my employee exaggerates, gossips, and lied to get credit for a project she didn’t do

by Alison Green on September 4, 2024

A reader writes:

I work as a director at a medium-sized nonprofit, reporting directly to the chief development officer (CDO). I have a coordinator (Jane) who reports to me and takes care of most of the administrative work. In June we received a large campaign pledge from a very powerful national foundation. It was a complex process that required collaboration between myself and other directors. One of my colleagues did a lot of heavy lifting in preparing our CEO and CDO for the solicitation meeting, and I took the majority of the follow-up.

We had a day-long directors meeting to do some planning for the next fiscal year. One of my colleagues mentioned that Jane complained in a group text that she worked “really hard” on this pledge/donation and “didn’t get any credit.” The CDO and I were pretty floored. Jane had virtually nothing to do with this process. I may have asked her to look at the foundation’s trustees at some point to see if there were any connections, but otherwise my other colleague and I did 95% of the work. I managed to shut it down in the room, but if Jane is talking to one of my colleagues, on my team, at the director level, I wonder what she is saying to others.

This is not the first time I have felt as though Jane has not been completely truthful, and I have noticed that she can be something of a gossip. She will say to me “off the record” and share some sort of rumor that doesn’t have much to do with her job. I have also felt in the past like she’s exaggerated, but this is the first time that I have actually caught her in a lie.

Truth be told, I don’t think that Jane is particularly spectacular at her job and I am not overly fond of her. I don’t want to get her in trouble, but I am disquieted by the exaggeration and gossip. I would say that she is just young, but I am pretty sure that she’s in her 30s. I suppose she is just really naïve, which was not what I expected when I hired her.

Would you take any action about this? I had already submitted my annual performance review before this took place but I am considering addressing it during the review (outside of the rating process).

Yes, you should talk to her.

There are a few different fronts you should address it on.

With her complaint that she didn’t get any credit for a project she barely worked on: I’m a big fan of taking things like this very, very seriously. First, because maybe there’s something you don’t know about what happened — maybe she helped the other director more than you realized, or maybe there’s some other miscommunication or surprising perceptions that it would help to ask her about and talk through. Who knows, it’s possible there’s more to it than what you realized. But assuming there’s not and she meant it as a throwaway remark that wouldn’t get back to you, by taking it very seriously you’ll convey that no, actually there are consequences to misrepresenting things like that (at a minimum, she’ll find herself in an uncomfortable conversation with you, being asked to account for her words). So sit down with her and ask about what you heard.

In other situations where you get the feeling that she’s exaggerating or not being entirely truthful, use a similar strategy. Make it a thing! Probe into it. Ask questions. Don’t just let it go. If you make it a thing every time, either she will learn she needs to stop doing it or you’ll get more clarity about exactly how deep the problems go and whether this is even salvageable. (Or both.)

With her tendency to gossip, address it head-on. When she brings you problematic gossip, tell her that kind of gossip is inappropriate and you want her to stop. And address the pattern too: “I’ve noticed you often pass along rumors like X or Y and that has the potential to cause harm because…” And then if it happens again: “This is the kind of thing I was talking about.” (Caveat: this assumes we’re talking about recreational rumor-spreading. If she’s asking about something she heard because it could legitimately affect her job, that’s different.)

Right now you have vague discomfort with Jane on a lot of fronts — and you also don’t think she’s great at her job. That’s a situation that cries out for more involvement from you, not less. Get more hands-on about managing the things that are making you uneasy, and delve into each incident that worries you rather than letting them go. She’s likely to find this strategy really annoying, but that’s okay; it’s your job.

One of two things will happen: either you’ll actually coach Jane into better behavior (if so, great) or it will become a lot clearer that she’s not operating in a way that’s aligned with the needs of her role.

You may also like:
{ 161 comments }

{ 161 comments… read them below }

  1. Venus*

    In my experience people like Jane don’t like the scrutiny, and leave for new jobs when they are regularly called on their behavior. In the end that’s a big win for you, because she’s likely causing a lot more problems than you can see.

    If she does want to improve then she will appreciate the feedback and work better.

    For the happiness of everyone who works with Jane, please follow Alison’s advice and if she reacts badly then take it as a sign that you need to continue so that hopefully she will leave soon. When I have worked with similar people they reacted badly in the hope that they would be left alone, because that had worked for them previously, and it was the good managers that kept pressing them that got positive results for the rest of us.

    1. Reebee*

      “In my experience people like Jane don’t like the scrutiny, and leave for new jobs when they are regularly called on their behavior.”
      —

      This is my experience with my own Janes, too. Good call, Venus.

    3. Slow Gin Lizz*

      Yes, exactly this. These kinds of Janes work best in environments where people believe their lies and exaggerations and as soon as they are called out on the lies, they know that they aren’t being believed and won’t be able to get away with what they’re doing. So they move along to another job where once again they can be believed when they make stuff up.

      1. A Book about Metals*

        That seems like a big leap to make Jane seem pathological when all she did was say she worked really hard on a project.

        1. MigraineMonth*

          All she did was lie and say she worked really hard on a project that she didn’t do.

          We’re not saying she a pathological liar, just that she seems to have a pattern of exaggerating and seems to have lied at least once. If your manager thinks you are dishonest, it’s usually best to move to another company (or at least another manager).

    4. Boof*

      Yes…
      I just want to stress that if Jane does not improve but also doesn’t do you the favor of leaving it is ok to fire her! (or, possibly reassign to something it seems she’d be a much better fit for if applicable – again do not do this as a dump do it only if there seems like a genuine opportunity for her to get into something that will work much better – tho I’m dubious such a role exists for the traits described; maybe sales? Or maybe they’re too untrustworthy!) I hate it when we get those letters where management just lets someone sit in a role doing damage or doing nothing hoping maybe eventually they’ll leave. Not a fan of the madogiwazoku technique personally though I understand some employers feel that level of loyalty to their employees seems not great to me

    5. AlsoADHD*

      In my experience, there are two kinds of Janes–the ones that don’t like the scrutiny and leave and the ones that feel unheard/unimportant and are actually soothed by this kind of follow up (if the manager actually approaches with curiosity), so it’s a win-win to follow Alison’s advice. The gossip seems problematic to me, but the first item LW lists…my first impulse would have been to ask her about it! If there’s someone feeling like their efforts aren’t recognized (or saying so, whatever she feels), it’s always important to ask about that and try to clarify the situation. Immediately jumping to “but you didn’t do anything” (even if it’s true) isn’t going to solve the problem in any direction, and I agree with Alison that they should actually listen if Jane DOES feel that way (as well as it being a great way to signal you hear what she’s saying to curb what she says if it’s not how she feels/true).

      1. Gumby*

        This might also be a culture mismatch. At my current company they are *very big* on crediting people for their work. I have been publicly credited as contributing to projects where my total investment was maybe 2 – 3 hours/month. Tiny in the big scheme of things. Also more admin in nature than technical. So if Jane comes form a “all contributions are acknowledged” culture she may not realize / like that she’s now in a “only big contributions are acknowledged” culture.

    6. Fluffy Orange Menace*

      I think that’s a bit of overreach. We really only KNOW that she complained about not getting credit for what she saw as her contribution to the effort. It feels like you’re painting her with a very large brush based on only one concrete example. The rest of it is “feelings” and speculation on the part of the LW:

      “This is not the first time I HAVE FELT AS THOUGH (my emphasis) Jane has not been completely truthful, and I have noticed that she can be something of a gossip. She will say to me “off the record” and SHARE SOME SORT OF RUMOR that doesn’t have much to do with her job. I HAVE ALSO FELT IN THE PAST LIKE SHE’S EXAGGERATED, but this is the first time that I have actually caught her in a lie.

  2. Anonymous Fundraiser*

    I also work in fundraising. Her habit of gossiping is actually really concerning. A key part of development is keeping donor information private. Also sometimes you are privy to sensitive information about people like people’s marriages being on the rocks or health conditions they might not want broadcast generally that truly are “need to know” information. We also routinely look up information on how much money people make or might have access to and that information is not something that should be shared. Even if she does not have access to that kind of information now, at a certain stage in her career as a fundraiser she will.

    I love gossip as much as anyone but I don’t do it in professional contexts.

    I also want to highlight that if you are feeling like she is untrustworthy, you need to dig into that now. If she processes donations and pledges and is handling money at all, you need to be able to trust her.

    1. Lizzo*

      As someone who had funds stolen from me because of an unscrupulous fundraising team member, OP, you need to nip this in the bud now or yeet her out of your organization…and hopefully out of the development field.

      1. A Book about Metals*

        Come on – there’s no evidence at all Jane is stealing, embezzling or doing anything unscrupulous with funds. You’re already willing to push her out of the entire field?

        1. Lizzo*

          But there is evidence here that Jane doesn’t understand the importance of confidentiality and discreetness (is that a word?) that is required of development professionals. That’s problematic, even if there isn’t stealing involved–at this point or ever.

          2. Fluffy Orange Menace*

            Actually there ISN’T evidence of that. The LW was pretty vague and ambiguous in what she described and “some sort of gossip that doesn’t necessarily relate to her work” doesn’t sound like she’s gossiping about donors, etc… We don’t know what it is, we don’t know if it’s about coworkers, her neighbors, the RHOA, whatever.

        2. Observer*

          there’s no evidence at all Jane is stealing, embezzling or doing anything unscrupulous with funds.

          She doesn’t need to be. If the gossip includes anything remotely related to donors, that a *major* issue. Discretion is an absolutely non-negotiable part of a development job. Because that gossip can cause all sorts of harm to the donors and the organization.

          1. A Book about Metals*

            How major can it be when LW themselves hasn’t shut it down yet? If Jane is sharing all of these off the record rumors, shouldn’t LW have said something by this point?

            Of course discretion is important but I’m not willing to say someone should never work in development again

            1. Observer*

              How major can it be when LW themselves hasn’t shut it down yet?

              In the short term? Probably not too terrible. But in the long term, it’s bad enough that the LW actually should be treating this more seriously than they seem to be.

              If *you can’t keep from sharing gossip and can’t tell the difference between gossip and relevant information, development is one of the fields you need to stay out of.

              *GENERIC you

          2. What_the_What*

            “If the gossip includes anything remotely related to donors, that a *major* issue. ”

            The OP explicitly said it wasn’t related to work.

            1. Observer*

              The LW says it’s not related to Jane’s job. Which doesn’t mean that she’s not talking about donors or potential donors. What it *does* mean is that she gossips, and you cannot dress it up as “sharing potentially relevant information.” And she knows that some of it is problematic, which is why she says “off the record.”

              That creates a real likely hood that she has already been indiscreet, and an even higher probability that if it hasn’t happened yet, it will happen eventually. Because that’s how gossipy people operate.

        3. I'm just here for the cats!!*

          There’s also no info on what the gossip is about. I don’t see anything that says that Jane is saying anything about donors or fundraising. It could just be regular office stuff.
          I do wish that the OP said what the gossip was about. Because Jane might not be trying to gossip but trying to bring things to the OP’s attention. The office admin often hears a lot about other people. Her saying “off the record” could mean that she doesn’t want anyone to get in trouble or it to come back to her.

      2. Vincent Adultman’s assistant*

        …That escalated quickly. Especially with the username choice. Jane didn’t actually steal your UberEats delivery, Lizzo! And there’s nothing in the letter to indicate that she’s misusing donor funds or information at all either.

      3. hiraeth*

        Hey, come on. A person can be unpleasant and manipulative without being a thief. Most things are still horses even if you personally met a zebra one time.

        1. Lizzo*

          Do you work in fundraising? To be successful in the field, you need to be able to maintain confidentiality and also demonstrate discretion. That’s in direct conflict with gossipy behavior.
          I never said this person was a thief, but to the point of the original commenter in the thread, if you can’t trust Jane’s judgment, she doesn’t belong in this field.

          1. A Book about Metals*

            Further down the thread people who work in fundraising say it actually is very gossipy, just that it’s only a certain time and place where the gossip is acceptable.

            Sounds like alot of unwritten rules that LW needs to impart to her reports

    2. Jennifer Strange*

      I also worked in fundraising and can co-sign on ALL of this. She would not have done well at any of the places I worked.

    3. Antilles*

      I agree. In my mind, the gossip is more concerning than her desire for extra credit, because being able to handle information with discretion is a key part of many roles.
      I also find it odd that she’s saying “off the record” because that’s not a thing in a work context. If she ever shares something of importance, you’re going to have to look into it; you can’t just let it lie because it’s an unfounded rumor or “off the record”. Obviously, you should strive to maintain confidentiality to the extent possible, but that would be true regardless.

      1. HQB*

        “Off-the-record” can absolutely be valid in work contexts, and it doesn’t mean “nobody can look into this.” It means “don’t attribute this to me.”

        Jane sounds problematic, and she may be making comments off-the-record as a way to stir things up without experiencing blow-back, but off-the-record comments are not inherently problematic and they can absolutely be looked into.

        1. Vincent Adultman’s assistant*

          Especially in a field like fundraising, “off the record” can come into play for anything from “I have a good donor lead but I can’t be attached to it for X reasons” to “Donor Y is shady AF so if your org wants to keep doing business with them, just don’t ever let him be alone with any female staff members.”

          1. Observer*

            True. But the LW would not be calling that “some sort of rumor that doesn’t have much to do with her job” It’s pretty obvious why someone would share that, and why they don’t want it attributed to them.

        2. Observer*

          “Off-the-record” can absolutely be valid in work contexts, and it doesn’t mean “nobody can look into this.” It means “don’t attribute this to me.”

          And that’s at least as problematic as anything else. For one thing, if she’s saying something that the LW would have reason to follow up on, the LW absolutely cannot guarantee that they won’t name their source. The fact that she doesn’t seem to realize that is a problem on its own.

          Also, given her role, there should be very few things where it makes sense to want to keep something from being attributed to her. I’m not going to say that it could never happen, but it should be uncommon in a role like this, and it should be pretty clear why this needs to be passed on the LW but preferably without attribution.

          So something is very off with her behavior.

      1. Jennifer Strange*

        Anonymous Fundraiser isn’t saying Jane is definitely gossiping about donors, just that folks who have a penchant for gossip aren’t folks you want working in a field like fundraising.

      2. Smithy*

        Yeah….I’m also a fundraiser….and goodness knows, we are a gossipy bunch. So without a lot more context, the idea that this is inherently a really problematic thing, I don’t know.

        But I think it comes from being in a position of being in a job where a huge part of the work is relationship building. So there’s a lot of our work where some information that people could call gossip, we do use to do our job. Like the Bezos divorce clearly had an impact on the fundraising world, so chatting about the Gates divorce and its implications are not uncommon. Similar with when people pass away, and the status of their estate. And while those are major national figures, the same will apply to figures that are more regional or niche to a sector.

        I will say that while other fundraisers are noting that discretion is an important part of the job – I do think that as you get into the higher dollar relationship managers, it’s a more subtle line in how that information is discussed. And it seems like the OP has a lot of other issues with this person, so it may be that her calibration on these issues just isn’t suited for the field. But this idea that fundraisers – particularly relationship managers – don’t gossip isn’t really my experience.

        1. Greengirl*

          It’s not so much that we don’t gossip– it’s that knowing when and where to gossip and where to exercise discretion is the issue. Like it’s not a “don’t gossip” it’s a ” be more choosy about what information you share and when.” Like I have absolutely warned a fellow development officer about a donor that is inappropriate with young women without getting into the details of specific instances (or his marriage).

          Like if Jane’s judgement about when and where to share information is off, that’s something that needs to be addressed. It would need to be addressed with someone the LW doesn’t have concerns about performance issues otherwise as well because it’s one of those soft skills that are important in the workplace.

          1. Observer*

            Like it’s not a “don’t gossip” it’s a ” be more choosy about what information you share and when.”

            And with whom and *why*. If the person you are sharing this with thinks that it has nothing to do with you or them, that’s a problem.

            Like, if you are talking to someone whose job is all about building relationships with potnatial donors and you tell them “Hey, I hear that ~~potential donor~~ is having major marriage problems that tank their marriage” and both of you know that that also means that they are probably going to be too side tracked to pay attention to you and / or lose access to the funds that they might otherwise send your way, then that’s relevant.

            But “Hey, I heard that Joey the maintenance guy is having a good time with the barista at the local Starbucks” is just plain gossip for the sake of gossip. And that’s not a good thing to be sharing with anyone who you happen to be talking to.

          2. Smithy*

            I completely agree.

            Honestly, this may just not be someone who’s an amazing fit in this field. It’s requires a lot of soft skills that I do think are a lot harder to interview for, and are not exactly easy to teach. Because reading other comments about this not being a gossipy field, just is not my experience. Sure, some people are also unprofessional and gossipy, but more so because it’s gossipy – if you’re not good at figuring out where it’s within the sector’s culture and where it’s not – it stands out more. Because we do gossip, just in ways our field has deemed acceptable.

        2. Lizzo*

          But there is a difference between “hot goss” (which IMO involves the gossiper(s) cultivating an air of moral superiority compared to the subject of the gossip) and “exchanging information that has practical implications for the organization”.
          If I’m bringing up the divorce of two major donors to a colleague, it’s to help them navigate the relationships effectively during a challenging time, not to speculate on whose fault the divorce is.

  3. Somehow I Manage*

    I support all of the suggestions given, and I have a feeling it is going to feel uncomfortable. But if there’s not more to the story that you uncover in having them, that discomfort on your side will be both more uncomfortable for Jane AND will lead to some type of resolution. I think I’d err on the side of giving her a much, much shorter leash. It’ll feel like your micromanaging, but in this case it is necessary so you can nip the behavior in the bud OR come to realize that she’s not the right fit for the role.

  4. Acronyms Are Life (AAL)*

    Maybe in context of her role and responsibilities she did a decent amount of work, like emailing, scheduling and coordinating meetings, printing, slide deck formatting, behind the scenes stuff, etc.? Perhaps she wanted to be thanked for her role in supporting even if she didn’t do any of the technical or liaison work, thus her comment was more that her work is underappreciated by the senior levels.

    1. Sloanicota*

      I agree, it sounds like Jane is saying she feels unappreciated. This kind of makes sense to me since it sounds like OP doesn’t like her and doesn’t think she’s great at her job, and Jane can probably sense that on some level. It sounds like a good time to have some real conversations, but the subtext shouldn’t be “I hear you’re stealing my credit for this big award” IMO.

      2. xylocopa*

        Yes, it’s very possible that Jane genuinely feels like she did a lot of work, whether or not someone with a different perspective would agree. Beginning the conversation with the perspective of “stealing credit” will just guarantee it goes badly. Talking about appreciation/credit for her work doesn’t have to start out with the most negative interpretation of her behavior. She may just need a bit of perspective about what other people are doing–or she might just also need someone to say “yes thank you for (scheduling all those meetings / making all those copies / whatever it is.)”

        Like, don’t get me wrong, there are a lot of issues with Jane, particularly the gossip, which needs to STOP, but some of this sounds like OP’s dislike/irritation is putting what’s happening into a more negative light than it needs to be. If someone complained in group chat about having “worked really hard” and not “gotten any credit”… that’s probably not something I’d classify as lying.

        1. Project Maniac-ger*

          Yeah I know we need to take LWs at their word, but I’m concerned about unreliable narration here. Not that things didn’t happen, and that gossiping isn’t a problem, but I’m picking up that LW is a bit at BEC with this person to say “I worked hard and don’t feel appreciated” is lying.

          I don’t think that this is the case here given other issues with this employee, but recognition of “back-room” staff is a problem in fundraising. Maybe I am too sensitive because I’ve been in this situation too many times, but some development officers do not understand (and/or appreciate) the administrative load major gifts, especially major gifts from a company, can be yet they get all the credit because that $ is from their portfolio. I know DOs who are that clueless and I also know DOs who think their work is the most important work.

          1. Sola Lingua Bona Lingua Mortua Est*

            I’m picking up that LW is a bit at BEC with this person

            BEC was my impression, too. If LW’s situation is that the company and personnel are both fungible, it may be best for all parties involved for LW to offer Jane a positive Letter of Recommendation and Reference for future employers who embrace the Woo and another person to be hired into Jane’s role.

          2. All het up about it*

            I also wondered if Jane picked up slack in other areas and felt that she contributed to the project that way. And maybe she did. Maybe the LW and their boss couldn’t have put in the time they did if Jane wasn’t holding down the fort in other ways.

            I think we can take the letter writer at their word that these things happened, but the LW is still making assumptions about Jane’s motivation, regardless of other experiences with Jane, that they can’t really know until they talk to Jane.

      3. Lauren19*

        Yes, it definitely sounds like she’s not getting credit on anything, and here’s this big thing that presumably a lot of other people are getting kudos for, and she’s not (regardless of whether she should or not).

        It also concerns me that OP only mentions a static performance evaluation and review cycle as options to take action. OP needs to be having regular conversations with her that address all of the issues presented here, AND kudos for the stuff she does do well (there’s got to be something she does decently well).

        1. Sloanicota*

          Yes, if you have an employee you are keeping on month after month and you can’t think of a single thing you would praise them for, I’d argue YOU are actually the problem. You should dismiss someone who doesn’t do a single thing right! They should reasonably be able to assume you wouldn’t keep them on if they were a total failure at the role!

          1. I went to school with only 1 Jennifer*

            Yup! And I’ve known folks who are like “no news is good news” and they never mention anything that’s supposed to happen, only the things that fail to happen. (They never praise but only chastise.) But folks, in real life we say “thank you” for all kinds of stuff that is supposed to happen. Like, I came in to pick up my to-go order, and you hand it to me, and then I say “Thank you”.

      4. JSPA*

        Yup. One person’s “simple brief task” can be a challenging / exciting stretch for someone without much experience / skills / natural talent / training. Especially if she’s not great at her job, this little bit of extra may have been a stretch for her. Or the standard duties (that others have mentioned) may have bounced her workload up by a noticeable percentage, to where she felt the lift needed.

        If she gossips, it’s probably not a good idea to give her all the details on the sorts of advanced stuff you were doing. Ditto if there’s risk of her taking credit.

        And if she’s already over-extended at her current job, yet hoping to advance, there’s a conversation about how unlikely that (currently) is, at your org, that needs to happen.

        And if she thinks her random gossip makes her more like a fundraiser (because she hears you dealing in discussions of donors’ relevant circumstances) she badly needs to either be taught and successfully learn the distinction…or be gently ushered out the door, if she can’t make out the difference, even with guidance.

    2. Sneaky Squirrel*

      I’m willing to take LW at their word that Jane didn’t do much but I wondered this too. Administrative coordinators tend to get overlooked a lot for their support in projects while project leaders and the faces of the project get credit. I’m wondering if Jane valued the work she did in the role as important and felt frustrated that she was overlooked for any thanks.

      1. MsM*

        Yeah, there are a lot of things my team works on where there really isn’t a lot for me to do beyond proofread some drafts or double-check some lists, and I still feel kind of left out when everyone else is getting thanked. But even then, my concern is less about getting recognition than feeling like I am contributing to the team in a valuable way. If Jane sees this as a zero-sum game where she needs to be perceived as being at the center of everything, that’s a problem.

      2. ampersand*

        It’s true; administrative work is often behind the scenes, and when it’s done well it’s easy to overlook because, to everyone else, it just appears that things are going smoothly. Much like running a household–there’s lots of “invisible” work going on. She may feel unappreciated.

        I also think that when you feel like something or someone is off at work, there’s probably something to it. LW should dig into what’s going on. It could be the case that Jane’s feeling unappreciated *and* there are bigger issues that need to be addressed.

        1. Baela Targaryen*

          I find it interesting that you used the housework comparison — I think that because admins are overwhelmingly female, the same pervasive (and incorrect!) attitude of “women’s work = less valuable” is coming into play here.

      3. AlsoADHD*

        I hate admin coordinator work, so I always try to put those people at the TOP of my praise list for a big project. Jane sounds like she has some problems (name the gossip) but it also sounds like the role just isn’t appreciated in general by LW as anything but a routine necessity? I wonder how admins and coordinators are generally viewed/treated at the org?

    3. Pastor Petty Labelle*

      Or she took on a lot of other work so you could focus on getting this big thing. She might feel that was contributing to the overall project.

      However, coupled with the gossiping about things that do not directly affect her work, this is probably not it. You need to address this as a work problem. Jane I need you to focus on your work, not what others are doing. Please don’t bring matters to me that don’t affect your work. If you feel the work load is not balanced properly, you can bring that to me and we can discuss it.

    4. Cat Lady in the Mountains*

      Yeah, I would definitely want to talk to Jane and get her take. For example, if you/other directors did 95% of the work on that grant, but Jane spent 95% of her time on it for a few weeks, I could totally see how she might think her contribution is bigger than it was. That’s a great opportunity to coach her on the bigger picture about how much work something like this is, and give her the feedback that it’s not ok to take credit for the 95% of the work she didn’t do. And, you can do that while also proportionally acknowledging the impacts and meaning of her (small in the broader context) contribution.

      1. Cmdrshprd*

        “and give her the feedback that it’s not ok to take credit for the 95% of the work she didn’t do”

        But is does not seem that Jane is trying to take credit for 95% of the work. What Jane said, and what OP said that they did 95% of the work can both be true.

        “One of my colleagues mentioned that Jane complained in a group text that she worked “really hard” on this pledge/donation and “didn’t get any credit.”……Jane had virtually nothing to do with this process. I may have asked her to look at the foundation’s trustees at some point to see if there were any connections,”

        It seems that OP does not dispute that Jane did not get any credit. But Jane saying she worked really hard on this does not mean Jane is taking most or even a significant amount of the credit. It is certainly possible that Jane did work really hard on the parts she was involved in, that OP even admits Jane did do “look at foundation’s trustees.” Working hard can be subjective, Janes working hard may be someone else everyday normal work, or even slacking work.

        Jane may have only worked on 1 or 2 tasks that only took up 5 hours, but Jane did work really hard on those tasks.

        1. Sloanicota*

          Yeah, I’m actually somewhat surprised at the framing that Jane is “lying” here. She says she worked hard, that’s extremely subjective to me – it’s definitely something to explore with her, but it’s not as if she’s claiming credit for anything specific that was actually done by someone else.

          1. bamcheeks*

            That was my thinking. I am genuinely confused by this being characterised as “caught in a lie”! This sounds like expectations wildly misaligned, but “I worked really hard on this” is a million miles away from “I led this activity” or “I did most of the work on this” or “this wouldn’t have happened without me” or “I should get most of the credit for this”. It’s literally just “I worked hard [on the bits I was responsible for] and I’d like that to be recognised”.

            You and your colleague did the heavy lifting on preparing your director for the meeting, and the follow up, but who scheduled the meeting? Who invited the guests? Who ensured everyone had the right date and time and directions and entry passes and parking? Who ordered refreshments and checked everyone’s dietary requirements? Who photocopied the relevant documents and sent out electronic copies? There’s tons of stuff that went into that meeting that isn’t just preparing your director and if Jane was doing any of that she’s quite within her rights to have described herself as having worked hard on it!

            1. Volcano vs Dante's Peak*

              Who coordinated with IT, catering, housekeeping, facilities (for table and chair setup, room access, etc), parking/security, etc?

              (Sorry, I just saw that bamcheeks mentioned the parking and entry passes too).

        2. fhqwhgads*

          It’s about context, I think. It can be true that Jane worked “really hard” for 5 hours (or an afternoon, or an hour, or whatever it was). But if she knows the entire project was 3 weeks (or whatever it was, significantly larger amount) of two other people’s time, I think it still shows Jane’s judgement is not great if she’s complaining about not getting credit for that small a proportion of a thing.
          The way it reads to me “looking at the foundation’s trustees to see if there are any connections” could be as small an ask as “here’s the foundation’s website, the page of their trustees, look up those people in our CRM, click on their Connections/Relationships page and see if there’s anything” or potentially “pop them into wealth engine and look for X” all the way to an extensive research project on those people. But since OP says “virtually nothing to do with the process”, I’m guessing it’s more like the former.
          Or maybe OP thinks the bit they asked Jane to do should’ve taken less than an hour – and would’ve if OP had done it – but it took Jane a bunch of hours of working hard. So in Jane’s mind, she spent a good chunk of time on the project, when in reality if the others knew it was so significant, it’d actually reflect WORSE on Jane because it should’ve been a minimal thing.
          Or maybe Jane took however long, and that was a reasonable amount by all accounts but she has no idea of the scope of what the other two people did so she thinks her part was a significant proportion and it wasn’t.
          Or it’s possible OP’s off base about how much effort it should have taken, and Jane did a bunch and it was necessary.
          We don’t know. They’ll find out when they talk about it.

      2. Melicious*

        This is what I was thinking. When you’re not in the room for the bulk of the work being done above you, it’s really easy to imagine that your contribution is way larger than it is. The OP mentioned naïveté; this skewed perception of the scope of the work in combination with admin work being invisibly behind the scenes could be what’s happening here. With most people, I wouldn’t assume a bad faith attempt to steal credit.

        1. AlsoADHD*

          It also kind of doesn’t matter. If Jane’s work was essential, in any way, to the completion of the project, even if it was 1%, she’s allowed to feel annoyed if no one seemed to appreciate it, especially if she put in any particular effort. It may not even be a matter of “imagining your contribution is larger than it is” as the quote LW actually gives isn’t Jane saying she did all or most of the work, just that she worked hard and wasn’t appreciated…the latter half of which is essentially confirmed by LW.

    5. Baela Targaryen (on Valyrian mobile)*

      Yep— this is my exact job at that complaint of Jane’s rang true to me. Work that is incredibly important and without which things can’t happen….but is only noticed and valued (negatively!) when a screwup happens. It’s frustrating.

    6. Mid*

      And that’s the hard part of admin in general—if you’re doing a good job at admin, people tend to not even know you’re doing the work at all. Admin failures tend to be noticeable, but admin successes tend to be invisible.

      And, while I believe in taking the LW at their word she didn’t contribute meaningfully to the project, if there weren’t other issues with Jane, spending time appreciating her work is usually worth it. Admin can feel very thankless at times, and very unglamorous, but is also very essential to having a functional workplace. Even if someone doesn’t actually think admin is doing all that much, it costs nothing to be kind and gracious to everyone on the team, not just the people doing the public stuff. NASA can’t launch space probes if no one schedules the meetings and makes sure food is ordered and the pens and paper don’t run out.

      Now, given her other issues, it’s still a good idea to watch her more closely, and make sure she’s not misrepresenting her work, but also celebrating the things she actually is doing is still worthwhile. And, to preempt the “it’s her job to do X, Y, and Z” it’s also LW’s job to get pledges and donations, and that team got praised for it.

    7. Annika Hansen*

      Having been in a similar role, I could see this happening. (It doesn’t excuse the gossiping, etc.) My department received a federal grant. We normally don’t get them for our work. I had to gather information and then fill out a report that we had to file (monthly? weekly? It has been many years). Sometimes getting that information from the employees working the project was a bit painful. However, the Principal Investigator actually had to file it because her name was one the grant. So it looked like she did all the work. However, she never tried to hide the fact that I helped with the project. I moved on from that role about 15 years ago within the same department. My now boss was on the project. He has brought up recently how much my help was appreciated.

      Now, I can see the other side where the person didn’t really do anything. I have worked with those people before. So I think Alison’s advice is perfect, to first find out if she did anything on the project first.

    8. H3llifIknow*

      That aligns well with what I was thinking. If she’s in an administrative role, there is a lot of admin stuff around fundraising, research, paperwork that may feel as though it’s not as much of a “contribution” to the actual award to upper management, but CAN feel like “hey I had my hands on a lot of that stuff and nobody acknowledged that!” to the person who did it all.

      The gossip IS an issue, if it IS gossip. The fact that she says, “off the record” reads to me as if she’s saying, “Hey off the record, I heard that XYZ is going on with the company, is that true?” It doesn’t sound like it’s “I heard Joe and Sue are having an affair,” so I think we all need more context around what she’s “gossiping” about before just kicking her to the curb.

      1. MsM*

        I’m assuming Jane didn’t find any connections based on OP’s inability to remember – but if she had, that would actually be a pretty big deal.

        1. Dust Bunny*

          . . . and she still did the work of checking. Sometimes you do a lot of legwork and the “result” is a null, but that’s not Jane’s fault.

      2. Dust Bunny*

        The LW does say, though, that the gossip doesn’t have much to do with Jane’s job. It might actually be a separate issue and the LW is conflating her irritation at two distinct things. One of my coworkers is a bit of a gossip and spends too much time on personal calls, but she’s a good worker otherwise so the gossip is less annoying than it might be, otherwise. It’s never important information, though.

        1. MsM*

          Yeah, I’m pretty sure if OP thought Jane was a solid worker and didn’t already have concerns about her stirring up workplace drama, they’d be more concerned with why Jane might be feeling that way.

          1. Paint N Drip*

            ^ this
            I think OP needs to really separate the elements of this issue, so she can get some clarity

        2. Fluffy Orange Menace*

          ” It might actually be a separate issue and the LW is conflating her irritation at two distinct things”

          So.True. I have had up to 22 people reporting to me at one time; I am human. It is inevitable that someone is going to just immediately grate on me and that I will be irritated with them over something I wouldn’t be annoyed with if I LIKED them. It honestly sounds like OP doesn’t LIKE Jane and I feel like she really exaggerated her faults. But maybe that’s just how *I* read it.

    9. Pay no attention...*

      I thought this a little bit too. How difficult would it have been to just thank Jane for her administrative contribution? But this is based on my experience that the admin support in our Development department have been very poorly treated, and now the department has no admins and directors are complaining mightily about having to do their own reports/purchase requests/scheduling/travel arrangements/etc. that allows them to impress those big donors.

      For the gossip, sometimes the person at the bottom of the ladder feels like everything that goes on in the business directly affects their job…unless the gossip is more of a personal malicious nature — Bob is having an affair with the housekeeper.

    10. Miette*

      I have to agree, at least on this part of Jane’s behavior. I’m reminded of the engineer a few weeks back who thought a mere draughtsman saying he worked on a product line and was proud of it was the same as taking credit for the entire thing. Perhaps Jane didn’t close the deal, but her efforts shouldn’t be discounted. All of the admin tasks AAL mentions above are more time consuming than anyone ever realizes, and if it was at a time when Jane was very busy with other work or it was above and beyond her usual work (or she had to stay late, come in early), she has a right to feel like she worked hard on the project too.

    11. mango chiffon*

      I’m in an administrative/financial role and I do find it a bit hurtful when my work is not acknowledged. Recently a director thanked the team’s comms liaison for arranging a speaking engagement and a research staffer for helping with slides. I thought she’d also thank me for helping with the complicated flight and hotel details I helped book for her almost last minute for this speaking engagement, but she didn’t. I did feel a bit miffed about it, but I brushed it off. Some other people do sometimes thank me for the work I do and it’s really important for morale. I may not write the reports or do the presentations, but I’m still involved in paying the invoices, scheduling the important meetings, making sure that people arrive to our office and have a good experience. All of this is important too

    12. LL*

      I was wondering this as well. Maybe she didn’t dothe high profile stuff, but if she was taking care of a lot of the little details she deserves credit for that.

      But also the gossiping sucks and I can see why OP doesn’t really like her.

      1. Fluffy Orange Menace*

        Well, the OP kinda hedged that Jane “sort of gossiped” about stuff that “didn’t really have to do with her work” …. so I wouldn’t classify her as a villainous office rumor monger based on the wishy washyness. It could be anything from “Did you hear Jen and Ben are getting divorced? I thought they were the real thing!” to “I heard we’re being bought out as a company, is that true?” to “I think I saw a homeless guy loitering in the parking lot!” I am really disappointed in how many people are ready to villify Jane based on what I read as very … meh… reasons.

    13. Hiding from My Boss*

      I’ll also throw out (having been there more than once) that sometimes support staff do more at a higher skill/knowledge level than managers realize, esp. if the manager “never had to be an admin.” It’s possible that happened to Jane.

      When my current manager came on board, she took over some of my recurring projects because she assumed no one was doing them. Seriously. Didn’t say anything to me (I found out when I started my projects at the correct time and she said “nobody was doing it, so I am.”), didn’t check the files or calendar, didn’t wonder how the projects had gotten done in previous years. At deadline a crucial item wasn’t done (that I would’ve completed very early on), so grandboss came at me about it. Current manager did ask who’d did a huge recurring statistical report. When I said I did, she continued to ask who actually did it. She finally believed that yes, indeed, it was the work of li’l ole me, but she acted astonished that I could do that stuff.

      1. Georgia Carolyn Mason*

        Good call. I submit large funding applications (from a middle-level position) for my org, and I have made it a point to shout-out our CEO’s assistant for her help. Her main tasks are usually scheduling meetings, pulling attachments and coordinating signatures. Whether it takes a ton of time, or whether it takes a particularly specialized skill set** isn’t really the issue. Without her, the project literally doesn’t go forward!

        ** I actually think being a really good EA is a specialized skill set, as most people don’t have an eye for detail AND the ability to stay organized AND the type of personality who can deal with absolutely everyone, including a thick skin!

  5. Peanut Hamper*

    I get the feeling Jane did 5% of the work, but sees it as 50% of the work, because she’s quite possibly not aware of 90% of it that was done while she was busy gossiping.

      1. Peanut Hamper*

        I didn’t mean it as funny, just that she has other priorities that are preventing her from getting the big picture.

        1. Broadway Duchess*

          That could be true, however it’s just as plausible that Jane did 50% of the work but as an admin, it’s thought of as less vital to the project, so LW is downplaying Jane’s impact.

          Now the gossiping… Jane needs to cut that out, no excuses.

          1. Observer*

            That could be true, however it’s just as plausible that Jane did 50% of the work but as an admin, it’s thought of as less vital to the project, so LW is downplaying Jane’s impact.

            Highly unlikely. These projects are complex, and even when there is a ton of paperwork and admin stuff it’s highly, highly unlikely that someone that closely involved in pulling of a successful process of that sort failed to understand what is involved. Because if you really don’t understand, you’re just *extremely* unlikely to get the grant.

  6. Sloanicota*

    This specific example given doesn’t feel that big a deal to me. I work in fundraising too and I’ve always found that ‘success has many fathers, while failure is an orphan.’ When we get a grant, everyone thinks their contribution is why we got it. That’s just how it goes. I don’t disagree talk with her about what she said and try to get a sense of her perception here, but I would be careful you’re not just feeling defensive that “you” got that money yourself (because I guarantee that other colleague you mentioned, and the CEO and the CDO all feel the exact same way).

    1. Reebee*

      “I may have asked her to look at the foundation’s trustees at some point to see if there were any connections, but otherwise my other colleague and I did 95% of the work.”

      —-

      …doesn’t sound defensive at all. Odd take.

      1. A Book about Metals*

        I think I know what Sloanicota is getting at – I’ve seen many instances where if you were to ask the CEO/CBDO about LW’s contributions they might say something similar.

      2. H3llifIknow*

        True enough, but at the same time she says: “I have a coordinator (Jane) who reports to me and takes care of most of the administrative work,” so it also sounds like she may not really be taking into account the amount of administrative support a complex fund raising effort takes.

        1. H3llifIknow*

          Ugh I tried to emphasize the phrase “…and takes care of most of the administrative work” but couldn’t bold or italicize it for emphasis.

          1. I went to school with only 1 Jennifer*

            I’m avoiding moderation here, so I won’t put in the actual link, BUT:

            If you’re in the browser window, on the right hand side is a list of categories. At the bottom of that list is 3 boxes. Click on the middle one (“HOW to comment”) and then scroll to the very end of that page, and you’ll see the html that works here. You can bold, italicize, underline, and cross out.

            And you can quote use blockquotes.
            Have fun!

            1. H3llifIknow*

              THANK YOU! It’s been something I’ve wondered about for a very long time. I assumed “How to comment” was like “don’t say nasty things to people,” etc… LOL

      3. Pay no attention...*

        Prospect research is a pretty important role in fundraising — we have a person who’s whole job is prospect research at my non-profit org. I doubt Jane simply spent 5 minutes googling the trustees, so the OP is heavily discounting that contribution and taking 95% credit! — that’s a lot — so I agree with Sloanicota, that sounds defensive to me….surely the breakdown is much more spread out over more people…CEO and CDO should probably get closer to 20% and not 5%, admin support should get some credit.

        1. Observer*

          Prospect research is a pretty important role in fundraising — we have a person who’s whole job is prospect research at my non-profit org.

          True, but it doesn’t sound like that’s what happened here.

          I doubt Jane simply spent 5 minutes googling the trustees

          Actually, it makes a lot of sense. Figuring out that someone should look at the list of trustees of a foundation and find out their affiliations is the real trick, and a major part of what prospect research is about. Actually looking up the list once the project is being looked at anyway? Really not that big of a deal. So maybe not 10 minutes, but also really not the core of any part of the job.

          1. Pay no attention...*

            I think you might have it backwards. Coming up with a list of people by googling the trustees of a foundation would be 10 minutes… actually looking up the list for their affiliations is the longer part.

  7. WantonSeedStitch*

    I agree with Alison–the complaint that she worked hard without recognition is worth investigating. Maybe the work the OP asked her to do took longer than the OP thought, or someone else asked her to do additional work that the OP wasn’t aware of. Or maybe it was something well outside of her usual duties, and she felt like that deserved some kind of acknowledgement. Or maybe it’s just that being acknowledged for even a small role on higher-visibility projects can be really beneficial for lower-level individual contributors, and she’s irked about missing out on that increased visibility that could be beneficial to her career.

    I don’t know what the other issues of “untruthfulness” have been with Jane, but to me, this sounds less like a lie or exaggeration and more a matter of differences of perspective. Granted, it’s possible that Jane is looking at things from a perspective that lacks context or a sense of proportion, but it doesn’t sound like she’s actually claiming to have done specific things that she didn’t do, at least based on the letter. If she HAS made such claims in the past, or has otherwise told outright falsehoods or deliberately misinformed people at work, that should be treated separately from stuff like this particular case. Similarly, the issue of gossip is a separate one and should be addressed separately.

    1. Rosie*

      Hello, as a career admin I have sympathy for Jane here. It’s clear the LW doesn’t like her. In the past I’ve had line managers ask me to keep them updated about the team or people they didn’t interact with much. If they disliked me they could have called that gossip instead of valuable corporate intel. There’s also been times when my bosses only got meetings because I put in the work of building positive relationships with admins and others on the other side. It’s not the major part of a project but it’s also not nothing.

      Also, are you all going to be getting bonuses due to this win? And will Jane be part of that bonus package, or is her work seen as part of the furniture? (A boss once described me as her desk lamp in a conversation about why I didn’t deserve a bonus that year. You don’t reward the lamp for shining its light, she said.) I think the LW could stand to do a little reflection before following Alison’s advice and speaking with Jane.

      2. bamcheeks*

        A boss once described me as her desk lamp in a conversation about why I didn’t deserve a bonus that year. You don’t reward the lamp for shining its light, she said.

        !!!!! I am speechless.

        1. Baela Targaryen*

          And of course it never occurred to this woman — following her own simile — that you also need light to do….basically all of your work.

          What a bozo.

        3. London Calling*

          Well, that sounds like a good way to switch the desk lamp off and make sure it never shines again.

          My desk lamp when I was at university was indispensable. Top light off, desk light on, start working/reading/writing essay whatever into the wee small hours. It doubled as a bedside light for reading in bed, too.

    2. WantonSeedStitch*

      Oh! And one more thing: as a prospect researcher, “look into an organization’s trustees to see if there’s any connection” can be quite time-consuming. Large foundations may have a dozen or more trustees, and connections research can take a while. You have to find out what other organizations each trustee is connected to, and see if any of the other people connected with them are also connected to your organization. Because of you don’t, you risk someone saying, “Why didn’t you tell us that Kilgore Trout on their board is also a member of the Puppies International board with Lwaxana from our organization?” I’ve done similar work, and even as a professional in this area of nonprofit work, you can’t get around the fact that it’s pretty arduous, even if it doesn’t require any high-level research skills.

    3. Brett*

      It can be very exciting to be part of a team working on an important and impactful project, even if your contribution is only a small part of the overall result. I’m at a very senior level in my company in a specialized role that only a few people in the company have the skills for. Earlier in my career at this company I was often called in for a couple of weeks to solve some critical problems that were blocking the project from being complete and ready to launch. And I was usually not mentioned in the formal go-live announcement. This might be a project with 15 full time people working on it for 6-12 months, so the number of hours contributed were small. But then again, when they were screaming for help with something they couldn’t solve my specialization was there to get them over the hump.

      I never really worried about it too much, but when I did make the list of contributors it was great to be recognized!

      THEN AGAIN, I didn’t mind because I always knew that my direct management fully understood my contributions even if the project team overlooked them. And here, the LW is Jane’s direct manager. So I would definitely say that a non-confrontational conversation is in order to see what work Jane felt proud of, and how she prefers to receive recognition.

      Incidentally, does anyone else have an employer that uses Fond? It’s basically a micro-recognition platform where you can send a spot message to anyone. Often as simple as “thanks for completing your required training on time” or “thanks for getting that important email out the door before the weekend so we can keep our momentum.” I personally don’t care about them much but I’m sure some people really love getting these. Maybe Jane would appreciate these kinds of small recognition.

  8. Baela Targaryen*

    (writing all of this with the caveat that it’s just as likely that Jane is braggart/liar)

    Admin work on things like the event you described very often go unnoticed/unsung. This specific complaint may in fact have legs and you should work to see if that is true. Admin work, when done well, doesn’t attract notice (which means that it’s frustratingly common to not get the credit for the work you did because it wasn’t noticed).

    This is a *possible* alternative explanation to the first point addressed in your letter. The other behavior seems murkier, but I do think this complaint is worth digging into. Good luck!

    2. ariel*

      I agree that this is a side note but also an important one – I know support staff where I work feel like they are not appreciated or admired because their work isn’t “shiny.” OP, this might be a great opportunity to think about how to incorporate more positive feedback in general for folks who report to you and who you work with, and how people are getting rewarded. It’s possible (if not likely) that Jane’s comment meant she wanted to be seen as a part of the important visible work of the org.

    3. Hiding from My Boss*

      I said more than once when I was an admin that the better I was at my job, the more invisible I became.

  9. Busy Middle Manager*

    I would address “over-exaggerates contributions” first and separately and the “gossip” second, if at all.

    Since based on the limited information here, the “gossip” isn’t true gossip and TBH, about 80% of people I’ve worked with at 5 companies had a habit of occasionally “sharing something off record that doesn’t pertain to their job.” I don’t consider that gossip unless it’s malicious, is a dig at someone’s personality, or has zero relevance to work. Even if you don’t agree with my smaller definition of gossip, the truth is, many staff members probably swap those sort of comments without you knowing, so singling out Jane to stop them simply won’t have an impact. They will go back to acting like other people.

    But I view the “over exaggerate contribution” as a huge issue. Worked with multiple people like this and they foment unhappiness around them. It leads to product and project failure:
    1) They think sending off a couple emails is managing a project. So basically the project isn’t getting managed
    2) Other people (usually someone making less money) need to pick up slack and get resentful
    3) Employee thinks the bare minimum they did was very managerial and that they deserve a raise or promotion or title change, so they are annoyed when those don’t come through
    4) Either way, if the person stays around, a new low bar is set for any new future employee. Eventually people think doing a job properly is going way “above and beyond” when it’s really not

    You really need to nip this in the bud. Trust me, everyone else will also be “gossiping” and resentful. Seen it a couple times, someone taking credit for a huge project when all they did was delegate out tasks they can’t even figure out themselves, and email follow-up a couple times.

    You also have to think long term with any position: if the person is useless, upper management won’t view the position as important and may not let you backfill it when they leave

  10. A Book about Metals*

    Without knowing all the details, part of this sounds like she’s unhappy about not being appreciated by a boss who doesn’t like her. Alot of us have been there and that’s a situation that sucks tbh

    Either way though you need to have these conversations with Jane and hopefully that gets things back to a better working relationship

    1. WellRed*

      Bingo! I’m not seeing where she lied with a capital l and while OPmay disdain gossip, it’s not uncommon. I definitely see other commenters are appalled by it but also seeing some imaginative leaps to “Jane shouldn’t gossip about donors.” Jane may very well suck all around but this letter feels pretty dismissive of her in general. Own it, OP.

  11. Camellia*

    I once worked next to a mature, responsible, admin who had been working for our director for a few months. One day before the yearly reviews, she discreetly shared that she did not feel appreciated or get credit for all that she did. I introduced her to a time-tracking spreadsheet that I sometimes used on projects. She started using it that very week and took it to her next status meeting with the director. She happily reported that he was very impressed, and did not realize the amount or extent of the work she did, especially requests coming in from other areas/directors.

    I hope this is the situation with Jane, as others have stated, this is such a common problem for admins and other support teams.

    1. My Brain is Exploding*

      I love this post! You provided something you thought would help her, she used it, and it did! PLUS the director is now better informed about what admins do and that will help ALL the admins.

    2. Paint N Drip*

      this is actually great community-building work!! Good for you, good for her, and good for the director (eventually)

    3. Genevieve*

      I love this. When I was an admin for a department with 13 profs, a director, AD, and numerous adjuncts, I always made sure to track what I did. Largely because we needed to make a case for a second admin, but also just so I could easily show my boss what I was actually up to. It’s so easy for that stuff to go unnoticed. That said, I was also extremely fortunate in that my boss knew how important admin work was and would absolutely tell that to anyone who didn’t respect my time. I learned from her to be assertive and make sure my contributions didn’t get overlooked. It’s served me well.

      Being realistic about your contributions to a team can be hard, especially as a newer employee. You don’t want to overblow your importance but you don’t want to let it get ignored, either. Clearly OP and Jane are not on the same page about Jane’s contributions and I love Alison’s advice to take it seriously regardless of what OP’s current impression is.

  12. The Magician's Auntie*

    Since it’s possible (not definite but possible) that Jane is prone to lying, I wonder if there are ways for the OP take action to cover their a** and minimise the chance that Jane could target them (the OP) with lies and rumours when she (Jane) feels more criticised and defensive.

  13. Delta Delta*

    It might also be worth looking more globally at Jane’s work and contributions to various projects and making sure she does get acknowledged for her work. She may feel like she does a lot of coordination and support, and when the time comes for applause she’s the only one not getting any. If she really did do a lot of work on the project, make sure to thank her for it. If she’s feeling overlooked in other ways, find out about that and make sure it’s remedied. If she’s being a little sly with the truth, that will tell you other things, as well.

  14. Zelda*

    Gossiping as a separate issue, it doesn’t sound like she was taking credit for anyone else’s work. Maybe she did spend a good amount of time trying to find a connection. I do think when you get to a director level, it is good to show appreciation for your team, even if they contributed a small amount.

    1. Paint N Drip*

      seems more like Jane was ‘requesting credit’ (in an admittedly slightly-immature and roundabout way) versus ‘stealing credit’

      I hope OP reads your comment, because I think it really concisely hits this element – regardless of how we feel about Jane personally… Jane did do some work, you may not know how much, and people in Jane’s position REALLY should be shown appreciation for their input on big projects like these

  15. Vincent Adultman’s assistant*

    “I may have asked her to look at the foundation’s trustees at some point to see if there were any connections,”

    This all coming over a letter so we have no other context clues to go off of but…IDK, this type of passive and distancing language hits me as a little…odd? Is it possible that Jane did put more work into the project than you’re assuming?

    1. Paint N Drip*

      I agree. If nothing else… OP KNOWS that Jane was involved! Jane isn’t a director, so wasn’t doing director-level/c-suite work (duh) but was doing work on this big exciting project.

      And other commenter wondered if OP was already at BEC-stage with Jane, and based on the language I also wonder that.

      1. Vincent Adultman’s assistant*

        Yeah, it’s easy to read this as “LW is BEC with Jane so everything is coming through that lens.”

        Again I don’t want to just jump right to that reading but I think it’s worth pointing out.

  16. Potsie*

    I don’t think that she was actually caught in a lie and it will probably be easier to address without that framing. I have worked with people who sound like Jane. They honestly believed that they worked very hard and provided critical work on may projects and were never given enough credit. In reality, they were underperforming and didn’t contribute in a substantial way to any project. But they weren’t lying when they complained, they had a distorted view of reality.

    1. Observer*

      I think that this is a very valid point. It doesn’t sound like she’s lying. But there is a good chance that she has a distorted view of the importance of her contribution. And it could also be, at the same time, that she did more work than the LW realizes.

      So going into a conversation with an open mind is a good idea. Because whether or not she really did a lot of work, I do think that it’s quite unlikely that she was deliberately lying.

  17. Sparkles McFadden*

    You definitely need to talk to this employee., and it will probably be an ongoing conversation. Some people have no sense of proportion. It is possible she did work of which you were unaware, but it’s highly likely that she did whatever task you assigned to her, and she’s built that up to be the one vital thing that made everything a success.

    The gossiping is part of this as well, but you should make that a separate conversation. Gossip can be a form of self-aggrandizement. The gossip wants to be the person who is “in the know” as in “I know this secret thing because I am so well-connected.”

    Looking at this through a more generous lens: Admin work is frequently undervalued and Jane may be feeling unappreciated. Open the conversation with that and see where it goes.

  18. I don't work in this van*

    I wonder if the gossip thing is something she thinks is helpful? Like, “here is what I am hearing, and I think you, as a director, should know what’s going around.” As someone who often works across many teams and builds relationships there (as an admin-type might as well), people have often asked me what’s going on with a different team or how morale was or if I knew why someone was leaving. Tell her to stop, obviously, if it’s not valuable or interesting, but I can see where she might think it is.

  19. Sneaky Squirrel*

    Maybe I’m reading into things that aren’t there but there seems to be a lot of contention for who “deserves” credit on this project. I’m curious how LW shut down Jane’s complaints that she didn’t get any credit. Could LW have given her credit for the work or did LW jump to say that her work wasn’t valuable enough? I believe LW that Jane didn’t play a major role in this project, but it sounds like LW is being quick to dismiss her complaints as lies when it sounds like Jane had some role in this project. LW should take Jane’s concerns seriously as Jane’s manager and someone who can help set her up for future opportunities. The gossiping needs to be managed but this is a separate issue.

  20. Jellyfish Catcher*

    First, thanks for a great new phrase: ”recreational rumor spreading.”

    One significant behavior alone (gossiping, exaggerating, not being totally truthful, work that needs improvement) could be corrected, due to lack of experience, bad habits from a previous toxic atmosphere or just not having enough previous training.
    Even being not completely truthful could be due to fear of being fired or judged.

    But…….. we have several behaviors that fall into what I call integrity issues. That right there requires much closer management to see if behavior improves. In my experience you can teach skills, but integrity is usually hard wired.

    The issue that the LW doesn’t like this person could be skewing unfair, but I gotta say, multiple events of lack of discretion by someone in their 30’s is a significant concern.

  21. Wondercootie*

    I’m going to approach this from a different angle. Admin work is a hard and often thankless job. They’re often the ones doing the job of “death by a thousand paper cuts.” Managers often don’t realize how much their admins are actually doing because the good admins tend to make the work look easy or invisible. Make sure that you’re not unintentionally ignoring her contributions just because she’s not doing the “heavy lifting.”

    As for the gossip, do you know that she is spreading gossip to other people in the office, or is it just you? If it’s just you, consider that she might be trying to keep you in the know. As a high-level director, you need to know about what’s going on in the lives of your employees if it might affect their performance. As a fundraiser, it’s helpful to know details about your donors and others in the community. She may think she’s giving you helpful information.

    Definitely talk to her about it, but go in with an open mind. It’s clear from your letter that you don’t like her. It may be warranted, but it may not be.

  22. English Rose*

    What jumped out at me was LW’s phrase “I don’t want to get her in trouble.”
    That mindset seems to be something to reflect on, as it would sound more natural coming from a co-worker rather than the person’s manager. I may be making too much of one phrase, but it made me wonder whether LW is employing a sufficiently assertive approach. Managing someone isn’t about ‘getting them in trouble’, it’s about exploring exactly what’s going on.

  23. SB*

    It’s very weird that everyone is deciding that the Jane is actually correct and the LW is wrong.

    The LW was the project manager. She would know who did the most work on the project.

    It sounds like you all are burned out and may need to find a new job.

    1. Boof*

      I kind of agree lot of rampant speculation tho I do think it’s easy to overlook others contributions too, so step 1 is just to take the statement seriously and for LW to ask Jane why they said that, then go from there based on the response. LW should be open to the idea that maybe Jane spent more time/effort on it than they are conscious of, though.

    2. A Book about Metals*

      I think it’s more that LW openly says she doesn’t like Jane, and to me that puts her in unreliable narrator territory when discussing Jane and her motives etc

      Doesn’t mean LW is wrong and Jane is great, but we’ve all seen how lower level admins/coordinators often get the short end of the stick

      1. Six for the truth over solace in lies*

        Plus, LW acknowledges themselves that they’re not sure of the extent of Jane’s contribution (“I may have asked her to look at the foundation’s trustees at some point” implies a certain amount of ambiguity). It’s legitimate in that circumstance to ask how sure you are of the level of Jane’s involvement, especially in combination with the fact that women in admin roles somewhat infamously have their efforts overlooked in general.

    3. Baela Targaryen*

      I work as an admin, and you’re not definitively correct for all scenarios.

      Project manager = / = “eyes on all employees at all times, with a full and thorough understanding of everything they’re doing”

    4. Pay no attention...*

      For me it’s the OP’s numbers that already don’t reflect what I’ve experienced in a non-profit org. She gives herself 95% credit and even shorts the CEO and CDO from what I suspect is a much higher effort. She’s also pretty dismissive of the prospect research Jane was tasked with. That is not a 1% job where I am, but if it is at her org, why still be stingy with “thanks”. Jane’s not demanding a cut of the money.

      1. MsM*

        Yeah, the amount of credit-grubbing going on here is weird in general. I think it’s entirely possible OP’s feeling defensive because Jane’s the one who framed it that way, but there is also a potential version of this where she’s focusing on the parts of the process she considers important and downplaying some of the other stuff.

      2. Observer*

        he gives herself 95% credit and even shorts the CEO and CDO from what I suspect is a much higher effort.

        No they don’t. They specifically mention a colleague who did “a lot of the heavy lifting” and that they *and the colleague* did 95% of the work. Not the OP alone.

    5. Ellis Bell*

      I agree that OP knows the project, but Jane didn’t actually take credit for the project! She simply said she “worked really hard” as a consequence of it which could simply mean those invisible tasks on the sidelines supporting the main players like OP, and making the conditions necessary for collaboration and prep meetings. OP says she asked her for research, and it’s a little odd this is dismissed as being less than what a senior person like OP did, (when Jane herself never made comparisons) rather than wondering about if it was more than Jane’s usual workload. It could absolutely be the case that Jane had her feet up sipping coffee the entire project, but it’s decent advice to check in with Jane’s perspective on what “working really hard” means and about what kind of recognition she’s looking for. I do think OP is a little too hands off and this can feed into blind spots about perspectives. Besides, if OP felt she already had all the answers why would she write in?

  24. Lurker*

    LW, as Alison suggested (and others have echoed) I think this is definitely worth an open-minded conversation with her. This is not to say you are 100% wrong, but it is very possible that there is information and context that you don’t have that would make Jane’s comments make more sense.

  26. Hiding from My Boss*

    I said more than once when I was an admin that the better I was at my job, the more invisible I became.

  28. TheBunny*

    One of my first managers gave me advice I’ve followed at work and in my personal life: take people at their word.

    At best, they feel heard. At worst they know they will be called on the things they say. Either way you win. If she really did contribute more than you are aware? You’ll find out. If she didn’t, she knows you are asking questions and hopefully this will give her pause in the future.

  29. Bird Lady*

    As a former manager of a Development Department for a mid-sized nonprofit, all I have to say is that the office admin was often the reason why our department was so successful. There were times where I needed to devote 90% of my time to an emergency or last-minute-urgent-project that was assigned to me without ramp up time, and she managed all the day to day things. She served as a gatekeeper to my office, she managed the calendar, entered the gifts, printed the letters, got me to sign the letters without feeling stressed, and yes, she even did research for the projects! Even if her contribution to a larger project was small, I still sung her praises for all the work she did picking up slack.

    Being a gracious manager where I last worked was such a novelty that we were able to work more effectively with other departments in ways previous managers couldn’t. Sure, it meant less credit for me, but by praising others for their efforts and contributions, I was able to be more effective at fundraising.

    1. I'm just here for the cats!!*

      Exactly!! Especially if there was any purchasing things that needed to happen. That is a lot of logistics. It’s not always as easy as going online and using the company credit card.

  30. I'm just here for the cats!!*

    I’m not saying this is the case with Jane but please make sure that Jane didn’t contribute to a project before you say she didn’t. Not only could she have been doing something for someone else, but you might not realize how much the administrative tasks take.

    I am an admin for a small department of about 15 people at a university. I have been part of large projects where there were many small tasks that people asked me to do. (organize files, create handouts and get them printed, create signs for directions, etc). I too would be peeved if everyone else that worked on the project was called out for a kudos but I was not because I did not contribute the same way. Yes they may have done 95% of the work but that 5 % could have been things that made the project actually go really well.

    So in the future if someone says “Jane said she was upset she didn’t get any kudos for her part of the project” I would not shut it down and say that she didnt have any part. I would say “I wasn’t aware she had a part in the project. That was an oversight and I will check in on what she did.

  31. Jessica*

    This suggestion might be nonsensical (since I don’t know the field or the details), but is there any chance that Jane has so little understanding of the entire work process here that she sincerely thought the amount of effort she contributed was a significant percentage? Like, if she’s only seeing the visible part of the iceberg, she might not be able to see her contributions in perspective.

Comments are closed.