@Oku
I think there are slivers of truth to what @Henry is posting and a lot of my response to you is somewhat contrarian in nature done purposely. I don't have all the details of your workplace and your colleagues so I can really only infer about things based on what you post. And of course, I don't get your co-workers side of the story. So this is partly entertaining but mostly I want to aim to provide a different perspective on how to look at this conflict holistically.
@Lemur,
I don’t see how refusing to take on work outside of my responsibilities makes me a bad team player. Taking an extreme example, I need to clean my home on weekends. It’s something I don’t enjoy, but it needs to be done. If tomorrow my boss comes and says he wants to establish an in-house cleaning service and everyone needs to pitch in (of course, he won’t touch the broom himself), should I do it? Would you do it?
Generally speaking, yes you should pitch in if your other teammates are also pitching in. It is also something your boss wants done. Taking on the tasks builds goodwill with your boss and also your colleagues. So would I do it? Yes. I also wouldn't expect the boss to pitch in either. That isn't their role in this. Keeping your first-line supervisor / boss happy makes life a hell of a lot easier in a work environment. As long as their requests aren't totally unreasonable, I see no problem with doing what I am told. There is a humbleness that comes with knowing your role and place in a business hierarchy. I don't know about you, but I prefer harmony and not adversarial relationships at a place I spend 40+ hours a week. Its a small world - if you stay in your industry, then these same colleagues you'll meet again one day. No one remembers tasks details, but they will remember how individuals made them feel when working together. Lastly...good leadership is built on good followership. No, I have not read habits of highly effective people
.
In your particular situation, I don't think it makes you objectively a bad team player to refuse work you don't want to do if you're overburdened with other responsibilities or if the work is far out of scope with your job duties and responsibilities. This just needs to be communicated effectively. I put team player in quotes from my prior post because work politics is never all objective. There is a perception and subjectivity that comes with declining work. Refusing work ought to be done delicately (as there are perceptual social risks involved) and really only done if one understands the type of power* they wield. Someone else mentioned work culture differences and maybe that all this is but I do get the sense that this was a bit of an overreaction that really stemmed from months of bottling up frustration and resentment on your part.
*
https://knowledgebank.mgscc.net/5-diffe ... eadership/
Most individual contributors do not have coercive, reward, or legitimate power. They can have referent power or expert power. For instance, expert power is a favorite among software developer types. In other words, "I can refuse this task because I am so damn good at this thing I am an expert in that it would hurt for you to potentially lose me as an employee if you try to coerce me into doing something I don't want to do."
I suppose there is also FI/FU power which is not listed hehe. One day Oku you will have this truly and I'm looking forward to it.
Suddenly, the task of cleaning falls on @oku, with no added benefit and no help. He refuses, and now he’s labelled a bad team player. Fine, so be it. Remember, I was foolish enough to have cleaned the floor once, but when I handed the broom to a coworker, it took literally a day to send a passive-aggressive email, suggesting I do the task again.
I don't believe these situations are ever created out of a vacuum. What is your relationship like with this co-worker? Have you refused to help them in the past? Do you take up their offers to meet for lunch/coffee? What do you know about them? What do they know about you? Have you worked together on projects before? Did co-worker attempt to build a relationship in the past but you had refused? Perhaps they feel slighted. We can't mind read that is for sure - but I get the sense that a relationship with this co-worker has not been built. Or perhaps it was already adversarial. Otherwise, this situation would've never happened to begin with. Allies don't do that with each other. I also don't blame you fully for this situation. This is partly your boss's fault for what sounds like an ineffective team culture. Maybe, they should've came to you directly if this was that important.
On the other hand, it’s true that I don’t have allies and I’m not charismatic enough to create a rebellion. In other words, I’m not McMurphy. However, the intention is not to rebel against the system; the big picture is becoming financially independent first (with dignity) while having the freedom to go to another place when the time is right.
You can get away with not having allies especially at the lower-levels in a hierarchy as long as your boss is happy with you. Just don't get the attention of wolves or bandits from same-level peers. Or make yourself something of a enigma that the bandits feel isn't worth bothering with.
Example of what I've personally done is whenever co-workers try to get me to help them with something I don't want to do, I usually just ask a billion questions about the task. I even get a bit philosophical and get them to question why the task is important. And I usually end with pointing towards resources, tools, and training materials that can help them. I've even offered to train. That tells me right there if they really want to learn (they take up the offer) or if they're being lazy and just trying to pass me their shit. I hate show horses as much as the next person
Needless to say, I rarely ever get tasks from colleagues I don't want to be involved with. Luckily at my work this rarely happens anyway.
Agree that rebelling against a moving train never really works for anybody. I tried that in my past. Doesn't work.
Being a team player, proactive, creating win-win situations and being a nice guy to work with is the kind of rubbish listed in books such as the 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, which is like a manifesto created by the worst characters of HR to make people docile and comply with absurdity.
Or maybe its just a mark of maturity? You can be assertive without being aggressive. You can set boundaries without being an asshole. You can also be a good team player while avoiding those tasks in which you don't want to take part in. You can also build relationships with your co-workers so you get to know them and they get to know you....and you don't have to be friends to do this.
I understand it can be incredibly frustrating to deal with colleagues who might never understand you, your values, and what you stand for. But if these aren't expressed and if you never make the effort to get to know them and respect them, then why would they want to understand and respect you?
Earlier you posted this guideline "If a flawed player points a gun at you, point a gun at them." Have you put yourself in their shoes and tried to see how you could be the flawed player in this situation? Have you considered
why they might be pointing a gun at you? For someone to raise a gun, you had to have did something to prompt that whether directly or indirectly. Its rare to have a random shooting. Also, why point a gun back? Is there a better way to respond that doesn't involve figurative violence? I'd say if you work at a place that truly only has pointing a gun back as a way to solve problems, then you outta just quit for your own sanity. Sometimes environments just suck and there is no fixing.
