Share:

Supervisor taking credit for your work---solutions?  

Page 1 / 2
 

Colleague 45751
Eminent Colleague Registered
Joined: 12 months ago
Posts: 23
August 7, 2019 10:38 pm  

Dear Forum, this question fits in a bit with my last question about patents. For the last 2-3 years, I have worked for a group of financiers that set-up a VC fund for biotechnology. The problem with their VC fund is that they had no scientific and industry expertise. Then I step in whereby a colleague in a local civic club recognized my talents and expertise. My role would be to scientifically evaluate the technology behind the company and the patents/marketplace competition. So he hires me by paying through his own LLC and not through the billing process of the VC firm. We have a loose agreement with no contract; other than gentlemen's agreement that he would give me credit and make my efforts know to the management and directors of these companies. He has never introduced me to the main investors of the VC firm and never allowed me to question certain inventors (which is necessary for my analysis of the technology). I would offer to draft the patent for free (for experience) or to help oversee the prosecution of the patents with no answer. Anytime I offer a solution to a problem, I never get an answer on whether to move forward. Typically, I would see this as a big red flag but I like this guy and he has paid me well. However, he is using me in the wrong way and I have told him that. Everyone that I know well as friends (plus family) and has a good business acumen has told me get a contract and push for answers. However, the big problem is that in order to get clarity and  I would have to go above his ahead. But he deliberately screen me from the main investors. Yes, we can debate this problem of going above a supervisor's head; but I feel if you are helping the company, most successful business men would have no problem with this (if helps the company save or make money and done in a polite way). However, I realize there are some out there that feel that this is worst sin that you can make professionally. Remember in this situation, I don't have a contract and I have pushed him to make one as well as offered to bring in new investment money to the firm to cover my salary. Two weeks ago, one of the two major investors reviews the billing expenses for my supervisor and discovers that my "supervisor" have billed my main VC instead through a consulting w/o telling the principals investor he hired someone. Apparently, my supervisor did not ask the main investors (2 principals) whether it was ok to hire me. Repeatedly, I have told him to introduce me to the main principal investors. Despite this, he repeatedly know about your efforts but has turned out to be not true.  I found out that my supervisor has used my expertise for himself to make himself look as if he had a scientific background and get praise from his supervisors (the investors). I am confident my supervisor has not relayed any of my reports and/or conclusions to the two main investors (these two investors are the principals that have all the money; they really pull the strings). In part because of this, the two investors (not my supervisor), were not always informed of my analysis or conclusions because it was filtered through my supervisor. This has created a problem when the investors purchased a company for several millions and I told my supervisor don't do it for these reasons. Well, it turns out my analysis was correct and the investors now realize they have problems with this company. My supervisor asked me to write an email to one of the investors (who discovered the billing issues) and then he proofed it. He wanted me to exclude the section whereby I talk my analysis of this problematic investment. So I did this and then I emailed the principal  directly to the investor w/o a cc to my supervisor; telling him that I have been vetting technology for all these companies for the last 2-3 years apparently w/o your knowledge and then apologized for my supervisor. When asked, he offered to set up a meeting with the two main investors after I can get a power point presentation done of all the work that I have done for the VC firm and some solutions with this problematic investment. My questions are:

1) Since my supervisor asked me to write an email to the principals and they (principals/main investors) agreed to a meeting, am I still going above my supervisor's head?

2) If my goal is to help the principals with the problems associated with this investment and to obtain a work contract, am I doing this for the right reason and in a polite way?

3) How do I get the principals help me with defining the role for both me and the my "supervisor" (really this is a friend who just brought me into the firm and is just a financier not a scientist)? I want to the roles to be: me, scientific analyst  and my "supervisor" to be the business guy. We make a great team when we stick to these roles- however, my "supervisor" wants play the scientist even when he is wrong in front of real scientists ---I am better in this role and have the credentials to back it up.

4) Several of the board members and scientists at the investment companies know about me but the two principals investors don't. Should I get the help of these individuals before I talk with the principals? 

5) My solution for this company is to buy another technology at a company where I know and trust the CEO. The CEO has agreed to the idea and will only work with me. How would you go about convincing the principals that the combination of technologies would be in their best interest and will happen only if they work with me (with a contract)?

PS: I have realized that my "supervisor" is taking credit for my expertise and he does NOT pull the strings in the firm (even though he would like to think so). Remember all of the guys in this firm are wealthy financiers  and very successful lawyers business entrepreneurs (in other industries). What my "supervisor" does have with these principals is creditability (more so than I since they have been friends since private high school).   Thanks

This topic was modified 4 months ago by Colleague 45751

Quote
Dick Woodward
Reputable Colleague Registered
Joined: 12 months ago
Posts: 273
August 8, 2019 3:36 pm  

Let's get one thing clear. You are a consultant to the person that you call your supervisor - call him X. You work for X because X is the person paying you. X apparently has a consulting relationship with the VC group. While I understand your frustration, you are being retained by X, not the VC group. If X wants to present your work as his own, all I can say is welcome to the wonderful world of consulting. I have written grants, promotional material and other documents for my clients - my name appeared nowhere on those documents.

Think of it this way - if you worked for, say, McKinsey, you and likely a host of other junior consultants would work on a project which would be submitted to the client by the senior consultant that manages the project. Your name might not appear anywhere on the project report. In this case, you are working for McKinsey, not the client;it would be unethical - and likely career suicide - for you to go directly to the client without going through your supervisor.

Frankly, if you were consulting for me and I was the contact with the client (that I had brought on through my connections) and I found that you were communicating with the client without keeping me in the loop (which you say that you did - no CC to X) I would fire you immediately. There are a number of other people (I can name several that I know personally) who can do what you do; I would merely have one of them replace you.

As far as having no contract, most consultants work with at least a letter of engagement that lays out things such as payment, responsibilities, etc.; it usually includes some sort of confidentiality agreement as well, and has a statement that everything that you do is a work for hire that belongs to your client (in this case, X). If you did not get something of the sort, it is "your bad" as they say! However, since consultants are hired and fired at the will of the client, whatever kind of agreement you have will not constitute job security - you serve at the client's pleasure.

Dick


ReplyQuote
Colleague 45751
Eminent Colleague Registered
Joined: 12 months ago
Posts: 23
August 8, 2019 7:05 pm  

Let me clarify a few items. There are three people in the VC firm: 2 principals and 1 minor principals. The distinction here is that 2 main principals have most of power and the money. I work for the minor principal who has less of a share in the VC; which I call my supervisor. I meet my supervisor at a Rotary meeting and recognized my talents. We have started six companies and I vetted all the technology behind these companies. This started whereby he asked me to do a favor and help interpret data from a board member. So regularly attended a board meeting of this company. Then it escalated from there and he suggested do you want to run (or work together) to start a vaccine company with technology that we are competing for at a major university. So, we made a gentleman's agreement on pay and goals. I told him that all I really expect is visibility out of this for my career. We were a good team and I developed a strong relationship with the VC company scientists and board members. However, then the main principal for the VC did an accounting of my supervisors' billing for a given company and discovered my consulting fees. I was told by my supervisor that he paid me through his own personal LLC consulting firm and not the VC firm. We a checked bounced, I asked again about this and then told me he submits my invoice to the VC firm but then he cuts a check from his consulting firm. I know that he has lied to me about this and several items. I have checks from him that bounced twice and I have been behind three months at times in getting paid. This opportunity was not about the money but the visibility and opportunity to be appointed to position running these companies (e.g. an entrepreneur in residence). Now, when the key principal  had questions about the billing invoices, I realized that my supervisor did not ask the two principals about hiring me. Previously and repeatedly, I asked my supervisor to introduce me to the other principals (for exactly to prevent miscommunication); however, he would say they know about me (which was incorrect). Thus, given these facts, I would say I work for the VC since they are ones paying my supervisors' expenses and given the subterfuge in billing. The principal told me via email that he wanted everyone working with the companies or the VC firm to be paid via contract not to be paid through my supervisors' consulting LLC.  He was quite mad and I was embarrassed since my supervisor reassured me that the principals knew about me and my efforts. Bottom line is that my supervisor did NOT pay out of his wealth and that he used subterfuge to pay me via the VC funds (which he denies). This puts me in an awkward position. Thus, it appears that I work for the firm since they indirect pay my wages and consequently, I am accountable to the principals. 

As I stated before, there is a problem with a company and I don't know what my supervisor has relayed to the principal (because of taking credit for my work). I want the credit for the work because that is what we agreed upon and this the only way this experience would help my career. Given this situation, it feels like my supervisor wants me to train him as a scientist and then so he can act like a scientist to his supervisors, the principals. This is just not working because he is making mistakes and telling "real" scientists in the firm's companies what to do. Plus, when we vet these slide decks and talk with the prospective scientists; I prepared the questions and at times go with him to talk with the scientists. I am quite good at this and know what the follow-up questions are. But there are sometimes whereby I will prepare the questions and he will never follow-up with written responses. Sometimes I think he just uses my questions (w/o knowing the science behind the question or reasoning). This has lead to a bad situation with a company whereby my recommendation NOT to buy this company was not relayed to the principals via my supervisors and the principals bought the company anyway. I can be so more effective for the firm if my responsibilities and nature of my relationship with my supervisor was restructured and if my supervisor continues assume this "scientist" and use subterfuge handle matters, it will only cost the firm.

Yes, I hear someone people say just be the yes man and do exactly what "your boss" wants even if the science is wrong and there is no transparency. I guess a response to this might be let me worry about this. However, should it be this way. I like think an employee should do what is in the best interest of the company, not necessarily, what is in the best personal interest of your direct supervisor. This means my obligation is to the firm (not to a guy that wants to be train as a scientist) and they are indirectly paying me. I actually care about these companies and the scientists we employed. Some say is all about the money and doing exact what your boss wants (sometimes he does not know and I have to advise him on how to move forward) out of respect. It is not that simple. Suppose I did this for free because I wanted to help a colleague. 

So given the nature of the relationship and these facts, I just don't understand the formalities here. Why can't I just arrange a meeting with the principals and introduce myself w/o my "supervisor" trying to run interference? I am trying to act in the best interest of the firm and help out; shouldn't that concern and effort be rewarded not hindered. Where do you get just being a yes man and then enabling issues to continue because you are fearful about what your supervisor will think or you allow him to use you for his own gain.  As a consultant, don't I have a right to tell what is in his best interest (better or worst) and consequently what is in the best of each deal and the firm; and being a yes man to him is not it (and it has already caused problems). Push comes to shove isn't the relationship second. 

I am doing this because I want the exposure not because of the money. I would do it for free for a given period of time if it lead to a senior position at one of these companies.  So I have the best of intentions.

Since my supervisor asked me to write an email to the principal and the principal asked me to met with the other principal (w/o my supervisor presence), am I still going above my supervisor head?

Also, do I need to get a the permission of my supervisor to talk with a board member who knows me and we have already been introduced?

Would you offer to buy the problematic company or ask to bring other investors to the VC firm to pay for my salary? I have some investors willing to act on my behalf.

How do you ever get ahead if most people think just because someone pays you, this commands absolute loyalty even when your efforts conflict with the goals of the organization? Doesn't this enable issues?

Plus, doesn't this allow the rich to take advantage of your career and purposely hold you behind for their selfish gains (w/o reciprocation). For example, imagine working for Trump. With this absolute loyalty mindset, isn't your career at the mercy of the kindness of your boss  and nothing to do with your abilities and productivity. Or does money rule and the power resides with who pays?

Given how this started and portrayed, I see it as two friends who started a business. This is why can't understand these formalities in what I can do or talk with and why my supervisor has not acted with 100% transparency, regardless of whether he pays me, Would same absolute loyalty mindset apply, if he paid me nothing?         


ReplyQuote
Dick Woodward
Reputable Colleague Registered
Joined: 12 months ago
Posts: 273
August 8, 2019 11:03 pm  

Let's see. Checks bounce. X lies to you. Perhaps you are doing business with the wrong people?

Dick


ReplyQuote
PG
Reputable Colleague Registered
Joined: 12 months ago
Posts: 397
August 9, 2019 10:02 pm  

For me or doesnt matter how much you are paid or something like that. As Dick says you work for X. That means that X can do whatever he wants with the information you give him including choosing to ignore it.

If X misunderstands what you are telling him it is your job to explain it better. If he understands but chooses not to use the information in the way you think it should be used, your job is done.

This post was modified 4 months ago 2 times by Dave Jensen

ReplyQuote
Dave Jensen
Prominent Maven Moderator
Joined: 12 months ago
Posts: 912
August 9, 2019 10:09 pm  

Hello New Colleague,

I would suggest in the future that you make the post a bit shorter. The two advisors who replied both invested more time than normal to make it through the lengthy description. Perhaps it could have been one major question, and then later in the thread, a couple of follow-on questions. Thanks for being here though-- interesting topic!

And thank you to Dick and PG for their ever-present valuable commentary!

Dave Jensen, moderator

Dave Jensen, Founder and Moderator
Bio Careers Forum


ReplyQuote
Colleague 45751
Eminent Colleague Registered
Joined: 12 months ago
Posts: 23
August 10, 2019 1:29 am  

Dick- you are probably right. However, the guy is a fellow Rotarian and I am trying to be tolerant of his flaws. Plus, he is not the same since his divorce and is financially strapped with debts.  He has many positives qualities. After his wife left him, he has lived on the ranch of the senior principals' ranch. There is a limit to how you can treat someone.

PG- Thanks for the reply. That's not exactly how he portrayed the venture as we started out- whereby I was a consultant. Plus, he has asked me to negotiate collaborations , find new business proposals, and take an active role in board meetings/negotiations; not something where I research an idea and then communicate the findings to just him. One concerning problem here is that he is not listening and not understanding these scientific concepts then try to play scientist for what he has learned from me (or tell well qualified scientists (inventors) what to do when the inventor has a good scientific reason to do it another way). My supervisor does not have the scientific acumen or training under some of these ideas at a high level. Yes, he should be informed but let me do the science because I know it better and have been trained to understand the details. This lack of listening and understanding has led to 2M dollar mistake in this company when it could have been avoided if he just would have listened.

Yes, the issue of how he is paying me shows his duplicitous behavior. Maybe subterfuge is better word. He is accepting my invoices and then he takes those invoices and submits those as his business expenses to the firm. The firm drafts a check for his pay and expenses and he deposits that money in his LLC. Afterwards, he drafts a check from his LLC to pay me for my work. When asked he said that he was paying from his LLC and then when pressed, he tells me my invoices have to be reviewed by the firm. When the principal reviewed the accounts, he discovered this consulting fee items from his weekly expenses that he submitted to the firm. The principal was unaware of hiring anyone as a consultant or advisor and then the principal made my supervisor tell him what was going on. Then the principal drafted a letter to me saying that nobody going forward is going be hired via my supervisors' LLC and that they will have to sign a contract with the firm and be reviewed by all parties. In essence, my boss hired me himself and then billed me off the firms expense account (not his own as consulting fees) without getting the permission of the two principals who pay most of the bills. This is wrong and I told my supervisor repeatedly to introduce me to the principals (to avoid this) and sign a contract. In the end, this leaves me in a horrible position with the principals and a principal invested 2M in company that he shouldn't have because my supervisor acted the way he did with the material that communicated to him.

My only mistake is not setting the responsibilities and boundaries of the working relationship from the start. Plus, demanding a clear line of communication with the princiapls to resolve matters like this.  Let me be clear, my focus I feel is to get the job done right in the end and not worry about my supervisor's pride; my hope is that principals understand this. This should be my supervisors attitude as well; but it isn't. If I am really a consultant or whatever, I can't be effective if he does listen and does not understand the science. This is my responsibility because I believe in getting job done right; my reputation.   

     


ReplyQuote
Colleague 45751
Eminent Colleague Registered
Joined: 12 months ago
Posts: 23
August 10, 2019 1:55 am  

There are some key questions here from my story. I thought about going above my supervisor's head to resolve these issues (before) because I thought be in the best interest of the VC firm and the job.  Plus everyone involved. However, I am aware of some people are quite sensitive about this no matter what the circumstances. However, I believe that my supervisor has now opened the door when the principal responded to my email that my supervisor asked me to write and has resulted in a meeting. 

 

Since the principal has contacted me by email and agreed to a meeting with me, would this be considered going above my bosses head?

What is the proper business response for handling these matters? When can you go above a supervisors' head (or higher up) to resolve a reasonable business issue or to protect the company's interest?

With that in mind, can I contact my supervisor's boss without his permission if has not introduced me? What if he has introduced me?

Let's suppose now that it is not my supervisor's boss but someone higher up in the organization. For example, a board director who you get along with. Suppose he has introduced you? Suppose he has not introduced you? Suppose you get met on your own.

I just don't understand these formalities and why some people are so sensitive about who I talk with; especially if my intentions are friendly and professionally focus on helping the company.  Why be so sensitive about this? 


ReplyQuote
DX
Honorable Maven Registered
Joined: 11 months ago
Posts: 598
August 10, 2019 12:29 pm  

Hi,

Back to what PG and Dick said, you are basically nobody in the company.  Don’t take that the wrong way.  But professionally your relationship is with the person who hired you.  

Irrespective of any historic or other non-professional relationship, you relationship is with your direct employer who pays you.  You got a good example with the McKinsey above.   The “supervisor’s supervisor” in this case is of no professional relevance to you beyond the conduct of what you were hired to do and only hired to do.  Your remit is only what you are tasked with.  I’m a “client”.  Now if a subordinate employee  of “vendor” or “service provider”  comes to me complaining about their boss or is communicating something to me that I have not been previously informed or aligned with my direct contact in that company, say an account director, I have an issue.  A control of communication is an issue and if that is misaligned then big problem.  Of course if there is an ethical issue or something related to bad business practice putting me and thus my company at legal risk then ok in all ears we have process for that. 

In your Case I think you have nothing to stand on.  

It’s different of course when you are in a company with contractual relation with the company where you  are in fact an employee.  I have and do work with my bosses boss and a key principle of working is always being aligned both in thought and communication messages with your direct line manager.   Even if in cases it’s just a FYI email to your boss, prudence and practice means at a minimum you keep them informed and do consult when appropriate especially when you climb up the ranks and become more and more empowered.  

I barely talk to my boss these days, Hell he’s in a different country and often I don’t know where in the world he is, and well he can say the same of me, he doesn’t know what country or part of the world I am at any given time for the most part - BUT - he is always informed and when when I need him, consulted - we speak with one voice for our function and team always!   

So your reposibility is first to your boss, the team you are in.  We don’t go to our supervisors boss unless coordinated and aligned - unless you have a problem then you have better not spoken to your boss about it otherwise, you could be the one in a bad spot, not your boss.  

Hope this helps but first and foremost from what I read you have zero stake in your boss’s company for any thing.   I would also fire you if you went to my client above my head on a critical business impacting , not in the course of everyday business, issue we did not align on.

DX

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


ReplyQuote
Colleague 45751
Eminent Colleague Registered
Joined: 12 months ago
Posts: 23
August 10, 2019 7:15 pm  

Dear DX, Thanks for your comments. You seem to suggest that my loyalty lies to my client (my supervisor) and what happens to the firm and this problematic investment is none of my concern and responsibility. However, there several points to consider:

1) This opportunity was never portrayed as a consultant role by my boss.

2) In this role, I have been asked to perform functions beyond simply advising my supervisor.

3) This organization is a bare bones operation with three people doing this in a part effort (plus the employees of the companies); not a well structured company with many unwritten and formal rules on how to communicate with others and who you can contact (and when). 

4) These next two points are important. My supervisor did not ask his principals to hire me nor did he even introduce me and even lied to me about the principals knowing about me. Despite insisting on a contract and meeting the principals. 

5) Even though my supervisor paid me with checks that has the name of his company on them, the VC firm paid me indirectly. He gave my invoices to the VC firm as his expenses and they (firm) reimbursed his company then he paid me using checks from his (my supervisors' company). He denied that he was sending the invoices to the VC firm and pretending that his (or he) company was paying my wages. Remember no contract.

6) The principal  was upset when he discovered this when he was examining my supervisors' expenses that he was submitting to the firm. Upset by this, he asked my supervisor to have me write him an email about what I was doing (for which my supervisor edited; strangely leaving out what I wrote about my accomplishments which were about this problematic investment).

7) The principal responded angrily to us both saying that any new hires (or work) will be done using the VC firm's contract and will not be paid via my supervisors' company. All principals will be made aware of any new hires. I was constantly insisting to my supervisor about a contract and introducing me.

8) After receiving the principal's email, I emailed the principal back w/o copying my supervisor. It was a nice email saying that I just wanted to help and that I had been doing this for the last two years ("vetting the science"). I asked for an appointment to see both the principals after I got together a power point presentation of what I got accomplished and ideas to help this company. He agreed to this meeting. Apparently, this wasn't done w/o my supervisor knowledge; my supervisor hasn't said anything about this meeting but he talked with me about the angry email from the principal.

Given the subterfuge my boss used to pay me, I feel the VC firm is paying me not my supervisor. He has placed me in a bad position but because of his behavior and I feel responsible for the problems with this one investment (because he did listen and convey my analysis to the principals). The principals could hold me responsible.  I wish I could  convey that I am just trying to help solve the problem and that I have the best of intentions but I feel that I am unable to do this because of a technicality in the proper business  etiquette of who I can communicate with and when; how about being professional and trying to solve the problem possibly saving the firm a lot of money (~2M).  Or does my loyalty still lie with my supervisor and if the investment fails, it is his responsibility not any of my business because technically I am considered a consultant and I can't talk with the decision makers due to this unwritten rule of etiquette of not going above my supervisor head when there is a problem no matter how well intentioned.  

Please someone address this point: Now that I have established a line of communication with the principal and we have arranged a meeting. Would this still be considered going above the supervisor? 

Just what are the unwritten rules of who I can talk with and when as well as when I need to get the supervisor's permission to talk with someone; don't organizations want people to work as a team so why be so sensitive about this if the employees are focused on the goals of the company? For example, can I talk with this board director that I met in a board meeting that said call me anytime but do I need to inform my supervisor if I talk with him?  This sensitivity seems to be silly. I have considerable experience outside of academia and I still don't get this. How do you network in this rigid environment? 

This post was modified 4 months ago by Colleague 45751

ReplyQuote
DX
Honorable Maven Registered
Joined: 11 months ago
Posts: 598
August 10, 2019 7:49 pm  

Hi,

Easy, you ARE going above your supervisors head.  Your work in this situation is owned by your supervisor.  To respond to your boss’s client, without the boss in cc,  no matter what you think they are to you is bad behavior and bad practice worthy of dimissal.  

You are not a stakeholder in the company.  Think about it like this,  if it’s like a McKinsey, BCG, LEK etc etc employee came to me about a project or issue and not had their Project Director cc’d.  I’d have an issue. (I’ve worked with some of the above).  

So my view is that you are going over your bosses head, in case you describe bad practice and also bad practice for the so called principal to approach you directly.   

You are compensated for your work, forget all promises, my recommendation is you immediately cease all work and close your contract.  Walk away. 

Just bad practice all around in your situation and smells bad from where I sit.   Avoid entangling and complicate relationships. 

Wishing you luck with your next step, hopefully that’s an email with your boss in cc, directing that person to your boss for further questions.  Then walk away.

DX

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


ReplyQuote
Colleague 45751
Eminent Colleague Registered
Joined: 12 months ago
Posts: 23
August 10, 2019 9:26 pm  

DX, I can't emphasize this enough; the principal agreed to the meeting. Part of the reason for the meeting is too renegotiate my employment. This principal invested 2m in this company and the main two principals are the guys who actually pull the strings and have all the money. My supervisor did not rely my analysis to the main two principals and they invested in the company anyway. My analysis was not to invest for reasons related to the patents; you can't patent a compound that was already patented and such there might be duplicity by the inventors. However, this needs to be investigated further. Now they invested in this idea for 2M and now realize the problem after I showed my supervisor and legal counsel.

Suppose you were the principal and I could help you save some of your money, would you still think that I acted improperly. Conversely, I see this as acting responsibly not improperly. Just who am I offending? My supervisor who did not get the permission of his bosses to hire me and then disguise my fees as his expenses to the VC firm; SEE THE PROBLEM HERE. The principal apparently has a problem with this practice. I am trying to help out because I want it done right and its my reputation.

I have worked for a CRO, patent monetization firm, and patent litigation firm and I have talked directly with the client and didn't have to check with the supervisor first after the initial introduction to the client. This was especially true with the CRO.

You also seem to suggest that the principal was wrong for taking the meeting. He is the guy funding this venture and pulling the strings, plus indirectly paying my salary. Why should I care more about what my boss thinks about this formality versus the concerns of this principal regards of his actions? The principals opinions are the one's I should be concerned about?

Why does this have to be so complicated and why are some so sensitive about this issue? Where are the rules of proper business communication written down. I have never heard of these rules and aren't there exceptions. Should I be so fearful of talking with someone because of what my boss might think or should I get his permission every time I want to talk with someone? Silly! Just let me resolve the issue rather expect me to a sycophant.  Why is this such a big deal? 

FYI- there is no contract and I told my supervisor ask them to hire me under a contract and to introduce me to them. 

 

  

This post was modified 4 months ago 2 times by Colleague 45751

ReplyQuote
Colleague 45751
Eminent Colleague Registered
Joined: 12 months ago
Posts: 23
August 10, 2019 9:47 pm  
Posted by: DX

Hi,

Easy, you ARE going above your supervisors head.  Your work in this situation is owned by your supervisor.  To respond to your boss’s client, without the boss in cc,  no matter what you think they are to you is bad behavior and bad practice worthy of dimissal.  

You are not a stakeholder in the company.  Think about it like this,  if it’s like a McKinsey, BCG, LEK etc etc employee came to me about a project or issue and not had their Project Director cc’d.  I’d have an issue. (I’ve worked with some of the above).  

So my view is that you are going over your bosses head, in case you describe bad practice and also bad practice for the so called principal to approach you directly.   

You are compensated for your work, forget all promises, my recommendation is you immediately cease all work and close your contract.  Walk away. 

Just bad practice all around in your situation and smells bad from where I sit.   Avoid entangling and complicate relationships. 

Wishing you luck with your next step, hopefully that’s an email with your boss in cc, directing that person to your boss for further questions.  Then walk away.

DX

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Haven't you ever responded to a coworker or higher-up, not your boss, w/o having to copy your boss, especially if the email was directed to you. What are the rules for this situation? This seems being so sensitive. The only exception would be if I trashed my supervisor; otherwise, if professionally focus, it seems just being paranoid.   


ReplyQuote
Dick Woodward
Reputable Colleague Registered
Joined: 12 months ago
Posts: 273
August 10, 2019 9:57 pm  

It seems to me that you are asking us to help you justify what you are already planning to do. Since this is the case, go ahead and proceed rather than extending this discussion. Please feel free to let us know how it turns out.

Dick


ReplyQuote
Colleague 45751
Eminent Colleague Registered
Joined: 12 months ago
Posts: 23
August 10, 2019 11:05 pm  

Dick, appreciate your comments. The meeting is already set and agreed to by one of the principals. Yes, my supervisor will not be present. Consider his subterfuge and why the principal is upset.  I am trying to understand from the other side. I hear you and others saying this is bad form regardless of the reasons and good intentions. But I don't understand why and just what the rules are. I am cognizant of this sensitivity but actually ignorant of the reasons why and the rules. This forum preaches networking to get ahead but I see this as the biggest barrier to effective networking. Informing those about the proper rules of networking and communications might be helpful. If I was a bit more informed on this, I might be able to come up with a solution here or be able to minimize about potential damage (especially how my boss and his colleagues view me and my reputation). Please help me because I just don't know about these rules and I am a good person who means well in all my actions professionally.  Thanks 


ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 2