Today I face more outstanding fuckwittery in the office....
I work in a team of seven people. There is one Administrator and three 'mini' departments made of two people, one of which I manage. I actually quite like all of the six people and (apart from when we are mismanaged) we work pretty well together.
Out of the blue last night Manager1 (remember this guy?) called us in for a short notice meeting at 17:00 last night. He started off by telling us how well everything was going but I was sitting there just waiting for the next bombshell. Surely enough Manager1 has decided that despite 'working well and setting an example to the whole company' he feels that we should have an overall team leader.
The 'super' way that the management envisage this team leader being selected is by each person in the team voting for three people in the following format:
3 points - most suitable candidate
2 points - second most suitable candidate
1 point - third most suitable candidate
We are not to give any reasons for our selection
You can request not to be put forward for the position (regardless of votes)
Nobody can vote for themselves
There is no confirmation what pay increase (if any) at all will be awarded.
Once they have counted up the 'votes' the top three points scorers will each get 3 weeks trial as a team leader. At the end of the nine weeks we all get to vote again.
The first point I raised was:
If you are happy with the way this team works why are you changing it?
The second point I raised was:
Does this not lean towards a popularity contest?
The third point I raised was:
This is supposed to be a place of work, not reality television
Am I alone in thinking this is a crap way to work? Possibly I am old fashioned but if the management team created a job specification and asked people to apply individually for this role we would end up with a candidate selected on experience and merit? Instead we will end up with months of turmoil while the 'lucky' three battle it out.
