I have a new boss. I've actually worked with him as a peer for 10 years. He's a nice guy, good at what he does, but no managerial experience at all. Basically he was given this position because he threatened to leave and they can't afford to lose him. I was not up for the job nor did I want it, I'm happy doing what I do. I am a field employee working from home; I have autonomy over my workload & priorities, my last two bosses would talk to me about once a month and then only if there was an issue somewhere. In a nutshell, I’m a professional who has demonstrated and earned the trust of the company. Ironically, the new boss's old situation was very similar, lots of self-direction, minimal management influence.
Today I get an email from him that he wants all of his direct reports (5 of us) to add him, and everyone else in the group, as a delegate to our Office Outlook; he'll be able to view tasks, emails, calendar, contacts, etc etc. and my peers will be able to do the same. Now, I know that it's the company's right to read my email at any time, but I have a real issue with that extending to my peers. I’m also not crazy about my boss having access to my Outlook information whenever he feels like it without having or needing a reason. I have nothing to hide, but I manage my workload in Outlook and really don't want to be micromanaged there; hell I don't want to be micromanaged at all.
So – would this upset you? What would you do about it? I can’t go to HR, the company absolutely has the right to monitor anything done on the computer (I just signed the annual GIS consent yesterday, lol).
I don't 'clearly' have an issue with this guy, I just know that he wasn't ready for the added responsibility - I've worked with him long enough to know that, personally I have no issues with him. I live and breathe in Outlook, my entire workload is managed there; there is no way I can just limit the information I put in. He wants access to everything, and for all my co-workers to have access to everything too. Already talked to one co-worker, her response was 'hell no'.
Everly & SCG - Thank you, those are great ideas!
Thanks Everyone! My co-worker discussed this with him (she’s in the office with him); it’s not an HR or upper management directive, it was his idea. He wants it so we can help each other out if needed. She pointed out that he will be getting emails from HR and upper management that we don’t need to be seeing. After some discussion he realized this might not have been well thought out, lol; now we are delegating calendar only.
So my question would be:
what if, you want to contact him, ONLY him, for any reason/work concern?
And it is confidential?
What then???
No matter what, is there any 'confidentiality' in place? And how does He intend, to create, channels and routing for that?
I work in management and I do not micromanage. I don't have time!!! He might just want to have an idea of what you and the team are working on monthly. You don't know what his manager is asking for information wise. I agree with one of the others, watch and see what is going on. There is something driving this.
.
I have news for you, you are probably already being monitored, and the company has every right to do so. Your new boss wanting to monitor you is totally within his rights & totally acceptable.
Are you upset that he is now the boss? Or are you completely detached from normal office & manager/underling relationships that you think you are justified in your feelings?
I am really trying to understand your view point on this, but I really just can't. If you are as good as you say you are, then who cares if he is watching you? As long as he isn't emailing or calling you every 5 minutes, you can hardly call it micromanaging.
Nothing you can do, really. I might bring up to him your concern about your peers reading your e-mails because you prefer your privacy in your communications with your boss. You definitely deserve that courtesy. At the end of the day he doesn't have to agree to it but I would definitely bring it up.
Having been a department head, I can tell you he's probably doing this because someone isn't performing up to snuff, and this is a way to make everyone accountable.
Don't fool yourself that your information is private either. If you're using company issued computers and software, they can access or find out what you've been up to if they really needed to...and probably already have been.
I can understand your concern about privacy and being micromanaged, but the fact of the matter is you are an employee of this company though you have the privilege of working off-site. If you were in an office, you'd be on the company's system, and very likely closely watched and managed. So this request isn't out of the realm of normal nor does it overstep what would be expected at any company.
I guess if I were in your shoes, I'd be more concerned about "why" they are pulling in the reigns right now. While it might just be your new boss trying to exercise some authority, the more likely reason behind radical change is because of something going on in the company that is affecting production and performance. Usually changes like this indicate new expectations and demands from higher up the food chain. Are they planning a restructuring or layoffs? If you are in some sort of sales or marketing, is there a problem with production and meeting goals? A move like this would certainly spur competition and therefore boost production and accountability. For all you know, maybe some of the others working from home are slacking and your boss has to build a case so they can find better candidates.
I guess I'd procede with caution and start doing some detective work to find out why there are new changes to how you report and communicate with your company. With that said, I'd do nothing right now. I'd observe and watch the show to see what's coming up next. This is a big picture issue in my opinion...not necessarily a singling out of anyone. Either way though, in this economy, no one, no matter how good they are, is safe. JMO
It's so hard to address this kind of thing without sounding like you're hiding something. I would go to him directly and ask if there is a problem with the group as a whole that this change is needing to address. Approach it like you're on the same side. Tell him that you have grown so accustomed to setting your schedule, priorities, etc., and that is how you have become as efficient of a worker as you are. Inquire to see if you are welcome in a brainstorm with him that will address any reasoning behind this change while "Still allowing you and the rest of the group to work as efficiently as you do now."
It sounds like your manager probably has no idea how to really manage since this is his first time, and he's reaching for anything that might help (or that another manager told him that they do). If you have a decent relationship with him, why not call and express your concerns? Perhaps explain that you manage your workload in Outlook and wouldn't want to mislead your peers -- or him -- if they read your notes, which are a work in progress. Then suggest that maybe he and your peers should become whatever that other designation in Outlook is where they can view your calendar entries but nothing else. I forget what it's called, but Outlook should be able to tell you. That's what we do in my office and it's helpful because I know whether I can double book someone (like if they've blocked time off tentatively, or for a meeting I know they can miss). But they can't read my email or notes.
Even though you don't like it, I think you're going to have to comply. Or look for something else!
He is new at management and probably trying to get a handle on his team. Suggest to him an alternative way of seeing what's on the workload and voice your valid reasons as to how and why you think that Outlook for the whole team is not a good idea. Maybe have him get a meeting together to hear other input since your other coworker was also against it.
It is so hard when newbies become managers and immediately they begin to micromanage - but take it as him trying to get a handle on things and suggest an alternative versus totally being against his idea for outlook.
As someone else suggests, there are ways that you can only see schedule of others without reading personal email, etc. I manage my "life" there too and it seem like my calendar/time slot is always booked, lol.
Actually, it wouldn't. My supervisor has asked all of us to grant access to our Outlook and it has actually come in quite handy. My secretary can adjust my calendar and scan my emails when I am out of the office. My supervisor can schedule meetings without hassle and as you said... I have nothing to hide! When my father-in-law died, one of my co-workers offered to monitor my emails so that nothing was overlooked while I was out for two weeks.
You clearly have an issue with this person functioning as your supervisor. This is a personality thing between you and this person, not an overwhelming issue. Just click the "delegate" button and know that if you are doing what you are supposed to be doing there isn't going to be an issue.
Because this person participates in meetings that you are likely not attending, he may also be aware of someone in your group who is abusing the priviledge and for many reasons can't "point out" that person- hence the "everyone do it" edict. It's also possible that the company is now asking everyone to do this.
I agree that there should be some level of privacy as work and messages back and forth that having nothing to do with so and so could be misunderstood. There are shared file properties in outlook that you all could have access to and put your calendar system in this shared file. Also, he shouldn't need to be a delegate on everything that's why you need a shared folder/drive for such things.
So, what's the other coworker who said 'hell no' plan to do? maybe you guys should coordinate your plan of resistance. :-)
I don't see why you can't export all of these data to personal files now and only allow him to see a minimal set. Personally, I only use mail and calendar and i don't care who sees that. Maybe if you set the option to send notification to your delegate for all meetings and emails you get, he'll be inundated and completely overwhelmed by the influx of emails and realize the error of his way. :-)
I've been in both shoes and I can understand how you feel. I especially dislike being micromanaged. My old boss used to say I glared at him whenever he attempted to micromanage me. If I were you, I wouldn't push the issue. Move stuff to private folders as much as you can, and expose the rest. You'll gain a reputation as a team player and easy to get along with as opposed to a prima donna. You never know when you'll need an ally. Everyone has his own style. Maybe this is his, maybe he'll change as he learns.
Good luck
I work from home too and have been in my role for 4 years - similiar experience of being very self sufficient, etc - and I don't think your feelings are out of line.
How big is your company? Do they have an open door policy - where you can approach the next level management and get their take on what is happening?
I wouldn't want everyone to have that access either...it's unnecessary...and people that don't work from home don't understand the value of the autonomy - not to screw around - but to work in a way that is most productive/effective for you. I've found that a lot of people that WAH do so because they had trouble in a typical work environment (I was fired/and or quit every job I had prior to getting my WAH role - I've been here 4 years and counting and couldn't be happier)
Do what you think is best and if you are as valued as you think they should listen...
First, find out if this is a directive coming from HR or one of the higher ups. If your boss is acting alone, have a team powwow. Together as a team, come up w/pros and cons of peers having access to Outlook. That way, if the consensus is "no" to adding the boss as a delegate, you won't be the only one saying it.
Ask questions like "how does this encourage/deter an open door policy" and "would this be beneficial/detrimental to the team/members in the long run". Also, if I know bosses (and I've had PULENTEE of them) offer a few alternative solutions you think will appease him, instead of giving a yes/no.
I miss working in an office. (sigh)
gl and hth!
I think what you should do is create another outlook that you wouldn't mind having everyone have access to. That way you can still have your major workload in one and the "Peering Tom" one in the other. You still are showing him your work and calender, just not everything. Just because you have nothing to hide, doesn't mean that there isn't something incrimminiating. You know what I mean. Anyways see if that is an option.
Sounds like your new boss has the New Boss Syndrome. Yes, I would be a little upset, but none of us should have an expectation of privacy when it comes to work computers. I might ask the new boss "Why?" There's no harm in asking, and MAYBE he's got a valid reason for wanting all the information to be shared. More likely it was just something dumb that some "How to Be a Manager" training suggested and he wants to show how "in charge" he is. How do the other four people feel about it, can you ask them? If I could, I would probably humor him by making it "public" and then putting the absolute bare amount of information into that account. Sorry this is going on, new bosses can be a real pain. I know, I've been one!:)
Edit to Add: If you wait it out, he might get over it or forget he asked.
Can you ask him exactly what he would like to have access to? As administrative assistant in my office, I have access to only certain portions of my 2 bosses outlook. I cannot view their emails, but I can view and make changes to their calendars. I'm not sure if I can view their contacts, I've never tried. Our office functions most efficiently when we can all see each others calendars, so I can understand that. I can also compose and send emails under my bosses name.
I would discuss it with him, talk to him about how you do work and see if you can address his concerns and he yours. It may be that he's gotten some direction from on high that he hasn't revealed.
