I am encountering an issue at work related to an administrative assistant who indirectly works for me (her direct supervisor is my “other half” - the AA does work that relates to both of our areas, since our responsibilities are closely intertwined). The AA is a graduate of our graduate program, and she knew the job responsibilities for which she was hired. The job involves answering phones, filing, processing certain requests, taking payments, doing mailings, making signs, and doing other general administrative duties. The AA has been in the job around a year & a half; I know from personal experience that it takes about 2 years to really get the hang of things around here. Her supervisor and I have worked closely with her to add some projects that she enjoys (such as design work), but we are careful to keep the additional responsibilities as one-offs so that she is not given additional responsibilities for which she is not being properly compensated.
We have a couple employees in our office who seem to think they can give her work without consulting her supervisor. Aside from the fact that going around the supervisor is unacceptable … some of these responsibilities interfere with her ability to complete tasks we need completed in a timely manner, and others actually take her away from her desk & thus result in more work for her supervisor and me.
This has become enough of an issue that we talked to our director. Apparently, the other employees had anticipated that this would be an issue, and they had already approached the director. The director informed us that she is of the opinion that this is all well & good. In my conversation with her yesterday, she said something that really got to me: “She is a graduate of our program. Surely, you don’t expect her to just sit and answer phones all day. She needs to be able to do the things that she wants to do, in order to develop herself.” Ummmm … she was hired to sit and answer phones all day. Someone needs to be there to do what she does. If she is gone, two people who were NOT hired to do that have to share those responsibilities, which takes time away from what we are supposed to be doing. And if she doesn’t complete the tasks we need done when we need them done, we have to do those ourselves. We fought hard to get this position to go from 3/4 time to full time a couple years ago because we needed the butt in the seat, doing the tasks required, all day long. (The director is new, so wasn’t the one who fought for us to get the extra hours for the job.)
Are my coworker and I wrong for expecting that an employee should do what she was hired to do, not what she “wants” to do? We are all for adding some challenges within the scope of her job, but that has to come with time (she is not doing what she needs to do as well as she should be yet without supervision … ) and with appropriate compensation.
Your hire is a graduate of your program .Unless you run a secretarial school she should be doing work she was trained for. Your director is right.
If there is enough work that she’s being borrowed by other departments to get work done then perhaps another position be considered if only for a few hours a week to answer phones etc.
I’d maybe log what isn’t gone/missed calls you know about or answer yourself/etc. Take data to the director. If after one more conversation it isn’t changing, I think you are stuck. Also, if the phone is the issue, can she set the phone to forward to her cell, and make it her top priority to pick up if it rings even if she is doing something else?
I’m going to say this, though. Most corporations have done away with admin assistants, except for the very top execs. You are lucky to have a half or 3/4 person. We all do our own filing, etc these days.
@gouf78 - The employee took the job. She needs to be doing what she was hired to do. If she wants to do things she “was trained for” that are beyond the scope of this position, it is on her to look for a new job. It isn’t her supervisors’ responsibility to see that she gets to do anything beyond the scope of the work that they need done and that she was hired to do.
@kelsmom - You are correct. She needs to be doing the work she was hired for. If the other people who keep pulling her away want her to do those things for them, they should hire her full time for that stuff, and free you and your colleague to look for a new AA. Frankly, how long can you realistically expect someone with her training to be content with an AA position? Is it a common first step in her carer field that logically leads somewhere, or is it a stop-gap gig for her. Even though it would mean that you have to start training a new team member, maybe she should be cut loose so you can find someone who has a longer-term attitude about the work.
This is a tough one. Since you now have feedback from the director, you and your co-worker need to decide together what your strategy will be.
It sounds like compromise is your only option. (Though I hope others can chime in with creative options.)
The main point I think you should fight to preserve is that your assistant should only take on work that is given to her by her direct supervisor. And it should have lower priority than her main duties. So, something that could be done at her desk while she answers phones would be less aggravating to you.
So push to have any requests for extra work come to you or your co-worker, and then at least your assistant still reports to the two of you.
I would push back on extra duties that take her away from her desk. Or limit that “away” time to one day a week (assuming you will lose the battle, this is a backup point to push for).
So discuss with your co-worker, and then have an honest discussion with this assistant. What does she want? Is she happy with the extra work? Make sure you take her opinions into consideration as you make decisions.
You have spent time getting her up to speed. If you lose her due to boredom, you have to start over with another employee.
First of all, your main problem is that someone above both you and her direct supervisor think it’s OK that she take on additional tasks. When those additional tasks prevent her from completing her basic tasks, that creates a problem for you two. The focus on any discussion you and the direct supervisor have with the Director should focus only on that basic fact. You have tasks that aren’t being completed, in spite of having a fulltime person assigned to those tasks.
Does this job have a job description? If so, read it to see what it says. If no additional tasks are included, show it to the Director to make her aware. Something will have to give. If there is no job description, tell the Director that you think having one is a good idea. You’ll probably be asked to create it. Then, make sure it meets your and the direct supervisor’s needs.
Can you and her direct supervisor quantify how much time her basic tasks should be taking, or how much time they typically take? If they have typically filled a 40-hour week, it’s hard to see how she would have any time left over to handle other responsibilities. Again, focus on the one fact that you have tasks that require XX hours a week, and if she handles additional tasks her basic tasks don’t get done. The converation shouldn’t have anything to do with the fact that she’s a graduate of your program. Perhaps this job doesn’t require such education, if she’s not using it to perform her basic tasks.
I guess it comes down to if you want this employee to stay or not. I can’t imagine someone with a grad degree wanting to answer phones as their primary responsibility for much longer. In my experience, young hires want to continue to grow and be challenge. If that’s not the environment they are in, they will leave.
Fulfilling the duties of the job she was hired to do is the first step. It’s irrelevant what her credentials are. It doesn’t make sense for the employee to take on other responsibilities (which were seemingly not even earned by good performance in her current job), then shift her current responsibilities to her supervisors.
However, a few things are working against you, including your boss’s perceptions/intent. I would make sure your boss understands that this employee’s performance hasn’t been stellar, nor has she exhibited the skills to work independently. That is highly relevant. I hope those facts have been documented in her reviews.
Secondly, I agree with @intparent that there aren’t many professionals who have access to admin assistants anymore. I think it’s reasonable that the department leader would be seriously looking at the responsibilities of that job (really all jobs), and determine the roles that are necessary. But, I think (?) you work in a dept with heavy call volume, so it may very well make sense to have a dedicated person with phone answering responsibility.
You are going to need to effectively manage upward, by communicating to your boss the performance issues with the current employee, educate him/her on the history and documentation required to justify the AA position, and state your willingness to be part of the process evaluating roles and responsibilities. Maybe your boss isn’t undertaking a full evaluation process position by position, but your willingness to discuss the AA’s role and the current employee’s performance is necessary. Good luck.
If the director had said that to me, I would have said, "I understand it is important to have the employee work on interesting projects and doing secretarial work may not be that challenging for a graduate student. At the same time, the work still needs to get done. Do you think we could take some additional budget to hire a part time person to help out? Or maybe we can ask everyone in the office to help and do their own administrative work. " I would put it back in the director’s court. I bet you the director is going to say there is no budget to get additional help and no one is going to want to fill out forms and answer phones.
Of course, someone should do what they were hired to do. If they want to do move up to do more interesting work then they would need to do it on their own time. I always tell my staff that I expect them to do extra projects outside of their work if they want to get promoted, but it’s up to them to manage their own time.
Does the admin have a say in what tasks she completes? Is there a way for her to decline the other tasks, or is she actively seeking them out?
I work in a hierarchical field, so if an employee is asked by someone higher on the food chain (no matter what the employee’s title or credentials) to do something, there is really no mechanism to decline.
Over credentialing is an issue. There are many jobs that require a degree to be hired, but for which performing the tasks of the job doesn’t need one at all. Same with graduate degrees. People with those credentials often don’t stay in the jobs.
Good comments. I appreciate the feedback - all of it.
The issue for us is that this AA position is a necessity. It could be called something else - other schools might call it a coordinator - but our organization terms positions like this one as AA jobs. We have an extraordinarily lean staff - I mean shoestring lean. I already write and update web content, create forms, file, do data entry, manage our student information system, manage student employment, distribute and collect required forms/information … I have complete responsibility for three very important functions of a college (meaning, I am the ONE who DOES the work for my functional areas, from clerical to high-level decision-making). We have to have someone to respond to applicant requests, student needs, assist with certain events, help get things ready each year, etc. We are a customer service organization, and these tasks are essential. There is only so much my coworker and I can do in a day, and it already takes us far more than 40 hours a week to do what we are tasked to do. That is where the AA comes in.
I work at an art school, and our graduate willingly accepted the tasks of her job. She had reasons for wanting the job -a number of our grads stay on to work after graduation for benefits (they are artists who need to pay the bills). There is a detailed job description. We knew that she wouldn’t want to do the job long-term, although she was more convinced than we were that she would stay a long time. She wasn’t concerned about the lack of challenge. Realistically, no one stays in that sort of job forever, so having someone here for years was not an issue. It’s a job, not a career … some jobs are like that.
Adding: What has been said has provided both food for thought and validation of some of my feelings. The suggestions are great, and I will definitely use the advice! I love CC.
You didn’t hire the correct person for that position. Even if she agreed to take the job, and she probably needed a foot in the door. So now you are left with - do you have the company resources to hire a receptionist? Is she ready for a promotion? Do you care if she leaves or not - keeping in mind the 2 year cycle of training and on boarding?
It drives me nuts at my company how many people come in knowing answering phones is part of their responsibilities, then want to quickly move away from answering phones. I just had an employee ask for a $2/hr raise and not have to answer the phones or help train new people. So let’s see, do less and make more? We have a regulation that requires us to have a receptionist in a front desk area - totally dumb because we don’t get people in this office, but we have to have it, so we just stick someone up there. I know some employees have balked at “having” to sit there, but it can’t be helped.
Sounds like you are in the minority on this decision - I’d go to the boss and talk about how the basic functions of that position should be filled in while she’s off working on more challenging to her tasks. I do allow flexibility in positions to a point - when I see someone has a knack and desire for something I do try and incorporate it into their position. But I don’t let people dictate their jobs completely - at that entry level. The new manager isn’t really thinking things through, and it feels like they are prioritizing this employee over your needs because it seems like the nice thing to do. Some times managers want to do the fun stuff and not the basic tasks that need to be done.
I would look at it another way. How can you get rid of her menial, non-value added tasks so she can do the more meaningful work? Employees and jobs develop. We used to have 3 people in our office. They couldn’t keep up. I sat down and looked at it, a few simple changes later, we have one who has extra time. What did we stop doing – printing and filing stuff.
Is there another way to take care of phone calls? Automated systems, voice mail, third party answering service, etc. Is there a use for part-time or contract work to do specific projects, like a mailing? Think out of the box and see what happens. Good luck.
How can I get rid of her menial, non-value added tasks so she can do the more meaningful work? Add them to the menial, non-value added tasks I already do. (And I am not entry level, by any means.)
If she is such a high calibre person, SHE should be the one to come up with ways to get rid of “menial, non-value added tasks” so she could do more interesting work. I like to put it back to my employees - figure out a way to streamline your work.
When D1 was working in an office on campus, they would give her a lot of copying/printing to do for the department. They literally asked her to make copies of binders one page at a time. D1 took a binder apart and fed it through auto feed, she had it done in 5 min rather than few hours. The office manager had budgeted X number of hrs for D1 to do that on a regular basis. Once D1 showed them how it could be done in 5 min, she was then given additional tasks to plan departmental events.
I’m not sure if this will help with this particular employee, but I suggest trying to get away from the mindset that answering phones is a menial and nonvalue-added task. I work at a nonprofit organization (a professional association) and I and most of my coworkers understand that the tone and content of our phone conversations with members and other individuals contribute significantly to the members’ level of satisfaction with us. That said, not everyone enjoys or is good on the phone, so if this person is not good on the phone or is avoiding phone calls, she probably shouldn’t be in the position.