|
|
|
|
|
|
by sootzoo
3626 days ago
|
|
|
> They are conspiring to replace an existing employee. That says enough. If the organization were "healthy" they would be upfront with the existing manager and allow him/her to gracefully exit. You seem to start from this very distrustful premise and never look back. Would you say the same of someone who gives significant notice of their departure (say, a retirement or medical situation) to the relevant supervisors but doesn't inform subordinates until a replacement is on board? What if that person were a fairly high ranking one in the organizational structure, as it sounds this one is? Confidential replacement is pretty typical when the outgoing leader has no apparent (temporary) replacement and transitioning duties twice would be difficult/disruptive. It's not broken culture to ensure the wheels keep turning despite a pending high-profile departure. Not to mention, if a manager and two tech leads are involved, it's pretty likely the outgoing manager is at least peripherally aware of the situation. You could very well be right about this employer, but the presumption that the nature of the search is somehow underhanded or deceitful is pretty one-sided. |
|
|
The OP writes "they want to replace the existing manager". Chances are this would have been phrased "the existing manager is moving on" if no deceit was involved.
> Would you say the same of someone who gives significant notice of their departure
When to make the information known to the rest of the team should be a management team decision. I don't think there is a one-size-fits-all answer.
> What if that person were a fairly high ranking one in the organizational structure
Finding a replacement before announcing the departure to the team makes sense. It sounds like in the OP's situation the outgoing manager is not aware of his/her status.
> Confidential replacement is pretty typical when the outgoing leader has no apparent (temporary) replacement and transitioning duties twice would be difficult/disruptive. It's not broken culture to ensure the wheels keep turning despite a pending high-profile departure.
Not sure if you are referring to keeping it confidential from the employee being replaced or from the rest of the team.
> ...the presumption that the nature of the search is somehow underhanded or deceitful is pretty one-sided
I think you are suggesting that it is appropriate (not deceitful) to attempt to hire the replacement before informing the current manager. Ideally in situations where something isn't working out, both parties can collaborate to phase things out in a mutually respectful way, especially in a startup.
Yes, in big companies there is an HR department and all sorts of reasons why "typical" HR practices make sense. But a person joining a startup should feel that the team he/she is joining is not typical and has the sort of integrity to act cooperative (in a game theoretic sense) in these sorts of scenarios.
FWIW these sorts of scenarios are inevitable. Sometimes employment arrangements don't work out. How they are handled offers an indication of the character of the management team.