supervisor vs mentor

called a meeting with my supervisor today. she clarified a few things (things I didn't but should know) and I explained a few things to her about her "management" style. She didn't see how respecting each others' jurisdictions and responsibilities might be necessary or even conducive to good working relations, but she could take into consideration.
why am i (the underling) coaching/mentoring a supervisor in management approaches... it's a question of survival, I guess, to make my day to day work (for her) less painful, but it's not giving me any sense of fulfillment.

the cultural divide

Was just downstairs in the caf. The lunchlady asked if I wanted onions in my salad to which I replied no thanks (I don't particularly like onions). A rather large man of questionable hygiene behind me said "non, ca fait siffler" (course not, it makes you whistle) and chuckled. It must have been obvious that I didn't understand at first, so both he and the lunchlady repeated it until I figured out that "siffler" might be a euphemism for fart. I really didn't care to eat my lunch at all after that. Even half an hour later I was still unable to shake that vision as I leaned over my takeout container. I wonder that was part of an experiment to test a new commercial diet plan?

grr

conflicting management styles/expectations suck.
professional self-restraint against blogging what's pissing me off sucks even more.
my only outlet/digestive aid is to email myself I guess.

another day...

I'm still reeling from a discussion I had at work today. I blogged (but haven't published) the anonymous details of the disturbingly ignorant response I was given to why we shouldn't be implementing a collaborative workspace to capture, standardize and improve upon our team's role in a complex government decision-making process. I won't be publishing the details here (or anywhere), but I am finding the inane stupidity and desperate shortsightedness of the control-freakish response profoundly disturbing, and I am not sure I'm going to continue enjoying working under that.

Coincidentally, yesterday's Dilbert:

disturbingly stupid

In the vein of stupid manager comments, this one still has me reeling.

Context: a group of approx 15 young (and youngish) professionals managing projects, each lasting over 3 years with new ones launched every quarter. Although nearly identical in process, they vary greatly in scope, and the number of stakeholders/interrelationships, statutory time constraints, and potential economic impacts makes them quite complex. There is also a very strong reliance on other teams contributing and participating (it is government, after all), and some of these other groups have complained that our mini-projects are all being managed differently. Mistakes are being made, over and again.

If you've ever heard of iso9000 or six sigma (or been around one long enough), that ought to raise a sympathetic smile as you recognize the desperate need for some process/policy/decision-making/guidance/aide-memoire/SOMETHING documentation and share it with our sister team to provide a more standard and professional service.

So, I proposed (again) a collaborative tool (e.g., wiki) to capture and build upon lessons learned, checklists, resource descriptions, templates, best practices, tips and tricks, etc., with all the obvious associated benefits. The supervisor shot it down (again), this time with the following arguments:

training you guys is my job

I've been through it once and I know what you need to do

all the things you need to do are in the schedule (indeed, the deliverables and approvals are identified...)

everything's been done before, just grab any existing file and use it as example (and repeat the same mistakes with the same stakeholders? no thanks)

you are all professionals, professionals don't need to follow a standard/accepted process (what?)

as professionals, you should already know what resources are available and how to use the various tools, even if parachuting in from another department (double what?)

furthermore, the (sister team's) manager doesn't agree that we should be doing things this way and if she wants to do it her (lazy) way when it's her turn, well she'll just have to learn from her own mistakes. (triple-salko what?)

I was stunned, but still strong enough to counter that as professionals we SHOULD absolutely be following a standard/accepted process, work out the solutions to the little things ourselves, capture and share them with each other (you know, "professional development"?), so that she could focus on making sure we have the resources we need to do the job on time and intervene only for the problems (unfortunately managing by exception seemed to be a completely foreign concept). "We can do that with a wiki," I added.

That seemed to push her over the edge. Increasingly impatient, she blurted out, with some degree of desperation:

"If you want a wiki, I'll be your wiki. I am your wiki!"

I'm still reeling from this exchange, increasingly unsure I'll be able to continue enjoying work with her around.

clarification

the other day i commented that i was more intelligent than most.
i forgot to specify "in some areas only" cuz in others, I'm as helpless as birdshit on a windshield. so i guess it all averages out. except it doesn't make me any happier. oh well.

From boreal forest to, well... see for yourself