The Blame Game

[Guest]

We're often taught that we're not supposed to blame others for our own inadequacies.
We're not supposed to throw other people under the bus.
We're supposed to be encouraging and supportive of those around us.
A good craftsman doesn't blame the tools.  He corrects himself.

You're the leader of a group.  And everything you do is being undone by others.  Everything you require of others, they fail at.  Everything you try to teach them, they either don't understand the concepts involved, they forget, or they simply get it wrong.  And you are not in a position where you can simply do it for them.  You HAVE to have them do it.  And every time you correct them, they get it wrong.

Then to top it all off, their failures become your failures because it's your name on the line.

Mormon led an army of apostates to fight against a nation almost as bad as they themselves were.  I don't know what I would have done in his position.

What the heck am I supposed to do?

 

[zil]

Something I read a while back (not even sure what now) says that you should develop Christ-like love for these people, and then the rest will come more easily (which isn't the same as easily).

That said, people aren't tools.  People have agency.  Sometimes, it is a particular person's fault, or a failure on the part of multiple people.  Often, however, figuring that out and/or pointing that out doesn't solve the problem.

Beyond that, each problem you describe has a different solution (probably a different source).  I'm not sure anyone here can make a recommendation without knowing a lot more details.  For example, for people forgetting what needs to be done, I can think of numerous team and personal methods, and one can find various tools to help with remembering and prioritizing.  E.g. You could utilize the scrum concept of daily stand-ups and a scrum board to keep current tasks visible and to emphasize / remind.  You may need to remove distractions from the environment, or change procedures or sequences to help break habits.

For people who are struggling with concepts, that almost has to be handled one-on-one, either with a variety of training methods until you find the one that works for that person, or having a different trainer (have one train the others in a particular area that the one "gets"?), possibly different training materials.  Everyone learns differently, so you need to find out learning methods and figure out how to train.  IMO, you should not rely on verbal instruction alone.

Whatever else is true, each should suffer the consequences of their own actions - cuz without consequences, there's no motivation to improve - but remember the D&C method of correction...

I'm reasonably certain that's mostly useless or obvious stuff you've considered.  I'm sorry you're having such struggles (they are the worst kind, IMO).

[Mike]

4 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Then to top it all off, their failures become your failures because it's your name on the line. ...

What the heck am I supposed to do?

Without knowing the specifics of your position and how much authority you have vs. how much delegated responsibility you have I can empathize with the challenge. Makes one want to consider Trumping them, I'll bet.

[Guest]

I am their boss.  But due to office politics I'm unable to fire them.  And due to economic considerations I can't simply hire others.

One of my primary responsibilities is to check all our drawings that go out.  I mark them up for correction.  I go over the markups with them verbally.  Then they are to incorporate the markups.

When I receive them back, they've deleted items that were perfectly fine that I never told them to delete nor did I mark them up.  They add stuff I never told them to add.  They correct my spelling and terminology that didn't need correcting.  When I go over said items, they say they didn't do that or that I had told them otherwise.

Now, a client with whom I could be building a great relationship sees me missing submittal deadlines.  They see multiple mistakes on drawings that I had correct in an earlier revision and expected them to NOT TOUCH.  But they did touch them and I'm getting blamed for missing it.  And I did miss it.  But it was fine the iteration before.  Nothing needed to be done to it.  But for some reason, it got changed by parties unknown. (actually I know who, but they won't admit to it.)

This is what I'm dealing with.

[zil]

In this scenario, documentation is crucial - you need to keep a copy of what you reviewed with them, complete with your signature and theirs and the date the corrections were explained (you may not be able to fire them, but do you not have control over their performance evaluations?).  If it were me, and I felt it necessary, I would video the session where I go over corrections.  IMO, in addition to negative consequences, you need to find some way to have positive consequences for when they do it right, and make sure they know both the good and bad.

I don't know enough to know if this would work, but I'd keep copies of the drawings, and work with IT to see if there's any sort of check-in / check-out system you could use that would track who pulled a copy and who uploaded changes (e.g. a document control system - lots of large companies have them, and they'd just need to add a new document type to get your files in there).  With something like that, any debate about who did what goes away.  (There's even free software that can do this sort of thing, but it requires a server, or you have to use a public server (the project can be private, but I personally wouldn't trust IP that way).)

[Guest]

55 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

that didn't need correcting.

You're completely sure about this? 

Not trying to be contrary, just trying to get to the bottom of why a team of people would behave this way.

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Eowyn said:

You're completely sure about this? 

Not trying to be contrary, just trying to get to the bottom of why a team of people would behave this way.

No, I did not need correcting.  About 1% of the time I do miss or misspell something.  Half the time, I see their correction and I recognize it's fine.  The other half, they think that's the correct spelling and copy it exactly.

Edited January 25, 2017 by Guest

[Guest]

9 hours ago, zil said:

In this scenario, documentation is crucial - you need to keep a copy of what you reviewed with them, complete with your signature and theirs and the date the corrections were explained (you may not be able to fire them, but do you not have control over their performance evaluations?).  If it were me, and I felt it necessary, I would video the session where I go over corrections.  IMO, in addition to negative consequences, you need to find some way to have positive consequences for when they do it right, and make sure they know both the good and bad.

I don't know enough to know if this would work, but I'd keep copies of the drawings, and work with IT to see if there's any sort of check-in / check-out system you could use that would track who pulled a copy and who uploaded changes (e.g. a document control system - lots of large companies have them, and they'd just need to add a new document type to get your files in there).  With something like that, any debate about who did what goes away.  (There's even free software that can do this sort of thing, but it requires a server, or you have to use a public server (the project can be private, but I personally wouldn't trust IP that way).)

I can't give them negative consequences (office politics).  And documentation doesn't matter.  As for good consequences, they don't want anything I have to offer.  I looked over the list in How to Win Friends and Influence People last night.  They already have most of the things on the list.  And I can only offer one of them -- the need to feel important.  But they already feel important due to office politics.  They don't care about getting it from me.

Edited January 25, 2017 by Guest

[anatess2]

My suggestion is to read the thin book titled Gung Ho!  This is pretty much how I pattern my leadership style.

Basically, your leadership objective is to get the team Gung Ho on the work objective.  Therefore, the work objective becomes their objective and they get as passionate as I am to achieving that objective.  Of course, you can be as Gung Ho as you possibly can and nothing would still be achieved if the team lack the proper training to know how to achieve that objective.

Anyway, that's just my 2 cents.

Edited January 25, 2017 by anatess2

[Guest]

We're reading a great book at work called "Leadership and Self Deception". The title isn't exactly how it sounds, and it's also a great manual for relationships in general. I highly recommend it to anyone. 

[Sunday21]

If I have no idea what to do, I go to the temple. Sometimes I get some suggestions in the celestial room.