No Autonomy in work

Mrs OBumble

listermint wrote: »

I'd bad mouth the manager tbh. What's to be gained by telling lies and protecting idiots in the civil service just because.

If it were the private sector youd be dam sure the management style would be mentioned in a exit interview.

Based on your comments above across two posts your are very sensitive and protective of this style of amateur management.

It wouldn't fly in most organisations

What's to be gained is a new job: If someone in job interview bad-mouths their current or previous manager, I can practically guarantee that they won't get the job.

Whether the OP says something in an exit interview is a totally different question. Personally I wouldn't (no need to burn bridges), unless it could be done obliquely eg I'm leaving because I'm concerned that our section isn't performing: we're got getting through the backlog and so it's not satisfying to work here.

Usually when people complain about being "micro-managed" it means they're not good at the job, or their boss doesn't trust them (often for good reason).

In the OP's case, I wouldn't call it micro-managing so much as having obsessive attention to detail.

Either way - it's not the OP's problem to fix. It's the manager's manager. Remember that managers are employees too, and they have the same rights we all have to make mistakes, receive coaching to fix them, and to do so - or not.

If the manager's manager doesn't care (or cannot fix it), then leaving is the only realistic option. An employee is not going to be able to manage-up enough to change an underlying behaviour pattern.

LegacyUser

EchoIndia wrote: »

OP, this is not the way the civil service operates nowadays and anyone who believes this is the norm cannot be basing that on direct current experience.

I beg to differ, as a current civil servant.
As someone with 17 years' private sector experience, I have never come across the level of micromanaging as I have in the civil service. And that is why nothing gets done efficiently.

LegacyUser

EchoIndia wrote: »

OP, this is not the way the civil service operates nowadays and anyone who believes this is the norm cannot be basing that on direct current experience.

I beg to differ, as a current civil servant.
As someone with 17 years' private sector experience, I have never come across the level of micromanaging as I have in the civil service. And that is why nothing gets done efficiently.

Chaos Black

Thanks everyone. I'm probably going to try and stick it out for six months at the least, although I am applying for other civil service roles in the meantime. From how I understand it, it is the done thing anyways in the service to apply for everything above your current grade, even if you are just in the door.

I already asked my line manager in the first month, to start putting instructions/corrections/adjustments in email. Things like the staple instructions and font etc are still said in person, which isn't ideal. I appreciate the attention on constructive criticism/training, like content of the work or something that genuinely improves the presentation.

The rest I find maddening and difficult to just accept the status quo of work not getting completed in a reasonable time frame, as I do take responsibility for my work. I probably take it too personally as I tend towards the unhealthy side of perfectionism myself, just not in the same manner and I'm actively aware of it.

beauf

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

...Usually when people complain about being "micro-managed" it means they're not good at the job, or their boss doesn't trust them (often for good reason).

In the OP's case, I wouldn't call it micro-managing so much as having obsessive attention to detail.....

I'm sure many complain about being Micro managed aren't. Cry wolf so to speak.

I'm sure many might assume this is always what is going on. But it is a real "thing"

Its not simply an obsessive attention to detail. Its when this obsession result in primary objectives not being met. It has a negative business outcome. That is what the OP has described.

Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary defines[3] micromanagement as "manage[ment] especially with excessive control or attention on details". Dictionary.com defines micromanagement as "manage[ment] or control with excessive attention to minor details"...

... Often, this excessive obsession with the most minute of details causes a direct management failure in the ability to focus on the major details.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micromanagement

beauf

Mnrweod wrote: »

I beg to differ, as a current civil servant.
As someone with 17 years' private sector experience, I have never come across the level of micromanaging as I have in the civil service. And that is why nothing gets done efficiently.

I expect it depends where you work. I've not seen micromanaging that much in Public Sector, except where its to avoid taking ownership of an issue. (Foot dragging on a decision etc.) The Public sector though are a lot more constrained by rules and regulations. Though which is a real culture shock coming from the private sector, especially if coming from a progressive business area. I have seen it in a bit in private sector. Seems to me to be personality trait rather than cultural in specific business sectors. Maybe I've had untypical experience.

beauf

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

In fairness, I said "respectfully confronting a manager", which puts a slightly different emphasis. It's not about appealing to common sense. It is about sending out a clear message that 'I'm not going to take this crap' without doing anything that the manager can complain about. Something as silly as changing of mind about a preferred font over a short period should easily be challenged.....

I would only refuse to do it where I know there would be no come back on me. (don't burn bridges etc) You'd have to be very sure of your position to do that. In my experience the micro manager didn't change their behavior, they just got someone else to do it.

But the OP really isn't in the position to do that. Though. I wouldn't advise they do that when just starting out.

uck51js9zml2yt

I'm also recently joined the civil service. I'm definitely given free reign in doing my work. If I've a question i can ask. A bit more clarity would be a bonus:)

AndrewJRenko

beauf wrote: »

I would only refuse to do it where I know there would be no come back on me. (don't burn bridges etc) You'd have to be very sure of your position to do that. In my experience the micro manager didn't change their behavior, they just got someone else to do it.

But the OP really isn't in the position to do that. Though. I wouldn't advise they do that when just starting out.

I didn't suggest refusing to do anything. I suggested respectfully challenging in a constructive way that lets the manager know that you won't be randomised.

For example, to deal with the changing font/size requirements, how about coming up with a template MS Word doc for notes and asking the manager if they are happy with the font/size in place there.

beauf

I was talking about myself. Where I had to refuse constant pointless changes.

With templates they just keep changing whats agreed. often undoing and redoing the same change multiple time, all the while the project is delayed.