Training Slimeballs in the workplace

Neon_Lights

Currently I'm training a member of my team to do some review tasks of my work from development. He's a BA, and I'm a developer

I get the feeling though that he's trying to overstep the mark here and take over responsibilities from me. I have no problem with the review, but training him to take over technical tasks where he's not best placed to is a little disconcerting. I appreciate somebody has to learn, but he's carried out a few development tasks for the team as of late which were woefully Implemented and I had to double back on. We are tied resources wise, but I think training this guy is a dangerous move time wise.

Wanderer2010

To be frank, when I read your description of "slime balls" I instantly thought less of you than anyone you may be training. It would be very interesting to get both sides of this story...

jimmycrackcorm

If he deficient babe the technical background then why is he doing development tasks.

If he needs involvement due to twice constraints then get him to help in testing.

_Brian

I think the trainers attitude could be the problem as per referring to someone doing their job as a "slimeball".

Neon_Lights

_Brian wrote: »

I think the trainers attitude could be the problem as per referring to someone doing their job as a "slimeball".

Sigh, this.

You know in an office where you have people doing things that have no place doing them, and aren't well competent enough to pick something up, due to previous education and experience, who you repeatedly explain things to and not having done the fundamental grunt work, who have a silo ed view if the world in a myopic task as opposed to having an architectural view. But yet feel entitled that they need responsibility. This in turn leads the company wasting time and money by releasing botched solutions. All because a person wanted to do something they haven't done the groundwork for.

That's a slimeball.

Wanderer2010

Neon_Lights wrote: »

Sigh, this.

You know in an office where you have people doing things that have no place doing them, and aren't well competent enough to pick something up, due to previous education and experience, who you repeatedly explain things to and not having done the fundamental grunt work, who have a silo ed view if the world in a myopic task as opposed to having an architectural view. But yet feel entitled that they need responsibility. This in turn leads the company wasting time and money by releasing botched solutions. All because a person wanted to do something they haven't done the groundwork for.

That's a slimeball.

You coming on to a forum to ask for advice on how to train a "slimeball" says more about your awful manner and character than it does any people you train. Are you aware of the fact that using words like architectural and botched in a pathetic attempt to promote you to an intellect and demote your trainees to that of pond life just makes you come across an absolute dcikhead?
Put it this way- I don't even know you and already I dislike you.

beauf

Neon_Lights wrote: »

Currently I'm training a member of my team to do some review tasks of my work from development. He's a BA, and I'm a developer

I get the feeling though that he's trying to overstep the mark here and take over responsibilities from me. I have no problem with the review, but training him to take over technical tasks where he's not best placed to is a little disconcerting. I appreciate somebody has to learn, but he's carried out a few development tasks for the team as of late which were woefully Implemented and I had to double back on. We are tied resources wise, but I think training this guy is a dangerous move time wise.

I don't really understand your comments, or the work practice you describe. or the title.

Either the guy isn't capable or hasn't been trained well or perhaps, its just a bad process that has been forced on you, and you disagree with it fundamentally.

I think you really want to move some where that has a more professional development team and roles. I get the impression from other comments you've made its more of an ad hoc development team, where people are expected to do more than one role.

Zaph

I'm not entirely sure a slimeball is what you think it is, hence the questions about your use of the word. Here are a couple of dictionary definitions to help you out:

A very unpleasant person whose friendly manner is not sincere

A very bad, unpleasant, or dishonest person

Neon_Lights

Neon_Lights wrote: »

Currently I'm training a member of my team to do some review tasks of my work from development. He's a BA, and I'm a developer

I get the feeling though that he's trying to overstep the mark here and take over responsibilities from me. I have no problem with the review, but training him to take over technical tasks where he's not best placed to is a little disconcerting. I appreciate somebody has to learn, but he's carried out a few development tasks for the team as of late which were woefully Implemented and I had to double back on. We are tied resources wise, but I think training this guy is a dangerous move time wise.

Are you looking for advice on how to approach the situation?

Okay then. Park the attitude. Dangerous move time wise? Give it a rest. Don't be so hostile towards someone you will need to work with. If you think it won't be noticed, you are wrong. Try to help him do a better job instead of acting like you know better. You might but it's not your place to be difficult or obstructive when your manager or the owners have decided on who to hire.

Just get on with doing what you've been asked to do by your employer, including training the new guy to do the reviews etc. If that's not okay with you then it's time to look at other places of employment.

Pelvis

It sounds like the business has decided that this guy has to be trained up as you say, but how does that make the guy a "slimeball" (a very odd use of the word in this context). It's hardly his fault that he's not up to the task?

I agree with others, the biggest problem here is the OP.

CruelCoin

Neon_Lights wrote: »

I have no problem with the review, but training him to take over technical tasks where he's not best placed to is a little disconcerting. I appreciate somebody has to learn, but he's carried out a few development tasks for the team as of late which were woefully Implemented and I had to double back on.

Of course he's not up to the mark yet, else he wouldn't need training...

I'll echo an earlier poster: Slimeball in the thread title is interesting, and also how you lead with him trying to take work off you.

Is there more to the story?

bee06

Is he pushing you to train him in stuff he doesn't need to know for his role or is his manager etc telling you he needs to be trained in x, y and z?

Because surely if it's him pushing you can just say that's not part of the training plan.