0

I work in a startup company in France. Our team is composed of less than ten developers, two scrum masters, three managers and two QAs.

In France, people get their work contract definitely validated after a trial period of four months. This often means people tend to make particular efforts during those months and to release the pressure afterwards thus unveiling their true faces.

This guy arrived to develop with us about 8 months ago. He had the perfect behavior right away. Often new colleagues have something we can base our jokes on but he wasn't this kind of guy. He has directly had the most professional attitude possible. He is smart, speaks well, does not count his hours. He rapidly made his mark and identified who to twist around his finger. He is even concerned about his little defects and asks for people to help him correct them.

But over time especially since his contract was validated, our private conversations with other colleagues slightly shifted from "that guy wil go far" to "that guy is power hungry". In fact it seems everything he does will help his own carreer. By the way he seems to be openly confortable with that.

If only one person would ask a question during the meetings with the boss, it would be him.

If other people in the team do a great job and get their little moment of glory, he will find a way to at least be part of it, even if it consists in basically rephrasing the solution. He will never admit he doesn't know something.

We also noticed he does not take jokes about him really well, actually he seems not to appreciate too much self-derision or stuff that will make him look bad in any way.

He will pick easier bugs to be "the guy who fixed 15 bugs whereas other devs fixed only 5".

He adapts his speech according to his interlocutor. For exemple during meetings he will tell our bosses what they want to hear and later in a private conversation express an opposite opinion.

In the end, he is not particularly brillant at the job. But he has a remarkable capacity to make people think so, using proper communication and constantly seeking for rewarding opportunities.

In a nutshell, most of the time he is "employee of the month" but he tends to be too comfortable with demagoguery and opportunism for people to not feel any kind of unease.

I am looking for insights on how to react to the situations when the guy subtly acts for his own success instead of what would be best for all the members of the team. Is it better to confront him, to play his own game or to simply ignore ?

Sbu
  • 135
  • 1
  • 5
  • 1
    I'm not sure I understand, how is this a problem affecting you? Has the person caused any issue that you'd need to solve? As far as I'm aware, the question is asking how to deal with a person who wants to advance their career via brown nosing? Just let them be if it doesn't affect you. Don't make a mountain out of a molehill – Draken Oct 17 '16 at 08:14
  • I think the word you're looking for is "high performer" or "excellent employee". Perhaps you should focus more on your own performance and less on that of others? What's worse is that in all the situations you describe I'm near-convinced that it is you and your colleagues who are at fault, not this "overly ambitious" colleague. VTC since there's no question here. – Lilienthal Oct 17 '16 at 08:23
  • 1
    I disagree. I have no problem with my own performance. Maybe I was not clear enough: this guy has no issue lying to our bosses and tends to minimize teammates' good work. This is clearly toxic behavior. – Sbu Oct 17 '16 at 08:29
  • This question is too open-ended as it stands. It needs a clear goal. – Erik Oct 17 '16 at 08:43
  • Is it possible you're not getting along with this colleague, and thus you see the worst in the man when there is not really an issue? For example you said "he will find a way to at least be part of [the team's great work]" as if it is a bad thing. I don't see how this is minimizing others' contributions or that it is toxic behaviour. – Brandin Oct 17 '16 at 08:44
  • @Lilienthal this story seems to be describing a showoff, rather than a high performer or even excellent employee. He sure has an eager work ethic, but seems to only want recognition from management in order to make promotion (whilst other colleagues might deliver higher quality work, just not as much quantity). – Edwin Lambregts Oct 17 '16 at 08:44
  • Most of these types are are actually pretty fragile, one reasonably big setback and they blow it out of proportion in their heads and fall to bits. – Kilisi Oct 17 '16 at 10:23
  • 2
    We also noticed he does not take jokes about him really well - So don't make fun of him? – BSMP Oct 17 '16 at 10:40
  • @Brandin : I tried to give an overview so that you can grasp the idea. I could not give all the subtle and mildly embarassing ways he has to optimize his career. – Sbu Oct 17 '16 at 11:40
  • @EdwinLambregts I doubt it. While I normally assume that the OP's version of events is correct, as not doing so is typically counter-productive, I strongly doubt that that's really what's happening. It sounds much more like a team of mediocre employees being shown up by someone looking to prove himself and them resenting him for it as a result. A developer new to the team picking the "easy" bugs, not being overly critical of management to their face and exercising "proper communication" are not huge offences. They're a sign of someone looking to perform at a high level... – Lilienthal Oct 17 '16 at 12:28
  • @Lilienthal : while I agree it's never easy to handle a "perfect" new employee because of related potential ego issues, I tried to make it clear in my question (and clearer a few minutes ago) that regadless of any competence he will cross some loyalty line too often to be considered a good teammate. What makes you think we are "mediocre" by the way ? – Sbu Oct 17 '16 at 12:46
  • Related - http://workplace.stackexchange.com/q/11816/2322 – enderland Oct 17 '16 at 13:32
  • @Sbew The issue is that the way you've worded your question makes it come across as more of a rant than anything and that has coloured my opinion of the situation and the accuracy of your claims. The language barrier may be at play here, but even if I ignore your word choice, the things you're saying and the non-issues you're complaining about mean that I'll immediately assume that you're simply complaining about the new guy making you look bad by comparison and that you're not looking for a constructive solution. – Lilienthal Oct 17 '16 at 14:30
  • Why do you have 2 scrum masters and 3 managers for 10 developers and 2 QA you have a very top heavy group it seems – IDrinkandIKnowThings Oct 17 '16 at 15:07
  • "He adapts his speech according to his interlocutor." What are you intending to convey with this sentence. It does not make sense with my understanding of the word interlocutor. – IDrinkandIKnowThings Oct 17 '16 at 15:14
  • @Lilienthal I'm sure I indeed lack some language subtilities in order to explain the issue but don't you think I may be asking in good faith ? The list of examples I listed was supposed to help people understand the behavior of the guy. In case you're wondering, I don't need this website to complain. And even if I was ranting mindlessly, wouldn't it be interesting to have your insights about how you deal with the situation ? – Sbu Oct 17 '16 at 17:33
  • 1
    @Sbew That's the risk you run when your question runs too long and is overly subjective. You could have (or still can) cut this down to the bare essentials without examples or other qualifying statements. Boil it down to a simple "How can I work [around / with] an overly ambitious colleague who wants to rise through the ranks at all costs?" or some variation on that. Long-winded questions are invariably criticised for their length and, usually, for their content, as you've seen here. – Lilienthal Oct 17 '16 at 17:54
  • Have a look at Kilisi's answer: it's short, it's very to the point and writing it didn't in any way require the level of detail on the situation that you gave. I could argue that it's too short to tackle a very difficult situation but at the same time it perfectly describes what the basis for your reaction to this guy's behaviour should be. Questions on loaded topics should strive for the same thing. – Lilienthal Oct 17 '16 at 17:56
  • 1
    Picking easy bugs. Good, he'll run out of them soon enough. Oh, you means you guys keep creating easy bugs? Well, stop making easy bugs? If it's so easy, catch them yourself? – Nelson Oct 18 '16 at 06:01

1 Answers1

14

I've met him, he'll go far or he'll burn out. He is focused and not particularly scrupulous. All you need to worry about is how it affects you and your work. Don't try and sabotage him, it might backfire and he might be your boss soon.

Recognise him for what he is, use him when it can be useful, ignore it when it doesn't affect you, cover your back when it does.

The real circus begins when there's two or more of them.

Kilisi
  • 222,118
  • 122
  • 486
  • 793
  • 4
    Love your last sentence. That, and the guy is a model on how to work office politics. I'd say he's in fact a model to follow, but as you said, trouble begins when there's two of them, so..... – gazzz0x2z Oct 17 '16 at 13:39
  • +1. These guys will be your bosses, or they'll blow up, and you don't even need to do anything. – Nelson Oct 18 '16 at 06:01
  • 1
    Probably the most important thing to do with someone like this is make sure to take public credit for your work before he does. – HLGEM Oct 18 '16 at 22:15