Why do we retain managers who know nothing? 5

[MISCHICK1]

Okay. I know all of us types are getting laid-off left and right but I want to know why we retain MIS Managers who know nothing technically, and are bad managers? Yes, we call our manager "Smack."

He had a great resume but gives me instructions such as "Build a new RAS server and also configure it as the company FTP server," and "I don't know how to install the CAL on the Terminal Server, you do it." Ah. HELLO, this is not rocket science!!!!!

He also takes 4 hour lunch breaks and after cisco switches and things get into his little hands they suddenly disappear. Not to mention that he is verbally and physically abusive toward me and my co-worker (yes, females in a male dominated area).

My team wants him out, but our director for some reason is keeping him here. I don't know why. Any advice?

 

[rjtatum]

Unfortunately it is the nature of the beast (i.e. Business). My father is an executive and I have often asked him why companies have to keep "dead weight". Unfortunately for me, he always gives me the same answer........everyone serves a purpose or he says that kind of person will take care of themselves eventually. Of course, if you are anything like me your impatient and don't want to wait.

 

[heyitsthephoneguy]

Could it be you're team is the problem and not the manager?

Managers are not supposed to be performing IT tasks. They are there to Manage. If he tells you to install the CALs on a Terminal Server, whether he knows how to or not, if it's your job, it's your job.

 

[rtrek]

One reason they stay on is that if they are removed, it looks bad for those who hired him in the first place. If they have been there a while also and the "official reason" they are released has been going on for a while, an attorney can start asking why wasn't he released earlier and start all kinds of legal troubles for the company. A final reason I've heard is that if a company starts firing people, for whatever reason, employees and customers/clients get nervous about the condition of the company and...

If they ever get cleaned out, it's usually during a layoff when a lot get purged and there is little they can do about it legally.

 

[MISCHICK1]

For heyitsthephoneguy

Uhm, you'd think that an MIS manager should have some technical ability before he is hired on, and no, he doesn't manage. Our Director manages our group when he shouldn't have to. The Director gives our manager tasks to perform in which he doesn't know how to do, so he hands it over to us then takes the credit for our completed project.

Our manager spends his time coming in with hangovers at 10:00am, taking 3 hour lunch breaks and leaving at 4:00pm in order to get ready to go clubbing. We are here from 7:00am to about 8:00pm and on many weekends.

We are basically in a really bad position. When we ask for help on something he just stares blankly at the machine, says nothing, and walks away.

If this is what you call a good manager and a bad team, then I can't imagine how your office is run...

 

[johncurtis]

If he's really that bad then you should take your concerns to your Director. Nobody should have to work with people like that whether they're your manager or anybody else.

 

[heyitsthephoneguy]

MISCHICK1

Sorry about the brashness. All too many times I've seen managers get blamed because they do their job...manage.

Honestly, I don't think an IT Manager needs to know everything about everything in IT. That's why you have Network Admins, Telco Admins, Hardware specialists, etc.

A manager's job by definition is to manage projects to completion, manage staff, delegate duties, etc.

In your shop it sounds like the manager is nothing more than a glorified member of IT with a title. If the Director is assigning the manager tasks to complete personally, then he isn't really a manager.

In my shop we have an IT Director & an IT Manager. The Director handles Executive level meetings, etc and the Manager delegates & manages the tasks pertaining to our IT group. He doesn't format & reload PCs, he doesn't install any software or services on any servers, he doesn't write code, etc.

He's not supposed to. He's supposed to oversee the people who were hired to do that job. If he did it all, why hire a code writer, a network admin, a telco admin, etc.

P.S. If the manager is grossly abusing his authority in the manner you refer to, it's another matter entirely...but it has nothing to do with his knowledge of IT.

 

[CajunCenturion]

MISCHICK1 - I sympathize with you, as your in an unpleasant situation. If you can tolerate the situation, it will in time probably take care of itself.

With respect to taking your concerns to the director, I would proceed very carefully. First of all, I would insure that there is not a relationship between the manager and director before saying anything. You could make your situation even worse if it turns out that the manager and the director are fishing buddies or something. Or maybe your manager is the son-in-law of someone on the board of directors. My point is, before you go over your bosses head, you better know what is going on behind the scenes. As unqualified as he sounds, you have to wonder how he got to that position in the first place, because based on your description, its doubtful that he got their on merit. That leave open the possibility that he's a "political appointee". Going over the head of such a person is usually not a good career move. Its also quite possible that your Director already knows, but for the same political reasons higher up, is powerless to do anything about it.

Do the best job you can, and sooner or later, the Director will find out the truth, if he/she doesn't already know, and it time, if you can hang in there, the situation will take care of itself. Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[johncurtis]

Point taken Cajun, but if you've got someone doing 6 hour days, and spending 3 of these on lunch break then I don't think that doing nothing is an option. I wouldn't stand for it and I'd have no hesitation taking the problem higher.

 

[heyitsthephoneguy]

"Point taken Cajun, but if you've got someone doing 6 hour days, and spending 3 of these on lunch break then I don't think that doing nothing is an option. I wouldn't stand for it and I'd have no hesitation taking the problem higher."

Who are you to make any type of judgement about your supervisor? The manager has his own supervisor and you are advocating doing his job?

By going to the Director, you not only are going over your bosses head, you're telling the Director he can't manage this person.

You'll more often than not find yourself in the unemployment line trying a coup like this.

 

[johncurtis]

Actually, I'm in the best position to make a judgement about my supervisor.

If I have a problem with my supervisor I take it to him first. However, the facts as given by mischick1 are such that going to his supervisor seems right to me. This isn't a 'coup', just common sense.

 

[Kjonnnn]

I use work at a company where input from the employees was taken for their superiors for performance reviews (fortunately i had a great boss) ...

If that situation is really as bad as you say, there is strength in numbers. Document his abuses over a period of time (sexual, physical, things he's shirked, time away).

It is dangerous and tendendious. You can't go to hire ups with "I FEEL ...", they will want evidence. Accept the consequences you MAY be fired or really treated badly if it doesnt help the situation. But go to hire ups as a group. I've seen it done, and the cheating boss was fired because the bosses were unaware.

Remember his bosses MAY ONLY SEE that the job is getting done (only because you guys are working hard.)

Also be aware if his bossess have the same work pattern. If he's only imitating what they are doing, they're not going entertain anything you have to say.

 

[CajunCenturion]

johncurtis - You may be in a reasonable position to judge your supervisor, but only as it relates to you.

You cannot make reasonable judgements as to how your supervisor relates to those higher up in the chain. Nor can you make judgements as who placed your supervisor, nor why he/she was put in that position.

Anytime you usurp, or attempt to ursurp the authority of those persons who out rank you, you run a huge risk or usurping your employment.

As I implied in my previous post, and more eloquently stated by heyitsthephoneguy, when you go over your bosses head to explain a problem at the intermediate level, you are in fact telling the higher up that he/she is unaware of problems within their juristiction. To complain about your manager, and to show so little confidence in the one immediately above by pointing out his/her shortcoming with respect to those under his/her supervision is a recipe for termination.

You may consider it "common sense", but I think "political suicide" is a more reasonable term. Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[heyitsthephoneguy]

"You may consider it "common sense", but I think "political suicide" is a more reasonable term. "

I couldn't agree more.

"Actually, I'm in the best position to make a judgement about my supervisor."

Yes you can make a judgement, but are you responsible for his work habits? The way I read the inital post is the manager answers to the Director, not the employees.

There is a chain of command for a reason. If you break it, you're asking to be removed from that chain.

 

[MISCHICK1]

Hi everyone! I truly appreciate all your input. I really has helped me put things into perspective.

Heyitsthephoneguy - I totally see your point. The manager should be there to guide us. Ours does not.

Also, our department consists of two tech analyst/helpdesk (myself included) and one sys admin - and the fore-mentioned manager for a total 300 users and LAN/WAN (we are international) architecture. We have no designated tasks, we do everything. What's sad is that our sys admin said he's leaving unless something changes. The three of us are great friends and this would just really suck. We work well together and make a good team.

CajunCenturion - you hit the nail on the head. Our manager was hired by another director who is great friends with the CEO. Our manager was the boyfriend of this director's wife's best friend. Ever since we started making it obvious that we want our manager gone, this director has been looking for things to blame on us.

 

[heyitsthephoneguy]

MISCHICK1

Man that is terrible....I came from a smaller situation where I was the jack of all trades sys admin. I got laid off and found my current job which basically removed 4 of the 5 "hats" I was wearing. What a breath of fresh air. It's nice to specialize, be organzied & have your stuff together....

Please also understand this about my posts:

I do not condone the type of behavior you suggest this manager partakes in. It is not acceptable for any level of employee to exhibit this...let alone someone who should be "leading".

My points are in regards to members of the IT community who feel like they should police anything and everything. I've seen posts asking how to control executives who want to make an "extravagant" purchase using their budget, etc.

IT is not a police role. It is not our function to monitor our boss to make sure he's following the rules. It's not our job to monitor other department's budgets. Our job is to provide & maintain data.

When my fellow IT peers start to function as police, they more often than not end up looking for work.

Good luck. It's a tough spot to be in...

 

[CajunCenturion]

You're in the middle of an obviously political situation, and so is your director. I have no doubt that he/she is fully aware of the situation, and any action you take will only make things more difficult for your director.

The best thing that you can do is to support your director as much and as well as you can. Your director is probably your biggest ally, but because of the manager (and his connections) being between you, cannot be overtly supportive of you. He/she probably wants to get rid of the manager as much as you do, but making waves, and trying to remove this manager, puts your director at odds with the hiring director.

I would suggest that you give your director credit for understanding what is going on, and don't put your director in the position of having to defend you to the other director. Do your best to make your director's job easier. You need his/her support.

And johncurtis - would you like to redefine "common sense" at this point? Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[MISCHICK1]

Kjonnnn and johncurtis - we went to the director together and separately. After telling him things like "so-and-so threatened to punch me in the face with a hub" and "he put his hands around my neck and pretended to choke me" all he said was "I wasn't there, so I can't be sure it happened."
After that we just gave up...

 

[heyitsthephoneguy]

MISCHICK1

I hope you're exaggerating with those comments...if not your director isn't who you should be speaking with. Those kind of charges should be brought to the authorities immediatly. Connections or no connections, the company puts itself in a bad legal situation by allowing those types of behaviors (if true) to continue.

 

[MISCHICK1]

heyitsthephoneguy

No exaggerating at all. He only does this to my co-worker and myself I guess since we are female. He is really pretty decent to everyone else. No one can belive what we are going through.

We go through both physical and verbal abuse with this guy. Comments like "Where did you get your education from again?" and "don't bother taking the MSCE, you won't finish anyway."

After complaining we were labeled as "trouble-makers."

Oh well...what comes around, goes around, and he'll get his in the end.