Jump to content

RuedeRivoli

Gold Member
  • Posts

    501
  • Joined

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

RuedeRivoli's Achievements

Community Regular

Community Regular (8/14)

  • Posting Machine Rare
  • Dedicated Rare
  • Reacting Well Rare
  • First Post
  • Collaborator

Recent Badges

35

Reputation

  1. Any bad rating on one of her employees affects her rating too, so I would hope she cares to an extent. In any case, I'll probably cancel the meeting.
  2. The purpose of the call is not to tell her she did it wrong. Not at all. I think this is where most posters got confused. As a matter of fact, it won't be about her at all. I won't even mention the Thursday meeting. I was planning on asking questions about the internal audit process. How internal audit conducts their audits, whether they do ask questions as part of the audit and what I think internal audit did not pick up on because they simply did not ask. Then, the second part of the meeting would simply be about what we could have done better during the project, the lessons learned during the project in relation to what internal audit picked up on. Nothing in the call will be pointing towards what she did on Thursday at all. She has far more visibility over what internal audit does and has direct contact with them. It's not a trial at all. If anything, my problem is more with internal audit than her specifically during this upcoming call. I invited the manager, not because I wanted to put her on trial in front of him (again, the call won't be about her at all), but because I don't want him to think I went above his head. I want to remain transparent with all management levels to avoid any further problems. Once again, the call is not about me telling her what she did wrong, but mainly ask her about the internal audit process etc. As I said, it is internal audit that came back with incorrect conclusions. She did not draft the conclusions herself, she just presented them. I want to address what internal audit did, not her.
  3. I invited my team lead to the meeting as well, but given the fact the audit results are being discarded, I might cancel the meeting altogether. I'll link in with her tomorrow to ask whether she still wants to move forward with it.
  4. Thank you. The reason why I asked for a meeting is because I have evidence the work was done and I didn't get to speak at all during the meeting due to various colleagues jumping in to ask random questions and she not stop for 10 seconds. I simply want to highlight the work was done and discuss how to avoid this discrepancy with audit moving forward. No harm in having a professional meeting to discuss an issue that could severely impact your performance review when the results are clearly incorrect.
  5. Thank you all for your responses. To give a bit of background on the dynamic with this manager: I've sensed she's had something against me from the beginning. It started during my first week when she asked me to write a paragraph to introduce myself and she would sent it across to the entire network afterwards. I did and she never sent it to anyone, nor did she introduce me to the network. She however introduced every single employee that arrived before or after me (I received those emails - including some from when they set up my email account before I started). This already gave me a negative vibe. Fast forward, a few months ago, she asked about how I want to progress between then and the end of the year. I told her I was interested in a specific topic and if she had any projects revolving around that, I would be interested in getting involved. What did she do the day she had a project? She assigned it to someone who is known for making mistake after mistake. Every single time I express interest in a project, she says she will assign me to it and then winds up assigning this person or someone else. If she asks who is available for an extra project as other people are at capacity and I volunteer, if no one else volunteers, she will suddenly come up with another employee to assign it to. It's been like this since day 1, yet she told me during my performance review (pre-audit debacle), I had an exceptional performance. Go figure. She is also the type of manager who seems to encourage people to talk to her about disagreements with other co-workers. A few months ago, two guys in my team had a lot of problems with one another and it created some toxicity within the team to the point where they both went ahead and complained about one another to this manager. I was nor involved in this drama nor did I want to be dragged into it. Then during my performance review, she said she knows there's a certain dynamic within the team and is aware of what's going on between the two guys, so if I ever feel the need to address any frustrations etc.. I can always speak to her. I don't throw people under the bus unless the situation has gone out of control, so nothing from my side there. That is why I am saying she sets an odd dynamic. As far as why the call is going ahead - the internal audit will be undertaken again at a later stage, but it doesn't mean the call shouldn't go ahead. The internal audit will still happen again. She plastered the supposed deficiencies in front of the whole team during the call and I wasn't able to even speak my truth because people started talking on top of each other. I want to address this privately to show that I also care about the quality of the work. If I don't address it at all then she's going to take it for face value that I on top of this don't care at all about trying to improve things moving forward. It's strategic. Talking about the team - some people from the team helped me out during this project. It just so happens that the deliverable supposedly marked as "not done" by internal audit was delivered by another member of the team, not me - on top of all this. I have the email trails. When I was about to address this during the call, the person who undertook this piece of work jumped in asking: "How could anyone forget to do this piece"? It annoyed me because this is the same person who undertook the piece of work at stake (the one marked as not performed) and instead of actually being team-oriented and saying she undertook the work I was overseeing, she acted as though she had some kind of memory loss and instead made it sound as though it was me who forgot to assign it or undertake it myself. There was no getting out of this during the call, clearly. In any case, what is done is done. I will continue to perform my tasks as required, but I will stop going above and beyond. This project which was the cause of the internal audit debacle landed me at the hospital because I was working 8am to 10/11pm including weekends for months (unpaid overtime of course) and it's not even recognized. I've now mentally checked out. I will be "cold" in the sense that I will no longer be emotionally invested in the job, will continue to perform the tasks such as a robot and leave it at that. I already have a foot out and certainly don't intend on staying. I don't burn bridges with people or former employers. I've had awful employers, but never even vocalized anything during exit interviews or anything for this specific reason. I always say: "Great company which I would recommend, great team - I'm simply looking to expand by skill-set by taking on a new challenge". I'm still in touch with my former employers,. No one knows what I truly think and I intend on keeping it this way until I leave.
  6. Extreme and it happens on a quarterly basis. I feel like a pupil as a grown professional. That's what I would have expected from a "normal" manager. She blindsided me by sharing this with the whole team (including people who didn't work with me on this project) without addressing the problem with me first. This is what I have an issue with because she made a whole lot of incorrect assumptions in public during the call and never gave me a chance to explain beforehand. She even said herself: "I don't have any background on these deficiencies and how they came about, but blah blah". Well, she could have had some background if she had discussed this with me privately first. This whole conference call ordeal will therefore mean for me that my peers will not want to work with me on any project (either it'd be mine or theirs) and that is my biggest issue in the approach she took. Now, everyone is going to make the incorrect assumption that I am incompetent, which I am 100% sure I'm not. Someone's performance should never be discussed in public period.
  7. Thank you. So, yesterday, we received an email from senior management stating that the internal audit that was performed will basically be discarded because the issue I highlighted earlier (audit performed on ongoing projects, which is indeed a deviation to the existing policy, does not encompass enough evidence to conclude a definite failure on our part). The audit will be done again at a later stage. At this stage, we have all the relevant documents in the system. I will nonetheless go ahead with the meeting, but this indeed proves the internal audit results shared were premature. If I compare this audit: it's is the same as if an external auditor started auditing a client for their annual accounts in September when the client's fiscal year ends in December. This is the closest comparison I can find. In any case, I worked for other global corporations before this one, and while you have to draw a line not to express your "feelings", I have never been told not to express my discomfort at something. In previous corporations of the same scale, we were even encouraged to do so in a professional and courteous manner if justified. I will personally remain neutral as I'm not planning on staying in a company which literally issues report cards to employees to rate them on an individual basis for everyone else to see. In almost 10 years of career, it's the first time I've ever seen this. It's not worth my time or energy. I need to be happy and comfortable where I work and this is not it at all.
  8. I don't think it's about being "right". You made assumptions, I wanted to address them. As far as being "right" in the workplace.. it's not quite like that. These audit ratings can unfortunately affect my performance review. Therefore, if I understand there may have been some inconsistency in the procedure that was applied that may have led to inaccurate findings or premature unfounded observations, then I have to address them in one capacity or another with the right evidence. It's definitely not about being right and I certainly do not think it is a negative trait to question in a constructive manner a process if there is a clear deviation. The reason for the meeting isn't to have a conversation about my feelings. I care about these findings and my original plan is to a) present evidence of what was done b) give background information c) address the gaps the project's process if there were any and where we could have done better. It's not confrontational or a therapy session or a "my way is better than your session". The bit about not feeling "comfortable" would have only been an extra in addition to the 3 points above. I obviously won't request a meeting for the sole purpose of pouring my feelings out.
  9. I'm a bit confused when you said I spent time gathering evidence for myself. What evidence are you talking about exactly? Asking a question to a colleague on a process is sneaky evidence gathering now? You have the timeline completely wrong and are making inaccurate assumptions based on your unrelated previous experience. A month ago, I simply asked more experienced colleagues if internal audit conducting an audit on an ongoing project is the normal process because I joined the company less than 2 years ago. I asked a question to literally two people and the team lead. That's it. That's the extent of my "investigation". I don't understand your point at all. It takes 1 minute for them to confirm whether this is normal process or not. I don't understand how I particularly "took up their time" when I simply asked for clarity on a process. I asked this question way before this whole debacle happened during the conference call and way before I requested a meeting with the manager. The meeting wasn't even in sight at the time at all. The reason why I asked was because I had received the observations from audit and was taken aback by the fact an ongoing project was being audited. That's when I asked whether it was normal procedure for audit to audit ongoing projects. It was a simple question that literally takes no one's time and I think is a fair question for a more recent joiner. There was no ulterior motive or me trying to collect evidence for a call that wasn't even on my radar then. The meeting request came as a result of the conference call debacle. I simply want to address this specific project. There was no "evidence collection" whatsoever aside from me retrieving all the email trails pertaining my work I had stored in my local drive (like a normal employee would). I think you're not looking at the timeline right and you're also making incorrect assumptions. Please don't try to utilize the background I'm giving against me. I requested constructive advice, not assumption-based judgments (you also come across as quite aggressive, just saying).
  10. Thanks. I don't work with her directly. I work with other senior managers on projects (who report to a different person), but she is basically overseeing my team from a hierarchy standpoint.
  11. Thanks. Before I raised the issue, I cross-checked with various people in the team including the senior project manager. They all advised that indeed, the procedure followed my internal audit this time around is a clear deviation from their usual process & it was later on also escalated by another party (more senior than I am). I certainly would have never raised this point regarding the procedure if I hadn't cross-checked with various parties, team members and even my team lead first. I did some preliminary investigation beforehand. It's not my style to go around complaining or criticizing other people's work without solid evidence. As far as doing little talking at the meeting... I'm the one who requested the meeting to discuss the results, provide some background and insights and overall discuss the next steps. So ultimately, I will have to do the talking since I'm the one who instigated it.
  12. My point is, she could have approached the situation differently (I won't tell her), but I believe the below approach would have been more professional: After she receives the results from the audit, she should have reached out to every staff who has a deficiency under their name to explain and give some background. (And yet, she goes on during the call about how she has no background on how these deficiencies happened, but she never reached out in the first place - just made assumptions). Once the above is done, she could have easily shared the results and hid the employee names, just leaving the project name. The point of the audit was to find out where the deficiencies lie, not to hang people out to dry in front of their peers and make them lose credibility. The people whose projects were part of the audit also receive these results personally, so there is literally no point for her to show the names and plaster people the way she did it during the call. It's absolutely unnecessary. She wasn't angry by the way. There was no anger there whatsoever.
  13. Someone more senior is in charge. I have no visibility over their timelines. I hand over my work to them and they do the upload. I cannot do the upload myself as they need to contribute with their inputs before doing so. Despite the fact my part of the deliverable was sent across to this person on time, they failed to upload it. I have no involvement in this and based on the procedure, I'm not in charge of chasing a lack of upload. It falls within the remit of the senior project lead. These documents never get uploaded on the same day of completion because it is not how the process works, unfortunately. If it were my responsibility, I'd upload it on the same day, but it doesn't work like that due to the various procedural layers. Again, I can appreciate an oversight, but if something is outside my control and it is unfair to claim my work was not done. I'm not the type to be confrontational or to argue at work or anywhere in real life really, so I'll be fine on this end 🙂
  14. I think you're not understanding the issue here. The problem isn't the fact my name was in red. It's the way she presented the results without getting background information first and the fact that she pointed out an incorrect observation under my in front of my whole team without addressing it with me first. It's one thing to present results, it's another to "accuse" someone of not having done the work on the basis of mere observations that were not cross-checked adequately.
×
×
  • Create New...