The Official "WWWD?" Thread

[ArkieDukie]

Just got confirmation that I was correct in what I was saying when BM cut me off at group meeting. I need to decide how I'm going to handle it. What I'd like to do is send an email to BM's boss, but I'm not sure that's advisable. An email to the entire group would not be worth the trouble it would cause. Frankly, I suspect she would escalate her apparent game of one-upsmanship and will become even more difficult to work with. Maybe I should save it for the discussion with BM's boss? Would love for some input.

I'd go to her boss and see what she does with it, BM needs to be put in her place, even if that's out the door. And, you'll know where you stand with her, without having to wait years to find out. But I do have one question: as a new employee, are you in a probationary period, fireable without cause?? That might change my suggestion if it puts you at risk.

I am currently in my probationary period and am evaluated by my boss after 6 months.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

Just got confirmation that I was correct in what I was saying when BM cut me off at group meeting. I need to decide how I'm going to handle it. What I'd like to do is send an email to BM's boss, but I'm not sure that's advisable. An email to the entire group would not be worth the trouble it would cause. Frankly, I suspect she would escalate her apparent game of one-upsmanship and will become even more difficult to work with. Maybe I should save it for the discussion with BM's boss? Would love for some input.

I'd go to her boss and see what she does with it, BM needs to be put in her place, even if that's out the door. And, you'll know where you stand with her, without having to wait years to find out. But I do have one question: as a new employee, are you in a probationary period, fireable without cause?? That might change my suggestion if it puts you at risk.

I am currently in my probationary period and am evaluated by my boss after 6 months.

What's the organizational chart look like - your boss in relation to BM's boss, and how well do they play together? Or do you both work for the same person?

[ArkieDukie]

What's the organizational chart look like - your boss in relation to BM's boss, and how well do they play together? Or do you both work for the same person?

We're in the same department, so BM's boss and I work for the same person. BM's boss has far more political clout than I do (full professor).

[OZZIE4DUKE]

What's the organizational chart look like - your boss in relation to BM's boss, and how well do they play together? Or do you both work for the same person?

We're in the same department, so BM's boss and I work for the same person. BM's boss has far more political clout than I do (full professor).

But your first meeting with BM's boss about BM went well, from what you've said. Has she talked to BM yet? Either way, give her an update, but keep it friendly and light. You're in the right, BM is wrong on her procedures and needs to shape up, at least acknowledging that your more knowledgeable and experienced than she is, and you can help her do better and grow. You're not her enemy, unless she makes you one.

[ArkieDukie]

What's the organizational chart look like - your boss in relation to BM's boss, and how well do they play together? Or do you both work for the same person?

We're in the same department, so BM's boss and I work for the same person. BM's boss has far more political clout than I do (full professor).

But your first meeting with BM's boss about BM went well, from what you've said. Has she talked to BM yet? Either way, give her an update, but keep it friendly and light. You're in the right, BM is wrong on her procedures and needs to shape up, at least acknowledging that your more knowledgeable and experienced than she is, and you can help her do better and grow. You're not her enemy, unless she makes you one.

That is correct. I think this needs to be a part of the discussion about BM. Something along the lines of "I've worked with her type before, and I don't like the direction things are headed. The situation needs to be fixed." Fortunately I've been in this situation enough to know what not to do. Keeping silent and dealing with it myself does not work. With both Supervisor Barbie and The Minion, I kept silent for too long. By the time I finally got fed up and said something, both had poisoned the well against me. The problem needs to be nipped in the bud.

[CathyCA]

That is correct. I think this needs to be a part of the discussion about BM. Something along the lines of "I've worked with her type before, and I don't like the direction things are headed. The situation needs to be fixed." Fortunately I've been in this situation enough to know what not to do. Keeping silent and dealing with it myself does not work. With both Supervisor Barbie and The Minion, I kept silent for too long. By the time I finally got fed up and said something, both had poisoned the well against me. The problem needs to be nipped in the bud.

I wouldn't go there by characterizing her "type." I don't think you've been there long enough to make that sort of generalization with her boss.

I'm not Windsor, but here is what I would do. I would have a face to face with my boss. I would tell my boss what you wrote here:

Now, fast forward to group meeting this afternoon. Some mention was made of meeting to discuss our special project, at which point BarMinion jumps in to say that we can't do anything else on the project until our new collaborator responds and tells us what to do. Uh, I made a suggestion and she thought we should try it. Apparently my suggestions don't count. Then, when I'm discussing something else we need to do (unrelated to first point), BarMinion INTERRUPTED me to tell me that I was wrong. I simply repeated what I said the first time: I asked our trainer SPECIFICALLY about the issue and was relaying what I was told. BarMinion corrected me again. I let it drop at that point, because I refused to get into an argument with the idiot in front of the entire group. Once I get an answer from our trainer to confirm what I said in group meeting, I will relay the information to BarMinion's boss.

Let your boss know that you got an answer to the question from the trainer, and that you were right, as you had suspected in the first place. Tell your boss that you don't appreciate being corrected (wrongly) in front of the group by someone who interrupted you.

Stick to the facts. Don't generalize or pigeon hole BM to your boss yet.

I imagine that BM has been a problem since before you got there. If you have your meeting in a facts-only, unemotional manner, you may help provide your boss and BM's boss with the information they've been waiting for and needing to counsel/discipline BM.

Stay calm and unemotional.

[windsor]

Stick to the facts. Don't generalize or pigeon hole BM to your boss yet.

I imagine that BM has been a problem since before you got there. If you have your meeting in a facts-only, unemotional manner, you may help provide your boss and BM's boss with the information they've been waiting for and needing to counsel/discipline BM.

Stay calm and unemotional.

I agree 100%. While we all understand you have been down this particular rathole before and have the scars to prove it, this is a new place, and you are still new to the dynamics. Factual and calm...with an emphasis on wanting to get along and establish a good working relationship.

[ArkieDukie]

Update: the meeting was this afternoon. It actually went pretty well. BM started out being a bit pushy, but she eventually backed down. She mentioned something about waiting for info from our collaborator, and I made a point of saying that the two of us knew what we wanted the instrument to do and were waiting for word from other people within her company. Basically, I somewhat diplomatically excluded BM from the experts on the instrument method.

I do think that BM's boss had a chat with her, and I didn't have to say a word. She was far nicer today than she has been recently. I just love having a colleague who recognizes an opportunist in her midst.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

[ArkieDukie]

After our big instrument training class a couple of weeks ago, "we" (BarMinion) started having trouble with the instrument. It was blamed on the person who did the training class, but my gut told me that the source of the problem was the one slinging the mud. Turns out I was right.

I walked into the lab today to find the service engineer from St. Louis (!) in the lab. We took a couple of minutes to get caught up, and she started working on the instrument that was allegedly messed up. She discovered pretty quickly that BarMinion had botched the instrument calibration so badly that you couldn't even see a signal for the calibration solution. There's no way she could blame anyone else since the tune file was dated well after the training class was over. She's still saying that the person who taught our training class messed up the instrument. Instrument log files don't lie, although BM tried to, and she got our trainer in trouble with her superiors.

The service engineer from St. Louis is a friend, and she's extremely competent. Off the record, I told the service engineer what my gut told me. I also passed along some issues that she might want to stress with BM (things she had been told in training but had chosen to ignore). Once BM finally showed up, she started mentioning at every possible opportunity that the instrument had been messed up since the trainer had left. She also flat-out lied and said she didn't do some things that I saw her do. Fortunately the service engineer can diplomatically word the report in such a way that the blame will be placed in the appropriate place, and she will privately make sure that the person who trained us is cleared.

Now for the question: if the issue is ever raised, should I tell BarMinion's boss who actually caused the instrument problems or should I bite my tongue? I think my other colleague may suspect now; he was able to talk to the service engineer. She never actually came out and said that BarMinion messed it up, but he can probably connect the dots. If BM's boss reads the service report, she may be able to connect the dots as well.

[DukieInKansas]

After our big instrument training class a couple of weeks ago, "we" (BarMinion) started having trouble with the instrument. It was blamed on the person who did the training class, but my gut told me that the source of the problem was the one slinging the mud. Turns out I was right.

I walked into the lab today to find the service engineer from St. Louis (!) in the lab. We took a couple of minutes to get caught up, and she started working on the instrument that was allegedly messed up. She discovered pretty quickly that BarMinion had botched the instrument calibration so badly that you couldn't even see a signal for the calibration solution. There's no way she could blame anyone else since the tune file was dated well after the training class was over. She's still saying that the person who taught our training class messed up the instrument. Instrument log files don't lie, although BM tried to, and she got our trainer in trouble with her superiors.

The service engineer from St. Louis is a friend, and she's extremely competent. Off the record, I told the service engineer what my gut told me. I also passed along some issues that she might want to stress with BM (things she had been told in training but had chosen to ignore). Once BM finally showed up, she started mentioning at every possible opportunity that the instrument had been messed up since the trainer had left. She also flat-out lied and said she didn't do some things that I saw her do. Fortunately the service engineer can diplomatically word the report in such a way that the blame will be placed in the appropriate place, and she will privately make sure that the person who trained us is cleared.

Now for the question: if the issue is ever raised, should I tell BarMinion's boss who actually caused the instrument problems or should I bite my tongue? I think my other colleague may suspect now; he was able to talk to the service engineer. She never actually came out and said that BarMinion messed it up, but he can probably connect the dots. If BM's boss reads the service report, she may be able to connect the dots as well.

Perhaps, if the subject comes up, you can let BarMinion's boss know that you think the service report covered what happened with the issue. It sounds like BM's boss is a savvy person and will read the report and connect said dots - if BM's B hasn't already done that.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

Isn't there a candy called "Dots"? If so, I'd buy a box and give it to BM's boss.

[Miles]

After our big instrument training class a couple of weeks ago, "we" (BarMinion) started having trouble with the instrument. It was blamed on the person who did the training class, but my gut told me that the source of the problem was the one slinging the mud. Turns out I was right.

I walked into the lab today to find the service engineer from St. Louis (!) in the lab. We took a couple of minutes to get caught up, and she started working on the instrument that was allegedly messed up. She discovered pretty quickly that BarMinion had botched the instrument calibration so badly that you couldn't even see a signal for the calibration solution. There's no way she could blame anyone else since the tune file was dated well after the training class was over. She's still saying that the person who taught our training class messed up the instrument. Instrument log files don't lie, although BM tried to, and she got our trainer in trouble with her superiors.

The service engineer from St. Louis is a friend, and she's extremely competent. Off the record, I told the service engineer what my gut told me. I also passed along some issues that she might want to stress with BM (things she had been told in training but had chosen to ignore). Once BM finally showed up, she started mentioning at every possible opportunity that the instrument had been messed up since the trainer had left. She also flat-out lied and said she didn't do some things that I saw her do. Fortunately the service engineer can diplomatically word the report in such a way that the blame will be placed in the appropriate place, and she will privately make sure that the person who trained us is cleared.

Now for the question: if the issue is ever raised, should I tell BarMinion's boss who actually caused the instrument problems or should I bite my tongue? I think my other colleague may suspect now; he was able to talk to the service engineer. She never actually came out and said that BarMinion messed it up, but he can probably connect the dots. If BM's boss reads the service report, she may be able to connect the dots as well.

Perhaps, if the subject comes up, you can let BarMinion's boss know that you think the service report covered what happened with the issue. It sounds like BM's boss is a savvy person and will read the report and connect said dots - if BM's B hasn't already done that.

Great advice. I like the idea of supporting the findings in the report. Hopefully you're recognized for objectivity instead of perceived as instigating. Does that make sense?

[Turk]

Now for the question: if the issue is ever raised, should I tell BarMinion's boss who actually caused the instrument problems or should I bite my tongue? I think my other colleague may suspect now; he was able to talk to the service engineer. She never actually came out and said that BarMinion messed it up, but he can probably connect the dots. If BM's boss reads the service report, she may be able to connect the dots as well.

Nope. My call is to be quiet. Problem solved, next play. If it comes up, I'd say, "Yeah, we got it straightened out. What a PITA. The good news is I'm pretty sure THAT's not going to happen again (looking right at BM if she happens to be part of the conversation). I'm pretty sure I have a copy of the service report; if you haven't seen it I can send it to you."

[windsor]

Now for the question: if the issue is ever raised, should I tell BarMinion's boss who actually caused the instrument problems or should I bite my tongue? I think my other colleague may suspect now; he was able to talk to the service engineer. She never actually came out and said that BarMinion messed it up, but he can probably connect the dots. If BM's boss reads the service report, she may be able to connect the dots as well.

I would only mention it if it comes up, and I would refer to the service report. You might need a "this service report indicates the problem may have been elsewhere" if there there is a Trainer bus toss.

If BarMinion continue to blame the Trainer I'd refer HER to the service report.

[ArkieDukie]

Good advice, all - thanks!

BM's boss has been out of the country; she returned yesterday. We were discussing the service engineer visit and the fact that I had worked with her due to BM's unavailability (training on another instrument). Mention was made of the problem (corrupted tune file), and I casually said, "Yeah, the date on the tune file was April 17." We haven't received the service report yet (I'm being bcc'd), so this was my diplomatic way of letting her know that the person being blamed by BM was in the clear without actually saying the words. Hopefully she's smart enough to have figured that out already. BM had already told her the problem was a corrupted tune file, but I'd bet money she left out the fact that the messed up tune file happened on her watch.

[ArkieDukie]

I got an email today from BM's boss; attached was the text for our poster at the upcoming conference that I'm attending. Upon reading it, I learned that BM was promoted to co-1st author, along with the grad student who did the work. I'm third author. I'm trying to decide how ticked I should be about this. The project was stalled when I got here because of a rookie league mistake that BM made in the analysis, and one of the experiments being featured is one that I designed (and BM promptly commandeered). In other words, it appears to me that she was promoted to co-first author status based on my intellectual contributions. It feels like this collaboration is a one-way street in which I feed them ideas and am then promptly shut out of the process.

I used to think BM's boss was on my side, but BM's first authorship on this poster makes me doubt that. Now that I know which way the wind blows, I think it is time to gracefully excuse myself from this project. There are plenty of other people here who want to work with me without wasting my time on people who basically steal my ideas and then leave me out of the loop. Been there, done that, bought the t-shirt. (My old boss at the health dept has, at last count, 2 publications that are based on project ideas that I outlined. I am not on the list of coauthors for either project.)

So, what do the rest of you think? Am I over-reacting, or do I have a right to be upset? Lavabe, this is a good situation for you to address as an academician.

[Lavabe]

I got an email today from BM's boss; attached was the text for our poster at the upcoming conference that I'm attending. Upon reading it, I learned that BM was promoted to co-1st author, along with the grad student who did the work. I'm third author. I'm trying to decide how ticked I should be about this. The project was stalled when I got here because of a rookie league mistake that BM made in the analysis, and one of the experiments being featured is one that I designed (and BM promptly commandeered). In other words, it appears to me that she was promoted to co-first author status based on my intellectual contributions. It feels like this collaboration is a one-way street in which I feed them ideas and am then promptly shut out of the process.

I used to think BM's boss was on my side, but BM's first authorship on this poster makes me doubt that. Now that I know which way the wind blows, I think it is time to gracefully excuse myself from this project. There are plenty of other people here who want to work with me without wasting my time on people who basically steal my ideas and then leave me out of the loop. Been there, done that, bought the t-shirt. (My old boss at the health dept has, at last count, 2 publications that are based on project ideas that I outlined. I am not on the list of coauthors for either project.)

So, what do the rest of you think? Am I over-reacting, or do I have a right to be upset? Lavabe, this is a good situation for you to address as an academician.

Ycch. In the meantime...
1) Who wrote the poster?
2) What was the list of authors before this email?
3) Are you 3rd of three authors, or 3rd of 4+ authors?
4) Did this project begin before your arrival?

[ArkieDukie]

I got an email today from BM's boss; attached was the text for our poster at the upcoming conference that I'm attending. Upon reading it, I learned that BM was promoted to co-1st author, along with the grad student who did the work. I'm third author. I'm trying to decide how ticked I should be about this. The project was stalled when I got here because of a rookie league mistake that BM made in the analysis, and one of the experiments being featured is one that I designed (and BM promptly commandeered). In other words, it appears to me that she was promoted to co-first author status based on my intellectual contributions. It feels like this collaboration is a one-way street in which I feed them ideas and am then promptly shut out of the process.

I used to think BM's boss was on my side, but BM's first authorship on this poster makes me doubt that. Now that I know which way the wind blows, I think it is time to gracefully excuse myself from this project. There are plenty of other people here who want to work with me without wasting my time on people who basically steal my ideas and then leave me out of the loop. Been there, done that, bought the t-shirt. (My old boss at the health dept has, at last count, 2 publications that are based on project ideas that I outlined. I am not on the list of coauthors for either project.)

So, what do the rest of you think? Am I over-reacting, or do I have a right to be upset? Lavabe, this is a good situation for you to address as an academician.

Ycch. In the meantime...
1) Who wrote the poster?
2) What was the list of authors before this email?
3) Are you 3rd of three authors, or 3rd of 4+ authors?
4) Did this project begin before your arrival?

1. The poster was written primarily by the grad student (the original sole first author). AFAIK BM didn't write any of it.
2. Before the email, BM was 2nd author and the grad student was sole first author.
3. I'm 3rd of 5 authors.
4. The project began before my arrival and was completely stalled when I got here. The date on the first experiment was in January; I started here in March. The abstract was submitted before my arrival, and I was added after I corrected a mistake that BM made in the initial data analysis. The poster features an experiment that was my idea. I designed it along with BM's boss. From all appearances, BM is running the project. She's the one who makes final decisions on what experiments will be performed.

I think my biggest problem is BM's promotion to co first author. I have no issue with her being 2nd author ahead of me since she did play a greater role in the day-to-day work. Since it appears that her boss has pretty much turned the project over to her, maybe she's earned it. (Actually, if that's the case, why isn't she senior author instead of co-first author?)

Maybe I just misunderstood my role in this project. I thought this is one of the projects I was supposed to work on when I was hired. Instead, I learned upon my arrival that the project was given to another lab, and I was supposed to be helping them. I did not envision having someone else take my ideas and carry out the experiments I designed (with their own revisions) while leaving me out of the loop regarding results. Isn't collaboration supposed to be a 2-way street? I do not want the role of being the brains behind the scenes for yet another opportunistic climber. Been there, done that.

[Lavabe]

1. The poster was written primarily by the grad student (the original sole first author). AFAIK BM didn't write any of it.
2. Before the email, BM was 2nd author and the grad student was sole first author.
3. I'm 3rd of 5 authors.
4. The project began before my arrival and was completely stalled when I got here. The date on the first experiment was in January; I started here in March. The abstract was submitted before my arrival, and I was added after I corrected a mistake that BM made in the initial data analysis. The poster features an experiment that was my idea. I designed it along with BM's boss. From all appearances, BM is running the project. She's the one who makes final decisions on what experiments will be performed.

I think my biggest problem is BM's promotion to co first author. I have no issue with her being 2nd author ahead of me since she did play a greater role in the day-to-day work. Since it appears that her boss has pretty much turned the project over to her, maybe she's earned it. (Actually, if that's the case, why isn't she senior author instead of co-first author?)

Maybe I just misunderstood my role in this project. I thought this is one of the projects I was supposed to work on when I was hired. Instead, I learned upon my arrival that the project was given to another lab, and I was supposed to be helping them. I did not envision having someone else take my ideas and carry out the experiments I designed (with their own revisions) while leaving me out of the loop regarding results. Isn't collaboration supposed to be a 2-way street? I do not want the role of being the brains behind the scenes for yet another opportunistic climber. Been there, done that.

I've never heard of a co-first author before... whose name goes first? Call me silly, but what exactly is the difference in terms of citations, responsibilities, etc...?