Professional situation leaves me ambivalent

[Enso]

Hi all,

For my work I'm kind of like an "intern" and I will be closer to being qualified at the end of the year. I'm not really an intern but it's probably the closest similar example. As part of my "internship" I work with another professional institution for a month and see a supervisor at the institution one day every week. So I go to this place every week and my supervisor is very qualified. She is very nice and friendly and I can't complain about her being an all-round awesome person.

The thing is, I'm not fully qualified so the "internship" thing is a huge learning experience. After going for a few days now I've developed this ambivalent perspective towards my supervisor/situation. I want to use this supervisor as one of my references on my resume (I'm 99% sure she would say yes). After a few sessions with her, I've begun to understand what I was doing at like a 45% level, and then I would go home and study all the procedures for the workplace etc so I can get better. I'm now finding that I can't seem to do most things correctly and it makes no sense.

On occasion I work with another few people at that location and they are chilled af. So I'll do the job maybe at like a 75-80% level, and they'll just be like "good work, maybe try x next time". However, my main supervisor has kind of gotten to a point now where she just takes over every time I try to develop some independence. I'm not sure if she's being controlling, threatened by me, or she's just a perfectionist. She is the most qualified person, and I can tell she has decades of random knowledge in her head, but she tells me contradicting things. I feel so much happier around the other "junior" supervisors because they are not management and they are just happy the job gets done at an acceptable level like 80%. So now I'm not sure if I should ask this supervisor to be a reference on my resume. I feel she's a wildcard. I genuinely don't know how she would rate me because she's constantly rating me very nicely all day and interrupting my job because I was 2 seconds to slow to do something, or worded something very slightly different to her in front of clients.

The reason I'm posting this I guess is because it's not that I don't like her or I don't like her advice or anything, it's just that I don't know whether the whole thing is more about her than me, because she's so qualified and experienced I understand that's how she is, but at the same time she's starting to contradict herself, and I feel she's a wildcard and I've given up trying to impress her. I've also noticed that even though she's an awesome person, there is still a very subtle boss vibe. In so much as, when she's not around everyone is like 15% more relaxed, it's not because of her personality but simply because of her position.

Anyway, thanks for any responses.

 

[Asa]

Can you have a discussion with her to find out what she thinks of your job performance, focusing on how you can improve? This may help you navigate whether it is wise to ask her to be a reference on your resume.

I'm now finding that I can't seem to do most things correctly and it makes no sense.

This isn't an uncommon experience in the learning curve.

Was this when the supervisor started acting controlling? Is she over-compensating for you, or trying to correct you because she wants you to learn by example?

In my experience, and from observing others' careers, you'll learn more from the types who want things done well (even if they are less fun or overbearing) than you will from those who don't care as long as it gets done. Rise to the occasion and make sure you do what she asks. You'll be better at your job and impressing people who will elevate your career matters.

Contradicting herself is the strange part. In these cases, I'd pay strict attention to context.

The next question is, who are you going to ask to be your reference if not her? Will they have as much pull?

 

[Enso]

This isn't an uncommon experience in the learning curve.

Yah that's what I'm thinking, that's why I'm not getting personal with it an I'm kinda ambivalent.

Was this when the supervisor started acting controlling? Is she over-compensating for you, or trying to correct you because she wants you to learn by example?

She wants me to learn and I know she has good intentions but I should probably provide more context. The job at this particular workplace is highly variable within the field. So I get a different situation every day but you do have some notice of what is going to be on the appointment and there are procedures for every situation. So as a short-stay intern it’s a very complex environment. When I do something at 80% I’m pretty happy with that at a general level, because such a complex problem was just thrown at me, and I think the junior supervisors get that it’s pretty crazy sometimes.

In my experience, and from observing others' careers, you'll learn more from the types who want things done well (even if they are less fun or overbearing) than you will from those who don't care as long as it gets done

Totally agree, I guess it's just because it's so variable that it's hard to remember everything, so even if she critiques everything I do in x situation, the chance of me remembering everything next time is 0 but I may remember some things.

Contradicting herself is the strange part. In these cases, I'd pay strict attention to context.

There are a few small contradictions that I just brush past, but there was a glaringly obvious one that literally defied logic. To put it into a common example, lets say you're changing a car tyre. One of the other junior supervisors taught me to break the wheel lugs loose before jacking the car, because otherwise the tyre will spin while your trying to loosen them. Then this higher supervisor said, you know you should just jack up the car and hope for the best, the lugs should be loose enough. So I was like... but the other supervisor said to crack them loose first because it’s easier. The response I got was “well I can see why she said that if it was a Toyota” and my final response was … we literally just worked with a small Japanese sedan.

The next question is, who are you going to ask to be your reference if not her? Will they have as much pull?

I think there's two problems here. 1 - I don't really know what goes on in a reference check, and to what level the supervisor answers any questions. 2 - The issues with using someone else is that I get far less time with them, so I could use the junior supervisors but I've only done a few jobs with them and so I know I could perform better with them now but I probably won't get much more opportunity with them and so, once again I don't really know if I should use them because I don't really know what goes on in reference checks.

I appreciate the response btw

 

[Asa]

There are a few small contradictions that I just brush past, but there was a glaringly obvious one that literally defied logic. To put it into a common example, lets say you're changing a car tyre. One of the other junior supervisors taught me to break the wheel lugs loose before jacking the car, because otherwise the tyre will spin while your trying to loosen them. Then this higher supervisor said, you know you should just jack up the car and hope for the best, the lugs should be loose enough. So I was like... but the other supervisor said to crack them loose first because it’s easier. The response I got was “well I can see why she said that if it was a Toyota” and my final response was … we literally just worked with a small Japanese sedan.

This sounds like a typical issue with work and managerial styles. She does it one way, the other manager does it another way. The other way sounds safer and more logical in your analogy. Unless it is hazardous, I'd likely do it her way (or the new way) when you're working with her. As you rise in your career, you'll be able to choose your own way later and nobody will care as long as things are done well.

I'm not sure, but it sounds like she may be having some issues with people challenging her competence or position and that could cause her to be bossier even when it isn't rational.

I think there's two problems here. 1 - I don't really know what goes on in a reference check, and to what level the supervisor answers any questions. 2 - The issues with using someone else is that I get far less time with them, so I could use the junior supervisors but I've only done a few jobs with them and so I know I could perform better with them now but I probably won't get much more opportunity with them and so, once again I don't really know if I should use them because I don't really know what goes on in reference checks.

I can't help you in this case because I don't know your career path or what the interviewing process is like in that career or in your country. Do you have anyone in your field to ask?

 

[Enso]

I can't help you in this case because I don't know your career path or what the interviewing process is like in that career or in your country. Do you have anyone in your field to ask?

That's ok, I appreciate the response.

 

[mintoots]

Asking her for recommendation might create good energy between you. Maybe it's healthy competition she's after. Maybe she'll appreciate that you appreciate her that way? Not really sure though as I don't know much about her. Do you have fears that she may not be a good reference? Why do you say she is a wildcard?

 

[Enso]

Asking her for recommendation might create good energy between you. Maybe it's healthy competition she's after. Maybe she'll appreciate that you appreciate her that way? Not really sure though as I don't know much about her. Do you have fears that she may not be a good reference? Why do you say she is a wildcard?

I guess it's because she seems to have such a high standard even if she delivers it with a smile. Also, I'm a fairly relaxed agreeable person, so when people ask for feedback (even if its like a shopping survey) I tend to just give people 5 stars. If I were the supervisor, as long as the intern turned up roughly on time, assisted me, and didn't really bother me, I would probably give them a 5 star reference. However, I understand not everyone is like me, and so I really never know what to expect out of people.

I don't think the other relaxed junior supervisors are wildcards because of their relaxed nature, I'm fairly sure they are happy with me (though I can't be 100% certain) - once again I'm assuming they have the same standards as me, because they are more relaxed like me, by logical deduction they should have fairly similar expectations - generally turn up on time etc.

I guess to put it into MBTI context, it's like an NF concerned about what the ST is going to say about them even if I get along with them.

 

[mintoots]

I guess it's because she seems to have such a high standard even if she delivers it with a smile. Also, I'm a fairly relaxed agreeable person, so when people ask for feedback (even if its like a shopping survey) I tend to just give people 5 stars. If I were the supervisor, as long as the intern turned up roughly on time, assisted me, and didn't really bother me, I would probably give them a 5 star reference. However, I understand not everyone is like me, and so I really never know what to expect out of people.

I don't think the other relaxed junior supervisors are wildcards because of their relaxed nature, I'm fairly sure they are happy with me (though I can't be 100% certain) - once again I'm assuming they have the same standards as me, because they are more relaxed like me, by logical deduction they should have fairly similar expectations - generally turn up on time etc.

I guess to put it into MBTI context, it's like an NF concerned about what the ST is going to say about them even if I get along with them.

So by a wildcard you mean that you fear she may write you a lukewarm reference letter or that you fear she may have a bad reputation preceding her? I think it might be worth the shot though to have her write it. If she is as competent as you set her out to be, she may surely be well connected. It matters where you are applying to for sure as they may be looking for something specific.

 

[Asa]

@Enso – If you were to ask her for a reference, might she say, "No," if she didn't think she'd write a glowing one?

 

[Wyote]

I can't speak on her or the situation with clarity, you'll have a better sense of it by being more directly involved.
But I've found more often than not a person in higher power/with greater influence will simply refuse to write a recommendation rather than accept and write a bad one.
Unless you've made some egregious mistakes and they feel some sort of obligation to inform others about it.
If you massively fuck up, you pretty much always know you've done so, and wouldn't be as inclined to ask anyway.
If you feel some hesitation about it, it's good to listen to that probably.

 

[John K]

@Enso is your position a formal one, or more like a grace and favour position? I ask because we used to take on sandwich students from university in the information systems department I worked for and, like full-time employees and contract staff, we agreed clear work objectives and clear personal development objectives with them. We reviewed them regularly against these so it was clear to them and to us how they were doing - these were then a really good foundation for any references we provided at the end of their time with us, and they had written performance review statements from us to take away with them.

This was a good way of overcoming the situation you find yourself in, where you aren't really sure what your supervisor thinks of you as you progress. If your organisation doesn't do this sort of thing formally, there is no harm in exploring with her whether you could formalise things along these lines just for you, so that you could have a clear idea of how you are progressing, and what you are achieving. You could start by writing down some objectives for yourself, both work and personal development, and use these as a basis for discussion and agreement.

It's hard to assess whether a particular percentage of ok-ness is good enough or not because it depends on what the activities are, and what your role is within the team. I would like to know the plane crew flying me across the world are at 100%, but often in software development an 80% solution was better that a 100% one that would take 10 times longer to deliver. Similarly, a back room activity is likely to need a less tight supervisory oversight than one that puts you in front of external clients as a representative of your organisation.

 

[Enso]

Thanks for the responses, I was going to respond individually because everyone has added something. I had forgotten that we do get an evaluation at the end, it's kind of informal but there is one piece of paper where the supervisor ticks certain boxes to indicate performance. I'm thinking that I'll see what this senior supervisor says in that review and depending on that I'll ask her. Regardless I think I'm going to use the other "junior" supervisors. It's a little awkward because for some reason that department is hard to contact, so I'll have to get email addresses at minimum, but I'll probably end up contacting the junior supervisors right before a job and just hope for the best with the senior one.

I think I have to consider that the senior one really doesn't care about references etc, so she's doing her best to teach me and so I know it's not personal but I am having issues with general managerial styles as Asa put it because she couldn't admit when something clearly made no sense (no-ones perfect). I'm starting to think she couldn't admit the junior manager was correct because threat of the hierarchy being upset. A more junior person shouldn't know better.

 

[John K]

Do make the most of these observations while you are in your current position @Enso. As an INFJ you may even pick up nuances that the guys themselves are not aware of.

Some supervisors wear their badge of office too heavily and try and use it to cover up their own weaknesses. But then some staff members think they know better when they are simply less experienced - or where there are several equally good ways of doing something and the situation has got a bit political.

A good supervisor can lead people who know far more than they do about specific areas of expertise. They will be comfortable acknowledging this and will seek and accept relevant specialist leadership from their staff where it’s appropriate. As an example think of a school head who was originally a history teacher supervising staff who teach maths, physics etc. Or an orchestra conductor who can only play the piano themselves.

I’m not saying your senior supervisor is falling down in these things - I don’t know. What I’m saying is that seeing this sort of stuff played out amongst people and understanding it is as useful as the rest of the work experience you will bring away with you. More so in fact because it’s valid in every work situation.

 

[Enso]

So thanks for all the responses.

I think I figured out what it is. It’s to do with the “student-teacher” relationship. The people I’m working with have done the job for many years and my ‘senior’ supervisor could probably be involved in research if she wanted. I can do the job like them 80% from being shown & common sense, but they don’t even expect that. The relationship is actually a very supportive relationship their trying to offer, as in, you try a few things here and there and you’re not expected to be perfect, the teacher just wants some excuses to “teach” even if the performance was perfect. They obviously feel safe in that position and feel they have earned it, as they are the top boss.

I was trying to take in the information and work hard to do better, and essentially assume the role of that job- but they don’t want that, because, the teacher loses that level of control & they feel it is important that I know why I’m doing every step. When you try to be too independent it comes across as competitive and slightly narcissistic and people tend to mirror that back to you. The thing is, that wasn’t what I was going for, I just wanted a good reference so I was trying real hard.

Personally this psychology seems crazy to me, but I get that every other supervisor is going to be like this. I have a completely different philosophy. If I had an intern come in and do my job for me, I’d be thrilled, even if they didn’t know why they were doing every single step, I’d have a chat to them after and feel no problems with giving them 4-5 star performance reviews. However, I very much doubt anyone else thinks this way, for some reason that’s just too intimidating, it’s too much independence for an unqualified person. Long story short, it’s all socially nuanced and there was never any possibility of me getting anything over maybe a 3.5 score overall for the length of my stay and the level of education – not that I really care, I just wanted a good reference. Best advice I figured out is just to enjoy myself in those situations. Ironically I have heard of some bosses that will push you and have higher expectations of you, but once again, I highly doubt they are ever going to give you more than an average review. From my perspective I don’t get it but that’s just social dynamics.

I think I remember a quote along the lines of "perfection indicates an absence of love"

 

[Matty]

Hi all,

For my work I'm kind of like an "intern" and I will be closer to being qualified at the end of the year. I'm not really an intern but it's probably the closest similar example. As part of my "internship" I work with another professional institution for a month and see a supervisor at the institution one day every week. So I go to this place every week and my supervisor is very qualified. She is very nice and friendly and I can't complain about her being an all-round awesome person.

The thing is, I'm not fully qualified so the "internship" thing is a huge learning experience. After going for a few days now I've developed this ambivalent perspective towards my supervisor/situation. I want to use this supervisor as one of my references on my resume (I'm 99% sure she would say yes). After a few sessions with her, I've begun to understand what I was doing at like a 45% level, and then I would go home and study all the procedures for the workplace etc so I can get better. I'm now finding that I can't seem to do most things correctly and it makes no sense.

On occasion I work with another few people at that location and they are chilled af. So I'll do the job maybe at like a 75-80% level, and they'll just be like "good work, maybe try x next time". However, my main supervisor has kind of gotten to a point now where she just takes over every time I try to develop some independence. I'm not sure if she's being controlling, threatened by me, or she's just a perfectionist. She is the most qualified person, and I can tell she has decades of random knowledge in her head, but she tells me contradicting things. I feel so much happier around the other "junior" supervisors because they are not management and they are just happy the job gets done at an acceptable level like 80%. So now I'm not sure if I should ask this supervisor to be a reference on my resume. I feel she's a wildcard. I genuinely don't know how she would rate me because she's constantly rating me very nicely all day and interrupting my job because I was 2 seconds to slow to do something, or worded something very slightly different to her in front of clients.

The reason I'm posting this I guess is because it's not that I don't like her or I don't like her advice or anything, it's just that I don't know whether the whole thing is more about her than me, because she's so qualified and experienced I understand that's how she is, but at the same time she's starting to contradict herself, and I feel she's a wildcard and I've given up trying to impress her. I've also noticed that even though she's an awesome person, there is still a very subtle boss vibe. In so much as, when she's not around everyone is like 15% more relaxed, it's not because of her personality but simply because of her position.

Anyway, thanks for any responses.

Don't fear referees that will be less than complimentary of you. Ending up in jobs one isn't able to adequately perform in has a very negative effect on one's reputation and learning trajectory.

Don't look at bosses as parental figures, whose approval you want to earn. They're customers paying a LOT of money for something, and they're going to be very picky about getting what they're paying for.

Imagine paying two people $60 an hour to landscape your garden. How would you view them, if they were being casual, chatting, and taking their time? How vigilant would you be, if you saw them starting to lay down sprinkler system piping to areas which you already told them would be covered by a concrete slab?

 

[Wyote]

Imagine paying two people $60 an hour to landscape your garden. How would you view them

 

[Enso]

I think I figured out a formula:

The bigger the organization, the more management and the more collaboration that is involved in a job (termed negatively, co-dependence on others in a team to do a job, even if it's simple) and subsequently less independence is possible. The smaller the organization, the less collaboration is available/required to do a job and subsequently the more independence is given. This seems to be my fundamental issue is that I keep running into opposite personalities to me in large organizations. The typical managerial types really don't like the idea of not seeing one of their staff for over a week even if their doing their job correctly - This is also because those managers feel their are not being supportive enough if that is the case. All management in big organizations tends to be the same sort of managerial archetype that only allows a certain amount of independence. However, as @John K and @Sometimes Yeah has said above I should recognise it as a good environment for growth professionally, which I do. But overall, it's been a really good experience because now I know I want a job in a smaller organization with more independence. This isn't just from this 1 experience, I've had similar issues in other jobs.