Being blamed for subordinate mistake

[pb4uski]

Just curious, why was upper management so upset if the deadline was met? It sounds like the person did their job and got it done by the deadline. Was management expecting it to be done earlier?

I sort of wonder about that as well. From what the OP described it was a close call rather than an actual problem. It may be that his employer may be a particularly political environment where every little goof up get blown out of proportion.

 

[Calico]

I have always managed slightly differently I was taught that "I take the blame, they get the credit.".... I have always taken the blame from upper management for anything my subordinates do (although, they have to hear it from me, then and at their reviews). I also give them the credit for a project no matter how much my involvement was.

At the end of the day, a manager will get the credit because their team did well, not because they did well. They are also responsible for all the screw-ups from their team.

On reflection, I can see that I worded my original post poorly. What I was trying to say is that the VP gives our manager credit for our work (we serfs are not even a tiny blip on her radar), and she blames our manager when someone on the team screws up. The manager hasn't been around long enough yet for us to know if he will give us credit where credit is due.

Sounds like the people you manage are fortunate to work for you.

 

[jollystomper]

Just curious, why was upper management so upset if the deadline was met? It sounds like the person did their job and got it done by the deadline. Was management expecting it to be done earlier?

Keep in mind we are hearing only one side of the story. For example, upper management may not felt they gave plenty of lead time so that a close call should not have been an issue. They may not have been assured that the deadline would be made until it was actually made. Which means they may have been losing confidence that the deadline was actually being met, especially if the manager who they assumed was in charge seemed to just be passing the buck. Which sometimes means contingency plans start going into motion, leading to additional time and energy that is now seen as wasted. In addition, the magnitude of what would happen if the deadline was missed may have been great. Bottom line - upper management does not like close calls. And they don't look highly upon folks who cause close calls.

 

[Milton]

pper management may [have] felt they gave plenty of lead time so that a close call should not have been an issue. They may not have been assured that the deadline would be made until it was actually made. Which means they may have been losing confidence that the deadline was actually being met, especially if the manager who they assumed was in charge seemed to just be passing the buck. Which sometimes means contingency plans start going into motion, leading to additional time and energy that is now seen as wasted. In addition, the magnitude of what would happen if the deadline was missed may have been great. Bottom line - upper management does not like close calls. And they don't look highly upon folks who cause close calls.

If the situation was so critical that it is currently causing huge concern even when a deadline was in fact met, the actual function should not have been delegated to a low-level person. One of the multiple VPs - who apparently now have lots of time on their hands - should have stepped up to take charge long before the deadline approached.

The whole (near) fiasco reflects poorly on everyone at the company, including but certainly not restricted to the op (who at least sent the staffer an email before the deadline, asking if she needed assistance).

 

[pb4uski]

OP, you still out there? How did things go yesterday?

 

[REWahoo]

The OP's profile indicates he logged off after seeing the first seven responses to his post and hasn't returned since...

 

[pb4uski]

True but he could still be monitoring the thread even though he isn't logged in.

 

[REWahoo]

True but he could still be monitoring the thread even though he isn't logged in.

Also true, but if that's the case I think it indicates he's shy about responding to all the input he received and unlikely give us an update...

 

[Midpack]

I know posts like the OP are intended to elicit support but there are so many red flags...

As expected...

 

[haha]

The OP's profile indicates he logged off after seeing the first seven responses to his post and hasn't returned since...

I'm shocked, shocked I tell you!

Ha

 

[Keim]

I'm shocked, shocked I tell you!

Ha

I agree, HA.

And, I must add in reference to your signature: de malo in peius