I've been a "new" (it's almost two years) first-time manager in a role that has been very confusing, but the most confusing has been the way this role is set up for supervising. I am manager in name to a team of about 20 people, but I was not expected/set up to directly oversee their work. How do I make this less confusing for managing them within these boundaries?
This is a new role, so no one knew wtf they were doing.
I basically supervise trainees as they come onto the job. They can train for up to a year and hopefully, if they're successful, get promoted within the year. Previously, a senior manager supervised this group, but he was too swamped with his huge team that they didn't actually get supervised. So, it moved to the field supervisors, who actually do interface with the trainees at least weekly.
My role became the hub where trainees would formally fall under me, but my role is primarily within the office, not the field. They want me to systemize things because it's a huge organization, but to me... even as a first time manager, trainees and humans need some kind of supervision and guidance. I tried doing 1:1s at first, but then I started running out of time to do my other work. So I decided to do group quarterly meetings and offer to have them reach out to me whenever they needed. I broke them out into cohorts and saw each new cohort at least once a week for their first month and was able to connect with them.
When they're out in the field, I built a system where the field supervisors could provide me feedback about the trainees' performance and if I needed to shore up things with training. This worked for trainees who are pretty self sufficient, but those that need more guidance and management are not doing so well. So I thought that I should try 1:1s with those that aren't doing so well.
However, I don't really see/do their work enough to give them great feedback or help. The field supervisors should be doing that, but they're also overwhelmed with work, so they're not doing it that often.
If the solution is pick back up 1:1s with those that are struggling, I question if my time with the trainees will be helpful. I'm very much a first-time middle manager with not that much power, so I feel the only thing I can really do helpfully is tell them about the nuances of our culture and the red tape that lines leadership, and advocate for them for promotion. Is that even helpful in a 1:1? I also feel awkward because the few times I've shared feedback (that came from the field supervisor... that they didn't share with the trainee but expected me to) I didn't have enough context to adequately share feedback in a helpful way. When I did, I get an upset trainee that wants to talk to the field supervisor and hear it straight from them.
I just... I don't know what to do. My boss doesn't want me directly supervising the trainees because "that's what the field supervisors should do and you have other things we hired you to do" but they're not doing it. I'm still their manager in title and thus will be expected to follow up on these things. If field supervisors are not doing supervising/managing, the trainees are suffering or in the dark and don't have an opportunity to do better. Then it reflects poorly on their training (which is what I manage.) I also feel an obligation to the trainees. At least to know I tried to do what I can so they have the opportunity to move up, if they're doing well. But I feel like this is a formula for failure except for those that are already strong self-starters.
How in the world should I approach this? I am losing sleep over this. Or do I just let them fail because the system sucks?
I am also looking for a job where I don't have to be a manager. When I accepted this job, it was not a managerial role. But they switched it after I accepted it. I'm still pissed about that, but for now, I am working with what I got. |
Video
Web
Image
Music
BlogU
