Working With Fools

All I Ask For Is A Little R.E.S.P.E.C.T.

As I begin a new month on this blog, I'm reminded of a popular song from the '70s sung by Aretha Franklin, having the words, "All I ask for is a little respect... R.E.S.P.E.C.T."  Just prior to logging into TypePad to begin this post, I checked my work email from home as I am often in the habit of doing.  One of the several new emails awaiting my perusal since I last checked work email was from my darling boss, Ms. Gruff.

It was a very brief email, consisting of three sentences.  As with many of Gruff's emails directing I and her other underlings, it began with a phrase made up of three, single-syllable words which I've grown to absolutely despise, "I need you...".  Gruff's way of communicating is so obviously wrong!  It's yet another example of why the woman should NOT be in leadership position, with people reporting to her!

"I need you to do _____ for me".  What an insane way for anyone to ask for someone to do something.  How demeaning, how demoralizing, how WRONG!  The point that this is no way for a supervisor to ask someone to perform a job is so freakin' obvious!  Yet, Gruff communicates in this "style", or lack thereof, day in and day out!  It simply amazes me that anyone could be so dumb!

Why can't Gruff ask by posing her request in a bit more positive and motivating manner, like, "There is a need for ____ to be done and you would be great.  Would you please perform this job for the team?"  Is it really that difficult to pose the request in a more positive light and ask, rather than order?  I think not!

It's really amazing that folks like Gruff have gotten to be in the positions they hold, lacking such basic common sense and courtesy, to the point where they are not capable of asking their employees nicely when there is a job or task which needs to be performed.

As the song goes, "All I ask for is a little respect!"

p.s. -  Happy March 1st, Spring is right around the corner!

Bo Drift and Golden Rule #1

Hi - I’m sitting in an airport, waiting for a flight home in a couple of hours to conclude attendance at a business conference. Now that I’ve downed a burger and beer, what better way to spend my time prior to boarding my flight than to write a post; the subject of which arose just last night as I checked email from my hotel room.

Changing names so as to protect the “innocent” - the email I had received was from my supervisor, Ms. Gruff, who routed an email to me from another supervisor in the same department, Bo Drift. Bo is a fairly new supervisor, one who moved up when his predecessor left. To be blunt, let us say that Bo lacks most people skills, however, I must admit he is an expert in the subject area he supervises. My characterization of Bo’s ability to effectively interface with people is made based on not just my direct experiences with the dude and observations but, moreover, the significant volume of scuttlebutt I hear on a very regular basis from others in the department, including all those poor souls who report directly to Bo. Oh, by the way, Bo Drift was selected by Miss Gruff to take on the supervisor role. Needless to say, there’s a huge backup of material on Bo and Gruff I’ll be blogging about in future posts!

As for Bo Drift’s email, he sent it to Miss Gruff and did not copy ME, even though the subject was ME and mentioned ME by name. I and (I think) 99.9% of humanoids in the business world would agree: when you mention someone BY NAME in a correspondence, that someone out of common courtesy should be copied. Not only was I the subject of Bo’s email, he sent it to my supervisor (Gruff), with the obvious intent of having her zing me for something Bo felt I did in error. Now, keep in mind that Bo, Gruff and I all work together in the same department and one of the management mantras frequently sung is, “let’s get away from operating in silos. Let my feelings be clear here: I have no problem that Drift felt a need to point out his concern, no problem that he mentioned me, and no problem that he copied my boss. However, I do feel Bo qualifies as a Fool because of the way he chose to raise the concern, his aim was to zing, and he did not copy me. So, I propose that this be dubbed the first WorkingWithFools Golden RuleTM that we are identifying on this blog:

A person who issues a correspondence and does not include on distribution person(s) who are mentioned by name, especially when the correspondence is intended to cite fault with such person(s), has earned the distinction of being a Workplace Fool^TM.

You know, its kind of funny - I must admit I procrastinated for months before I finally launched WorkingWithFools^TM. I was afraid I would run out of things, out of examples, to write about. I mean, heck, I’m just one person working at one company - how many foolish people, foolish habits, foolish policies and other dumb stuff can I possibly encounter? I’m chuckling now as I conclude this post and prepare to head off to my flight because I’m growing more and more confident I’ll have a never ending supply of material to write about from my own experiences. And then, of course there’s you folks out there who I hope will soon to share your experiences and thoughts.

What say you?

I appreciate your visits to my blog, letting me vent and share my frustrations and views, and also sharing your stories and thoughts!

© 2007, Working With Fools