. In particular, making sure that they have enough work to keep 125 SW developers off of overhead and making sure they have enough developers to do all the work that is required. They need to make sure of all this not only for the now, but also for the upcoming year or 2 ahead. Given that your manager can't meet individually with everyone on a regular basis then your group leader is essentially your representative to your manager. The manager does meet on a regular basis with their group leaders.

The reason for the 1:1s is:

to raise any of your concerns. Your group leader can then raise those to your manager "anonymously if desired".

To give the opportunity to promote yourself

IMPORTANT: to build a relationship with your group leader so they will take a personal interest in strongly promoting you during the "stackings".

You really should be thinking of your group leader as your manager from a performance evaluation standpoint.

Also, while your group leader isn't responsible for assigning projects to you, they could be your best friend in helping to get you assigned to the type of projects you really want to work on.

But even with this structure and having 125 developers working for them, I never heard that the manager was not willing to have a meeting with a developer if they asked for one. I was always also quite amazed at how much my manager knew about me despite my seldom having any interaction with them. So the process works, even though there are some obvious downsides.

Search This Blog

Iyfjky

What is the point of 1:1's with someone who isn't my manager [closed]

closed as primarily opinion-based by Jan Doggen, NotMe, Garrison Neely, Michael Grubey, Jim G. Nov 9 '14 at 3:12

closed as primarily opinion-based by Jan Doggen, NotMe, Garrison Neely, Michael Grubey, Jim G. Nov 9 '14 at 3:12

closed as primarily opinion-based by Jan Doggen, NotMe, Garrison Neely, Michael Grubey, Jim G. Nov 9 '14 at 3:12

closed as primarily opinion-based by Jan Doggen, NotMe, Garrison Neely, Michael Grubey, Jim G. Nov 9 '14 at 3:12

5 Answers
5

5 Answers
5

5 Answers
5

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Long meetings (6-7 hours a day): Being â€œbabysatâ€ by supervisor

Is the Concept of Multiple Fantasy Races Scientifically Flawed? [closed]

Confectionery

Category

Random preview

What is the point of 1:1's with someone who isn't my manager [closed]

closed as primarily opinion-based by Jan Doggen, NotMe, Garrison Neely, Michael Grubey, Jim G. Nov 9 '14 at 3:12

closed as primarily opinion-based by Jan Doggen, NotMe, Garrison Neely, Michael Grubey, Jim G. Nov 9 '14 at 3:12

closed as primarily opinion-based by Jan Doggen, NotMe, Garrison Neely, Michael Grubey, Jim G. Nov 9 '14 at 3:12

closed as primarily opinion-based by Jan Doggen, NotMe, Garrison Neely, Michael Grubey, Jim G. Nov 9 '14 at 3:12

5 Answers 5

5 Answers 5

5 Answers 5

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Long meetings (6-7 hours a day): Being â€œbabysatâ€ by supervisor

Is the Concept of Multiple Fantasy Races Scientifically Flawed? [closed]

Confectionery

5 Answers
5

5 Answers
5

5 Answers
5

Long meetings (6-7 hours a day): Being â€œbabysatâ€ by supervisor