> From the manager's POV, OP wants an exception to some policy (written or unwritten). If you want to get away with exceptions you need more than the normal adversarial relationship. No workplace is ever perfect but there is a difference between a manager who understands the reality of the situation and a manager who is a problem that needs to be removed. The fact you feel ignoring unwritten policies is "special trea…
I've only ever been an IC. It's interesting you assumed I was a manager. I've learned the tricks to get almost total freedom at work and wanted to share. Quid pro quo is the name of the game in business. You have to give something to get something and trust is everything. Cynicism will hold you back.
You basically quoted word for word multiple times what a petty and vindictive manager I worked for about a year said repeatedly in almost all your posts.
If you focus on this at the point where you aren't getting what you want its too late. You need to build a relationship of trust before you ask for an exception or special request (in the eye of the manager not you). Your manager should know the following: - That if there is a problem you will always come to him/her first not try and work around him - That he can count on you to do what needs to be done. You will go…
I think 1 is the worst thing ever and results in everyone being underpaid. People need to grow a pair and say that's not my job, pay me more. It's why everyone is underpaid.
If you focus on this at the point where you aren't getting what you want its too late. You need to build a relationship of trust before you ask for an exception or special request (in the eye of the manager not you). Your manager should know the following: - That if there is a problem you will always come to him/her first not try and work around him - That he can count on you to do what needs to be done. You will go…
That he can count on you to do what needs to be done. You will go out of your way for her. If you've ever said "this isn't my job" then you will have only an adversarial relationship. True to the extent that it is actually related to your job in a larger sense and doing so won't adversely affect your ability to do your 'real' job. Many managers will just keeping adding more and more responsibilities to their 'best' w…
I find the biggest mistake people make is that they think they're getting rewarded for what they did. That isn't how it works.
Think of it. When you go into an electronics store looking for a new TV, do you give the salesperson money based on what he did for you in the past ? You pay for expected future benefit. That's what you select the TV for.
Then think about it from a freelancer hiring process. Freelancers, like employees, are paid before they do anything (or at least the rewards are negotiated).
So the way to get maximum benefit for your job is to slowly improve, but stay far away from your top performance (and maybe you'll actually have enough energy left to have a hobby). You want planned obsolescence tactics, for yourself. Version 2.0 is just around the corner ! Do you want it ?
So the correct way to think about this is "let's talk about what you'd like me to do". I would shy away from the definiteness in those statements, for 2 reasons. Firstly you're unable to make those assessments reliable (so think about it, you're saying, money now, TV comes in 2 weeks, then deliver a substandard model in 2 weeks. If there is one way to turn the most kind person in the world against you, this is it). Secondly, you want to help them to make a decision. You have information they don't have. They have information you don't have. The best move is likely the one you figure out together.
I've only ever been an IC. It's interesting you assumed I was a manager. I've learned the tricks to get almost total freedom at work and wanted to share. Quid pro quo is the name of the game in business. You have to give something to get something and trust is everything. Cynicism will hold you back.
You basically quoted word for word multiple times what a petty and vindictive manager I worked for about a year said repeatedly in almost all your posts.
Sorry you had that experience. There are certainly cases where this advice is not appropriate and moving on is the right thing.
However accusing people you don't know of being a bad manager (especially when they aren't even a manager at all) is unnecessarily combative.
> OP feels going to the conference is a must, "a given", a "constitutional right", and that the manager "wronged" him by not letting him go. It's a very childish way of viewing the world. OP's employer does not own them - they have a right to a private life. While they certainly could not want OP identifying themselves as an agent of their employer when giving a talk, OP is entitled to use their free time / vacation…
I use vacation days to attend conferences. It doesn't feel ethical for me to attend a conference during a workday.
It's complicate when I go to a conference, I am connecting with other people in my industry and representing my company, so it's worth it to them. I can actually learn things that are useful there.
You basically quoted word for word multiple times what a petty and vindictive manager I worked for about a year said repeatedly in almost all your posts.
Sorry you had that experience. There are certainly cases where this advice is not appropriate and moving on is the right thing. However accusing people you don't know of being a bad manager (especially when they aren't even a manager at all) is unnecessarily combative.
The only people I have seen give your advice are bad managers. :)
Ever wonder why mosts casinos have more “SLOT ATTENDANTS “ than cocktail service when it is rare to see a slot machine breaks or needed service and surely those attendants had no engineering degree or at least experience on fixing those computers..
Will I figured out the answer after years of observations, provocation,to gather specific outcome relating slot machine payout. casino players tend to focus only to the screen , would skip going to the bathroom hoping that somehow it will randomly pay some jockpot..
The Handheld Device equipped by the “slot machine attendants “ are designed to remotely control slot machine and it make sense for casino’s point of vantage bacause they not only have the advantage but they have TOTAL CONTROL of cashflaw acting like gods and the players sheeps ..
floor supervisors / managers will orient/instruct attendants on their starts of shift to have a certain machines to patrol /covered and will be instructed to press a certain button for each active machine depending on BET the will also be instructed to write down machines # located at the top area near the remote receiver wich they have now built bigger more accurate. Slot attendants do not know exact functionality wich I think careless.
They think they are above the law and things will not have a day in court !
I will subpoena their video recordings , slot attendants employment records, their job descriptions, and the ultimate proof of this immoral , dirty , currupted system is their sudden double / triple Revenues after Slot attendants and their handheld device where operational.
Revenue’s should have decreased since they have to pay extra for hiring so many slot attendant .
Casinos sure contribute generates tax , employed , and sometimes help some organization, individuals,
But casinos creates more unemployment, foreclosures, divorces, tax revenues individuals before they where deceived go out to dine, go to stores and shops , spend money for auto repair, medical , and had a bank account .
Once people learned how they been going to those damn casinos not knowing that they have zero chance and machines where remotely controlled .. I can’t imagine the implications . I hope it’s not too late. Too many lives destroyed victimized by this greedy , barbaric individuals that profit’s on other misfortunes this is worse than the Eslavary era.
Section 10 on their compact agreement states that casinos should maintain a clean , honest gambling operation wich they have broken and will be questioned and challenge .. When I migrate to this country I have a big respect , belief, and admire the law , the rules, will I guess I was wrong I thought this only happens in third countries welcome to america.
Populace are being feed constant fear about nuclear, North Korea, Russia, China, global warming bullshit. No one is talking about this damn casinos that is more distructive combined any other treats it put the country in jeopardy. They enemy are among us and already crossed the border they play their card very will and could be the victor..
I agree that you should seek out a manager that wants to help you advance in your career, but you don't have enough context to judge the manager in this particular case. Perhaps OP is spending too much time speaking at conferences and not hitting his other agreed objectives. Perhaps there is a critical project launch that OP is leading during the timeframe of the conference and it's just not feasible in this isolated…
None of that is material to the judgement here. The fact that the disconnect exists as it stands is evidence of a total breakdown in the manager-associate relationship.
You asserted, without evidence and in absolute terms, that the manager is trying to "sabotage" OP's career, advocated that he quit his job, and that the manager is "bad" and "selfish." That's a lot of assumptions based on four short sentences.
All we really know is 1) OP wants to give a talk at an industry event and 2) his manager asked him not to.
Yes, there seems to be a disconnect—on the OP's side. There may be one on the manager's side also; we don't know. It is also not the responsibility of the manager alone to make the relationship work. People have their own interpretation of events, and ultimately none of us commenting knows what efforts the manager has made and what OP's interpretation of those efforts was.
Why would the manager be a shitty person if they saw no upside for the company, possible downside, and decided against that action? If we were talking about a decision that didn't involve another human being and their desires, I suspect you might find this decision-making logic acceptable. Perhaps you could explain why if there is no chance for the company to gain anything but a non-zero risk of the company's status,…
Because its the man's spare time and since he's not a child I would expect enough trust from the manager that the employee would not do any damage to the company. There's a non-zero risk to the company if the man gets into a bar fight, there's a non-zero risk to the company if the man crosses the street and gets run over by a truck on his way to work each morning.
First of all, it is almost certainly not his spare time. Nearly all of these events are held on weekdays during normal business hours. So this guy probably requires permission to not be doing his regular job to go to this. Second, there are usually costs associated with attendance. Many employers pay them and perhaps this company didn't want to. But for the sake or argument, let's assume this is held on a weekend and the guy pays out of his own pocket to attend. He's still there representing the company and the company has every right to choose how they are represented and by whom. It's not like he's attending Comic-Con. He's most definitely representing the company, even as a mere guest - doubly so as an actual speaker. The company can choose to say "no, he's not representing us". Maybe he's a really smart dude but a shitty speaker or someone with no social skills or stage presence.
There's a non-zero risk to the company if the man gets into a bar fight, there's a non-zero risk to the company if the man crosses the street and gets run over by a truck on his way to work each morning.
Yeah, but he's not representing the company in such a scenario. And in rare events, when such unflattering incidents like bar fights do actually make front page news for some reason, people are sometimes fired because of it. You know why? Because of this exact same logic.