Is it a good idea to push new employees to prove themselves in their first 90 days?
up vote
13
down vote
favorite
I am a new manager and I recently hired a new engineer. My boss’s philosophy is to really push people to achieve ambitious milestones in their first 90 days. He thinks a new hire should really want to prove themselves, even if that means working extra hours. I am being encouraged to assign a very ambitious workload to my new employee and put some pressure on him to meet an ambitious deadline. Is this a good idea?
productivity work-life-balance new-hires
New contributor
add a comment |
up vote
13
down vote
favorite
I am a new manager and I recently hired a new engineer. My boss’s philosophy is to really push people to achieve ambitious milestones in their first 90 days. He thinks a new hire should really want to prove themselves, even if that means working extra hours. I am being encouraged to assign a very ambitious workload to my new employee and put some pressure on him to meet an ambitious deadline. Is this a good idea?
productivity work-life-balance new-hires
New contributor
9
IMHO, it's a bad philosophy. However, it's a good idea to comply if you want to keep your job. Were you treated this way when you were hired there?
– Joe Strazzere
1 hour ago
2
The adaptation cost when you arrive on a project/company makes the hiree work more just because he needs to assimilate the tools and the process. Giving him a big workload and,hence delivery commitment (by delivering a lot of work), is risky as you might need to pass after the new hiree to align on the company's policy/processes the thing he delivered. Other than that, him getting more hours of sleep will enhance the information assimilation.
– Answers_Seeker
1 hour ago
3
If your boss thinks this is such a great idea, why stop at 90 days? You're already getting extra labor from these new employees, just keep squeezing until there's nothing left.
– Nuclear Wang
27 mins ago
3
I would absolutely quit at the first opportunity if I joined somewhere with this odd philosophy. Perhaps this is what your boss wants, he wants to find the people who are willing to work for free.
– James Trotter
23 mins ago
I would avoid this as a company, because you can't rely on that workload being finished. if you burn this new hire out 45 days into the job and they quit with no notice, that will all be lost, and you are really trying to make people quit with a strategy like this.
– J.Doe
21 secs ago
add a comment |
up vote
13
down vote
favorite
up vote
13
down vote
favorite
I am a new manager and I recently hired a new engineer. My boss’s philosophy is to really push people to achieve ambitious milestones in their first 90 days. He thinks a new hire should really want to prove themselves, even if that means working extra hours. I am being encouraged to assign a very ambitious workload to my new employee and put some pressure on him to meet an ambitious deadline. Is this a good idea?
productivity work-life-balance new-hires
New contributor
I am a new manager and I recently hired a new engineer. My boss’s philosophy is to really push people to achieve ambitious milestones in their first 90 days. He thinks a new hire should really want to prove themselves, even if that means working extra hours. I am being encouraged to assign a very ambitious workload to my new employee and put some pressure on him to meet an ambitious deadline. Is this a good idea?
productivity work-life-balance new-hires
productivity work-life-balance new-hires
New contributor
New contributor
New contributor
asked 1 hour ago
CFL_Jeff
1785
1785
New contributor
New contributor
9
IMHO, it's a bad philosophy. However, it's a good idea to comply if you want to keep your job. Were you treated this way when you were hired there?
– Joe Strazzere
1 hour ago
2
The adaptation cost when you arrive on a project/company makes the hiree work more just because he needs to assimilate the tools and the process. Giving him a big workload and,hence delivery commitment (by delivering a lot of work), is risky as you might need to pass after the new hiree to align on the company's policy/processes the thing he delivered. Other than that, him getting more hours of sleep will enhance the information assimilation.
– Answers_Seeker
1 hour ago
3
If your boss thinks this is such a great idea, why stop at 90 days? You're already getting extra labor from these new employees, just keep squeezing until there's nothing left.
– Nuclear Wang
27 mins ago
3
I would absolutely quit at the first opportunity if I joined somewhere with this odd philosophy. Perhaps this is what your boss wants, he wants to find the people who are willing to work for free.
– James Trotter
23 mins ago
I would avoid this as a company, because you can't rely on that workload being finished. if you burn this new hire out 45 days into the job and they quit with no notice, that will all be lost, and you are really trying to make people quit with a strategy like this.
– J.Doe
21 secs ago
add a comment |
9
IMHO, it's a bad philosophy. However, it's a good idea to comply if you want to keep your job. Were you treated this way when you were hired there?
– Joe Strazzere
1 hour ago
2
The adaptation cost when you arrive on a project/company makes the hiree work more just because he needs to assimilate the tools and the process. Giving him a big workload and,hence delivery commitment (by delivering a lot of work), is risky as you might need to pass after the new hiree to align on the company's policy/processes the thing he delivered. Other than that, him getting more hours of sleep will enhance the information assimilation.
– Answers_Seeker
1 hour ago
3
If your boss thinks this is such a great idea, why stop at 90 days? You're already getting extra labor from these new employees, just keep squeezing until there's nothing left.
– Nuclear Wang
27 mins ago
3
I would absolutely quit at the first opportunity if I joined somewhere with this odd philosophy. Perhaps this is what your boss wants, he wants to find the people who are willing to work for free.
– James Trotter
23 mins ago
I would avoid this as a company, because you can't rely on that workload being finished. if you burn this new hire out 45 days into the job and they quit with no notice, that will all be lost, and you are really trying to make people quit with a strategy like this.
– J.Doe
21 secs ago
9
9
IMHO, it's a bad philosophy. However, it's a good idea to comply if you want to keep your job. Were you treated this way when you were hired there?
– Joe Strazzere
1 hour ago
IMHO, it's a bad philosophy. However, it's a good idea to comply if you want to keep your job. Were you treated this way when you were hired there?
– Joe Strazzere
1 hour ago
2
2
The adaptation cost when you arrive on a project/company makes the hiree work more just because he needs to assimilate the tools and the process. Giving him a big workload and,hence delivery commitment (by delivering a lot of work), is risky as you might need to pass after the new hiree to align on the company's policy/processes the thing he delivered. Other than that, him getting more hours of sleep will enhance the information assimilation.
– Answers_Seeker
1 hour ago
The adaptation cost when you arrive on a project/company makes the hiree work more just because he needs to assimilate the tools and the process. Giving him a big workload and,hence delivery commitment (by delivering a lot of work), is risky as you might need to pass after the new hiree to align on the company's policy/processes the thing he delivered. Other than that, him getting more hours of sleep will enhance the information assimilation.
– Answers_Seeker
1 hour ago
3
3
If your boss thinks this is such a great idea, why stop at 90 days? You're already getting extra labor from these new employees, just keep squeezing until there's nothing left.
– Nuclear Wang
27 mins ago
If your boss thinks this is such a great idea, why stop at 90 days? You're already getting extra labor from these new employees, just keep squeezing until there's nothing left.
– Nuclear Wang
27 mins ago
3
3
I would absolutely quit at the first opportunity if I joined somewhere with this odd philosophy. Perhaps this is what your boss wants, he wants to find the people who are willing to work for free.
– James Trotter
23 mins ago
I would absolutely quit at the first opportunity if I joined somewhere with this odd philosophy. Perhaps this is what your boss wants, he wants to find the people who are willing to work for free.
– James Trotter
23 mins ago
I would avoid this as a company, because you can't rely on that workload being finished. if you burn this new hire out 45 days into the job and they quit with no notice, that will all be lost, and you are really trying to make people quit with a strategy like this.
– J.Doe
21 secs ago
I would avoid this as a company, because you can't rely on that workload being finished. if you burn this new hire out 45 days into the job and they quit with no notice, that will all be lost, and you are really trying to make people quit with a strategy like this.
– J.Doe
21 secs ago
add a comment |
7 Answers
7
active
oldest
votes
up vote
28
down vote
If you want to burn out a potential good employee then go ahead and be "ambitious". Don't be surprised if they resign or are ineffective due to burnout.
11
Filtering out people who refuse to do overtime for free might be the reason for this policy
– JollyJoker
28 mins ago
3
Most likely. Reasonable people will let themselves be filtered out.
– gnasher729
26 mins ago
+1. A good employee will have no problem finding work elsewhere. Most of them know this. There's no reason put up with crap like this from an employer.
– Lee Abraham
21 mins ago
add a comment |
up vote
17
down vote
The problem with this approach is that the new employee doesn't know your organisation and doesn't know that the first 90 days are considered "special" by you.
What would you think if you started a new job and your workload was so big that it required you to work 11h/day?
Personally, I would think the organisation doesn't know what work-life balance is, can't plan well and/or misled me on purpose during the recruitment process and I would consider quitting unless I was paid much, much more than in other jobs.
Even if I didn't quit, this would influence my perception of the company. There are companies famous for working long hours. But when accepting an offer from there you know what you will get. I expect other companies to warn me during the recruitment process if they want me to work more than what I have in my work contract. This way I can take an informed decision whether it makes sense for me to work so much for the salary offered.
add a comment |
up vote
10
down vote
My boss’s philosophy is to really push people to achieve ambitious
milestones in their first 90 days.
... and the unspoken part is:
... and then we mentally set the productivity baseline for that employee by what they were able to achieve in the first 90 days.
I mean, it's already bad enough that you're giving the employee a terrible first impression of your company ("What? I just started here and you want me working 11 hours a day? Okay, back to the job hunt!") but this is extra messed up due to the anchoring bias.
Basically, it's human nature from that point on to judge the employee's productivity based on this initial datapoint. So not only did they kill themselves in the first 90 days, but they screwed themselves over for the rest of their career there.
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
Check out The Onboarding Checklist by Manager Tools. It‘s a free, multi-part podcast episode that tackles this exact question.
In short: Definitely no, your main focus should be making the employee as effective as possible as a part of the organization. They have already proven themselves by having been selected in a (hopefully rigorous) interview process.
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
I don’t work extra hours unless you pay. If it’s not important enough to pay me, then it’s not important. There are more employers out there for a good engineer, and I definitely won’t set any bad precedent in my first three months.
Tell your boss from me: Thanks, but no thanks.
Thanks @CaptainEmacs, fixed it.
– gnasher729
27 mins ago
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
If I were that employee and I would later find out that my superiors have been playing underhand tactics, I would be very concerned about the culture of this workplace and look to apply elsewhere.
You should at least report this concern to your boss, in addition to the risk of burning out a good new employee, which has been addressed in other answers.
If your boss doesn't heed your advise, you have to bite the bullet. Make a mental note, and if, on future occasions your boss proves generally resistant to good advise, start to look for a different job.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
My boss’s philosophy is to really push people... in their first 90 days... I am being encouraged to assign a very ambitious workload to my new employee and put some pressure on him to meet an ambitious deadline.
Is this a good idea?
Not in my opinion.
Assuming you already believe you don't have a choice (like talking your boss out of this), I'd say that you are a new manager, and if you want to stay one you don't have much choice than to do what it appears you have been directly ordered to do.
I would tell the new hire, "My boss X really likes to give an opportunity for people to shine in their first 90 days, so I'm assigning you project Y at his recommendation. I will work closely with you and help you. I just want you to know it is a stretch project and not to get discouraged. It will be tough but we think you can do it."
At least that's what I hope I would do - I'm sure you can see some pitfalls in coming clean with the new person (like if they disclosed what you said it might reflect badly on new manager 'Jeff').
add a comment |
StackExchange.ready(function () {
$("#show-editor-button input, #show-editor-button button").click(function () {
var showEditor = function() {
$("#show-editor-button").hide();
$("#post-form").removeClass("dno");
StackExchange.editor.finallyInit();
};
var useFancy = $(this).data('confirm-use-fancy');
if(useFancy == 'True') {
var popupTitle = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-title');
var popupBody = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-body');
var popupAccept = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-accept-button');
$(this).loadPopup({
url: '/post/self-answer-popup',
loaded: function(popup) {
var pTitle = $(popup).find('h2');
var pBody = $(popup).find('.popup-body');
var pSubmit = $(popup).find('.popup-submit');
pTitle.text(popupTitle);
pBody.html(popupBody);
pSubmit.val(popupAccept).click(showEditor);
}
})
} else{
var confirmText = $(this).data('confirm-text');
if (confirmText ? confirm(confirmText) : true) {
showEditor();
}
}
});
});
7 Answers
7
active
oldest
votes
7 Answers
7
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
28
down vote
If you want to burn out a potential good employee then go ahead and be "ambitious". Don't be surprised if they resign or are ineffective due to burnout.
11
Filtering out people who refuse to do overtime for free might be the reason for this policy
– JollyJoker
28 mins ago
3
Most likely. Reasonable people will let themselves be filtered out.
– gnasher729
26 mins ago
+1. A good employee will have no problem finding work elsewhere. Most of them know this. There's no reason put up with crap like this from an employer.
– Lee Abraham
21 mins ago
add a comment |
up vote
28
down vote
If you want to burn out a potential good employee then go ahead and be "ambitious". Don't be surprised if they resign or are ineffective due to burnout.
11
Filtering out people who refuse to do overtime for free might be the reason for this policy
– JollyJoker
28 mins ago
3
Most likely. Reasonable people will let themselves be filtered out.
– gnasher729
26 mins ago
+1. A good employee will have no problem finding work elsewhere. Most of them know this. There's no reason put up with crap like this from an employer.
– Lee Abraham
21 mins ago
add a comment |
up vote
28
down vote
up vote
28
down vote
If you want to burn out a potential good employee then go ahead and be "ambitious". Don't be surprised if they resign or are ineffective due to burnout.
If you want to burn out a potential good employee then go ahead and be "ambitious". Don't be surprised if they resign or are ineffective due to burnout.
answered 55 mins ago
sf02
2,3331313
2,3331313
11
Filtering out people who refuse to do overtime for free might be the reason for this policy
– JollyJoker
28 mins ago
3
Most likely. Reasonable people will let themselves be filtered out.
– gnasher729
26 mins ago
+1. A good employee will have no problem finding work elsewhere. Most of them know this. There's no reason put up with crap like this from an employer.
– Lee Abraham
21 mins ago
add a comment |
11
Filtering out people who refuse to do overtime for free might be the reason for this policy
– JollyJoker
28 mins ago
3
Most likely. Reasonable people will let themselves be filtered out.
– gnasher729
26 mins ago
+1. A good employee will have no problem finding work elsewhere. Most of them know this. There's no reason put up with crap like this from an employer.
– Lee Abraham
21 mins ago
11
11
Filtering out people who refuse to do overtime for free might be the reason for this policy
– JollyJoker
28 mins ago
Filtering out people who refuse to do overtime for free might be the reason for this policy
– JollyJoker
28 mins ago
3
3
Most likely. Reasonable people will let themselves be filtered out.
– gnasher729
26 mins ago
Most likely. Reasonable people will let themselves be filtered out.
– gnasher729
26 mins ago
+1. A good employee will have no problem finding work elsewhere. Most of them know this. There's no reason put up with crap like this from an employer.
– Lee Abraham
21 mins ago
+1. A good employee will have no problem finding work elsewhere. Most of them know this. There's no reason put up with crap like this from an employer.
– Lee Abraham
21 mins ago
add a comment |
up vote
17
down vote
The problem with this approach is that the new employee doesn't know your organisation and doesn't know that the first 90 days are considered "special" by you.
What would you think if you started a new job and your workload was so big that it required you to work 11h/day?
Personally, I would think the organisation doesn't know what work-life balance is, can't plan well and/or misled me on purpose during the recruitment process and I would consider quitting unless I was paid much, much more than in other jobs.
Even if I didn't quit, this would influence my perception of the company. There are companies famous for working long hours. But when accepting an offer from there you know what you will get. I expect other companies to warn me during the recruitment process if they want me to work more than what I have in my work contract. This way I can take an informed decision whether it makes sense for me to work so much for the salary offered.
add a comment |
up vote
17
down vote
The problem with this approach is that the new employee doesn't know your organisation and doesn't know that the first 90 days are considered "special" by you.
What would you think if you started a new job and your workload was so big that it required you to work 11h/day?
Personally, I would think the organisation doesn't know what work-life balance is, can't plan well and/or misled me on purpose during the recruitment process and I would consider quitting unless I was paid much, much more than in other jobs.
Even if I didn't quit, this would influence my perception of the company. There are companies famous for working long hours. But when accepting an offer from there you know what you will get. I expect other companies to warn me during the recruitment process if they want me to work more than what I have in my work contract. This way I can take an informed decision whether it makes sense for me to work so much for the salary offered.
add a comment |
up vote
17
down vote
up vote
17
down vote
The problem with this approach is that the new employee doesn't know your organisation and doesn't know that the first 90 days are considered "special" by you.
What would you think if you started a new job and your workload was so big that it required you to work 11h/day?
Personally, I would think the organisation doesn't know what work-life balance is, can't plan well and/or misled me on purpose during the recruitment process and I would consider quitting unless I was paid much, much more than in other jobs.
Even if I didn't quit, this would influence my perception of the company. There are companies famous for working long hours. But when accepting an offer from there you know what you will get. I expect other companies to warn me during the recruitment process if they want me to work more than what I have in my work contract. This way I can take an informed decision whether it makes sense for me to work so much for the salary offered.
The problem with this approach is that the new employee doesn't know your organisation and doesn't know that the first 90 days are considered "special" by you.
What would you think if you started a new job and your workload was so big that it required you to work 11h/day?
Personally, I would think the organisation doesn't know what work-life balance is, can't plan well and/or misled me on purpose during the recruitment process and I would consider quitting unless I was paid much, much more than in other jobs.
Even if I didn't quit, this would influence my perception of the company. There are companies famous for working long hours. But when accepting an offer from there you know what you will get. I expect other companies to warn me during the recruitment process if they want me to work more than what I have in my work contract. This way I can take an informed decision whether it makes sense for me to work so much for the salary offered.
answered 49 mins ago
385703
9,35261650
9,35261650
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
10
down vote
My boss’s philosophy is to really push people to achieve ambitious
milestones in their first 90 days.
... and the unspoken part is:
... and then we mentally set the productivity baseline for that employee by what they were able to achieve in the first 90 days.
I mean, it's already bad enough that you're giving the employee a terrible first impression of your company ("What? I just started here and you want me working 11 hours a day? Okay, back to the job hunt!") but this is extra messed up due to the anchoring bias.
Basically, it's human nature from that point on to judge the employee's productivity based on this initial datapoint. So not only did they kill themselves in the first 90 days, but they screwed themselves over for the rest of their career there.
add a comment |
up vote
10
down vote
My boss’s philosophy is to really push people to achieve ambitious
milestones in their first 90 days.
... and the unspoken part is:
... and then we mentally set the productivity baseline for that employee by what they were able to achieve in the first 90 days.
I mean, it's already bad enough that you're giving the employee a terrible first impression of your company ("What? I just started here and you want me working 11 hours a day? Okay, back to the job hunt!") but this is extra messed up due to the anchoring bias.
Basically, it's human nature from that point on to judge the employee's productivity based on this initial datapoint. So not only did they kill themselves in the first 90 days, but they screwed themselves over for the rest of their career there.
add a comment |
up vote
10
down vote
up vote
10
down vote
My boss’s philosophy is to really push people to achieve ambitious
milestones in their first 90 days.
... and the unspoken part is:
... and then we mentally set the productivity baseline for that employee by what they were able to achieve in the first 90 days.
I mean, it's already bad enough that you're giving the employee a terrible first impression of your company ("What? I just started here and you want me working 11 hours a day? Okay, back to the job hunt!") but this is extra messed up due to the anchoring bias.
Basically, it's human nature from that point on to judge the employee's productivity based on this initial datapoint. So not only did they kill themselves in the first 90 days, but they screwed themselves over for the rest of their career there.
My boss’s philosophy is to really push people to achieve ambitious
milestones in their first 90 days.
... and the unspoken part is:
... and then we mentally set the productivity baseline for that employee by what they were able to achieve in the first 90 days.
I mean, it's already bad enough that you're giving the employee a terrible first impression of your company ("What? I just started here and you want me working 11 hours a day? Okay, back to the job hunt!") but this is extra messed up due to the anchoring bias.
Basically, it's human nature from that point on to judge the employee's productivity based on this initial datapoint. So not only did they kill themselves in the first 90 days, but they screwed themselves over for the rest of their career there.
answered 27 mins ago
Kevin
1,616313
1,616313
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
Check out The Onboarding Checklist by Manager Tools. It‘s a free, multi-part podcast episode that tackles this exact question.
In short: Definitely no, your main focus should be making the employee as effective as possible as a part of the organization. They have already proven themselves by having been selected in a (hopefully rigorous) interview process.
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
Check out The Onboarding Checklist by Manager Tools. It‘s a free, multi-part podcast episode that tackles this exact question.
In short: Definitely no, your main focus should be making the employee as effective as possible as a part of the organization. They have already proven themselves by having been selected in a (hopefully rigorous) interview process.
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
up vote
9
down vote
Check out The Onboarding Checklist by Manager Tools. It‘s a free, multi-part podcast episode that tackles this exact question.
In short: Definitely no, your main focus should be making the employee as effective as possible as a part of the organization. They have already proven themselves by having been selected in a (hopefully rigorous) interview process.
Check out The Onboarding Checklist by Manager Tools. It‘s a free, multi-part podcast episode that tackles this exact question.
In short: Definitely no, your main focus should be making the employee as effective as possible as a part of the organization. They have already proven themselves by having been selected in a (hopefully rigorous) interview process.
answered 1 hour ago
Roman
2093
2093
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
I don’t work extra hours unless you pay. If it’s not important enough to pay me, then it’s not important. There are more employers out there for a good engineer, and I definitely won’t set any bad precedent in my first three months.
Tell your boss from me: Thanks, but no thanks.
Thanks @CaptainEmacs, fixed it.
– gnasher729
27 mins ago
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
I don’t work extra hours unless you pay. If it’s not important enough to pay me, then it’s not important. There are more employers out there for a good engineer, and I definitely won’t set any bad precedent in my first three months.
Tell your boss from me: Thanks, but no thanks.
Thanks @CaptainEmacs, fixed it.
– gnasher729
27 mins ago
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
up vote
6
down vote
I don’t work extra hours unless you pay. If it’s not important enough to pay me, then it’s not important. There are more employers out there for a good engineer, and I definitely won’t set any bad precedent in my first three months.
Tell your boss from me: Thanks, but no thanks.
I don’t work extra hours unless you pay. If it’s not important enough to pay me, then it’s not important. There are more employers out there for a good engineer, and I definitely won’t set any bad precedent in my first three months.
Tell your boss from me: Thanks, but no thanks.
edited 27 mins ago
answered 1 hour ago
gnasher729
80.4k34145253
80.4k34145253
Thanks @CaptainEmacs, fixed it.
– gnasher729
27 mins ago
add a comment |
Thanks @CaptainEmacs, fixed it.
– gnasher729
27 mins ago
Thanks @CaptainEmacs, fixed it.
– gnasher729
27 mins ago
Thanks @CaptainEmacs, fixed it.
– gnasher729
27 mins ago
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
If I were that employee and I would later find out that my superiors have been playing underhand tactics, I would be very concerned about the culture of this workplace and look to apply elsewhere.
You should at least report this concern to your boss, in addition to the risk of burning out a good new employee, which has been addressed in other answers.
If your boss doesn't heed your advise, you have to bite the bullet. Make a mental note, and if, on future occasions your boss proves generally resistant to good advise, start to look for a different job.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
If I were that employee and I would later find out that my superiors have been playing underhand tactics, I would be very concerned about the culture of this workplace and look to apply elsewhere.
You should at least report this concern to your boss, in addition to the risk of burning out a good new employee, which has been addressed in other answers.
If your boss doesn't heed your advise, you have to bite the bullet. Make a mental note, and if, on future occasions your boss proves generally resistant to good advise, start to look for a different job.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
If I were that employee and I would later find out that my superiors have been playing underhand tactics, I would be very concerned about the culture of this workplace and look to apply elsewhere.
You should at least report this concern to your boss, in addition to the risk of burning out a good new employee, which has been addressed in other answers.
If your boss doesn't heed your advise, you have to bite the bullet. Make a mental note, and if, on future occasions your boss proves generally resistant to good advise, start to look for a different job.
If I were that employee and I would later find out that my superiors have been playing underhand tactics, I would be very concerned about the culture of this workplace and look to apply elsewhere.
You should at least report this concern to your boss, in addition to the risk of burning out a good new employee, which has been addressed in other answers.
If your boss doesn't heed your advise, you have to bite the bullet. Make a mental note, and if, on future occasions your boss proves generally resistant to good advise, start to look for a different job.
edited 5 mins ago
answered 10 mins ago
henning
1856
1856
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
My boss’s philosophy is to really push people... in their first 90 days... I am being encouraged to assign a very ambitious workload to my new employee and put some pressure on him to meet an ambitious deadline.
Is this a good idea?
Not in my opinion.
Assuming you already believe you don't have a choice (like talking your boss out of this), I'd say that you are a new manager, and if you want to stay one you don't have much choice than to do what it appears you have been directly ordered to do.
I would tell the new hire, "My boss X really likes to give an opportunity for people to shine in their first 90 days, so I'm assigning you project Y at his recommendation. I will work closely with you and help you. I just want you to know it is a stretch project and not to get discouraged. It will be tough but we think you can do it."
At least that's what I hope I would do - I'm sure you can see some pitfalls in coming clean with the new person (like if they disclosed what you said it might reflect badly on new manager 'Jeff').
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
My boss’s philosophy is to really push people... in their first 90 days... I am being encouraged to assign a very ambitious workload to my new employee and put some pressure on him to meet an ambitious deadline.
Is this a good idea?
Not in my opinion.
Assuming you already believe you don't have a choice (like talking your boss out of this), I'd say that you are a new manager, and if you want to stay one you don't have much choice than to do what it appears you have been directly ordered to do.
I would tell the new hire, "My boss X really likes to give an opportunity for people to shine in their first 90 days, so I'm assigning you project Y at his recommendation. I will work closely with you and help you. I just want you to know it is a stretch project and not to get discouraged. It will be tough but we think you can do it."
At least that's what I hope I would do - I'm sure you can see some pitfalls in coming clean with the new person (like if they disclosed what you said it might reflect badly on new manager 'Jeff').
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
My boss’s philosophy is to really push people... in their first 90 days... I am being encouraged to assign a very ambitious workload to my new employee and put some pressure on him to meet an ambitious deadline.
Is this a good idea?
Not in my opinion.
Assuming you already believe you don't have a choice (like talking your boss out of this), I'd say that you are a new manager, and if you want to stay one you don't have much choice than to do what it appears you have been directly ordered to do.
I would tell the new hire, "My boss X really likes to give an opportunity for people to shine in their first 90 days, so I'm assigning you project Y at his recommendation. I will work closely with you and help you. I just want you to know it is a stretch project and not to get discouraged. It will be tough but we think you can do it."
At least that's what I hope I would do - I'm sure you can see some pitfalls in coming clean with the new person (like if they disclosed what you said it might reflect badly on new manager 'Jeff').
My boss’s philosophy is to really push people... in their first 90 days... I am being encouraged to assign a very ambitious workload to my new employee and put some pressure on him to meet an ambitious deadline.
Is this a good idea?
Not in my opinion.
Assuming you already believe you don't have a choice (like talking your boss out of this), I'd say that you are a new manager, and if you want to stay one you don't have much choice than to do what it appears you have been directly ordered to do.
I would tell the new hire, "My boss X really likes to give an opportunity for people to shine in their first 90 days, so I'm assigning you project Y at his recommendation. I will work closely with you and help you. I just want you to know it is a stretch project and not to get discouraged. It will be tough but we think you can do it."
At least that's what I hope I would do - I'm sure you can see some pitfalls in coming clean with the new person (like if they disclosed what you said it might reflect badly on new manager 'Jeff').
answered 3 mins ago
J. Chris Compton
1,726313
1,726313
add a comment |
add a comment |
CFL_Jeff is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
CFL_Jeff is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
CFL_Jeff is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
CFL_Jeff is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to The Workplace Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f124453%2fis-it-a-good-idea-to-push-new-employees-to-prove-themselves-in-their-first-90-da%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
9
IMHO, it's a bad philosophy. However, it's a good idea to comply if you want to keep your job. Were you treated this way when you were hired there?
– Joe Strazzere
1 hour ago
2
The adaptation cost when you arrive on a project/company makes the hiree work more just because he needs to assimilate the tools and the process. Giving him a big workload and,hence delivery commitment (by delivering a lot of work), is risky as you might need to pass after the new hiree to align on the company's policy/processes the thing he delivered. Other than that, him getting more hours of sleep will enhance the information assimilation.
– Answers_Seeker
1 hour ago
3
If your boss thinks this is such a great idea, why stop at 90 days? You're already getting extra labor from these new employees, just keep squeezing until there's nothing left.
– Nuclear Wang
27 mins ago
3
I would absolutely quit at the first opportunity if I joined somewhere with this odd philosophy. Perhaps this is what your boss wants, he wants to find the people who are willing to work for free.
– James Trotter
23 mins ago
I would avoid this as a company, because you can't rely on that workload being finished. if you burn this new hire out 45 days into the job and they quit with no notice, that will all be lost, and you are really trying to make people quit with a strategy like this.
– J.Doe
21 secs ago