The Situation--You're Not Wanted!

[wildviolet]

Ok, here goes... I'm going to try my best to explain the situation... (sorry for all the s/he stuff but want to preserve some sort of anonymity)

 

I work on a research project with my advisor for a funded research assistantship. At the beginning of the year, Colleague #1 joined me on this project--not paid because s/he already has a NSF fellowship but just a few hours a week because s/he was interested in the project, and we used it as the final project for one of our courses.

 

This semester, Colleague #1 asked if another colleague could join the project (I did not know Colleague #2)--Colleague #2 is also not getting paid because s/he is not officially in our department and cannot get paid. But, Colleague #2 did not feel that s/he was getting enough research experience in his/her department and asked to join the project, perhaps working for a few hours a week.

 

Now, the problem is that Colleague #1 is now annoyed by Colleague #2 (I guess Colleague #1 did not know Colleague #2 as well as s/he thought s/he did). Hmmm... so Colleague #1 confides in me today that s/he senses that Colleague #2 is "fake" and not pulling his/her weight so far (it's been only 3 weeks).

 

Colleague #1 wanted to know if I felt the same way. My response? Yes, I sensed the same thing... but I wasn't conscious of it until s/he mentioned it. Colleague #1 does not want to work with Colleague #2 now. I must say that Colleague #2 is fairly young--maybe s/he is just immature? Does not pick up social signals? Is too earnest and eager to please?

 

So, my question is:

 

I trust Colleague #1. We get along great. I barely know Colleague #2. What do I do?

 

Is it appropriate to approach Colleague #2? My advisor? Wait it out? (Colleague #1 is against the last one.)

 

Thanks.

Edited February 6, 2013 by wildviolet

[Usmivka]

If they are only contributing a couple hours a week and don't expect authorship, why not shove off the bottle washing on them? WAIT, not science, sorry! OK, I think you've got to be proactive here. Perhaps you should say that you realized the project is really not structured for three researchers and you and #1 have already invested a lot of time on it together and want to continue alone? If you have some suggestions for alternatives for #2, that would lessen the blow. I don't have great advice I'm afraid, but your advisor might. I agree, waiting it out is a poor choice regardless.

Edited February 6, 2013 by Usmivka

[fuzzylogician]

What Usmivka said, except the "not science" remark -- that kind of attitude sometimes rubs me the wrong way. If you can find a way to have colleague #1 fix what they broke, that's best. Saying that there's just not enough for Colleague #2 to do right now might be the best option, and I don't think you need to worry about finding a replacement project for Colleague #2. 

[uromastyx]

That's tough. I agree with Usminka, but do you have any real say? Do you need to clear this matter with someone, i.e. the advisor?

I would approach the advisor, but only if necessary. It is crucial in academia to show that you can get allow and deal with issues. A failure to do this (that is, approaching the advisor) may create waves. It sounds like the colleagues don't play a major role here. Is this a matter of getting rid of #2 simply because #1 doesn't like him/her? Is #2 really an issue?

You need to decide if you can/should bring this to your advisor's attention.

[wildviolet]

If they are only contributing a couple hours a week and don't expect authorship, why not shove off the bottle washing on them? WAIT, not science, sorry! OK, I think you've got to be proactive here. Perhaps you should say that you realized the project is really not structured for three researchers and you and #1 have already invested a lot of time on it together and want to continue alone? If you have some suggestions for alternatives for #2, that would lessen the blow. I don't have great advice I'm afraid, but your advisor might. I agree, waiting it out is a poor choice regardless.

 

I'm afraid authorship will probably be expected if we actually get this project up and running...

 

What Usmivka said, except the "not science" remark -- that kind of attitude sometimes rubs me the wrong way. If you can find a way to have colleague #1 fix what they broke, that's best. Saying that there's just not enough for Colleague #2 to do right now might be the best option, and I don't think you need to worry about finding a replacement project for Colleague #2. 

 

Not going to work this time... this project has multiple components that can turn into long-term projects...

 

That's tough. I agree with Usminka, but do you have any real say? Do you need to clear this matter with someone, i.e. the advisor?

I would approach the advisor, but only if necessary. It is crucial in academia to show that you can get allow and deal with issues. A failure to do this (that is, approaching the advisor) may create waves. It sounds like the colleagues don't play a major role here. Is this a matter of getting rid of #2 simply because #1 doesn't like him/her? Is #2 really an issue?

You need to decide if you can/should bring this to your advisor's attention.

 

I don't really have any say... but it's a weird situation because s/he is participating on a voluntary basis. However, s/he can still be an author on papers and presentations.

 

Yeah, I think approaching my advisor would be bad (as much as I like and appreciate him). I would feel like I was complaining or whining or not able to figure it out on my own.

 

#2 could become an issue if s/he continues to act the way s/he does... For example, today I had to leave the meeting early and #1 and #2 stayed to continue the conversation. Apparently, #2 said something to my advisor about how I had said that project X needed to be put on the back burner. I didn't mean it literally that way... and taken out of context, it doesn't sound like how I meant it to sound. So #1 reports back to me (because I asked him/her how the meeting went after I had left), and #1 says that well #2 said to your advisor that you said this. #1 understands what I meant. But, #2 didn't quite pick up on the nuances in our conversations... so I am concerned that whatever discussions happen between the three of us will be reported back to my advisor in a way that is not quite accurate.

 

Also, I chatted with my mentor (second-year grad student with same advisor) and s/he recommended not talking to the advisor quite yet (after all, #2 hasn't done anything). But my mentor says that s/he feels the same way about #2--s/he senses the same social awkwardness! Eureka--triangulation (all we can hope for in the social sciences, LOL)! We had a good laugh about how weird some doctoral students can be. Also, that the way faculty often deal with someone they dislike is to not work with him/her.

 

The one thing that might save me and #1... apparently #2 has started asking about another professor's research project... what? How much free time do you have??? Anyway, I was thinking... maybe I could suggest that this professor's project is so cool and would be totally awesome and maybe #2 will decide to drop our project... (I can only hope).

Edited February 6, 2013 by wildviolet

[uromastyx]

Dang, this situation is making me uncomfortable.   I truly feel your pain. I hope #2 leaves on their own accord and doesn't continue to muck things up.

[wildviolet]

Dang, this situation is making me uncomfortable.   I truly feel your pain. I hope #2 leaves on their own accord and doesn't continue to muck things up.

 

Sorry!!!

 

At least #2 didn't say it while I was there--OMG, I would have been mortified, especially since I'm just now starting to develop a more comfortable relationship with my advisor.

[Usmivka]

What Usmivka said, except the "not science" remark -- that kind of attitude sometimes rubs me the wrong way. 

That wasn't meant to convey any attitude. I originally wrote the comment assuming that bottle washing was a valid solution. I edited it when I saw that this wasn't in a science field (where there is always lots of important but tedious work like bottle washing). When I edit, I don't totally rewrite a post, I just add to it. It bugs me that you assume I was being flippant or dismissive of other fields--in fact I felt that a field like education was much less likely to have trivial busy work than my own, hence the need change my comment and elaborate in a more constructive way. So I guess we both rubbed each other wrong.

 

WV, sorry to hijack the thread. I'm sorry about the situation, and think that ending this now will lead to less unpleasantness than allowing things to devolve. If you have to, perhaps you can ask your PI to step in and say that it wasn't really OK to bring in others/you didn't ask, whatevs to wrap up the issue. Then you can apologize profusely for not checking first and chalk it up to a learning experience--the white lie and taking some trivial blame might make things smoother for everyone.

Edited February 6, 2013 by Usmivka

[wildviolet]

That wasn't meant to convey any attitude. I originally wrote the comment assuming that bottle washing was a valid solution. I edited it when I saw that this wasn't in a science field (where there is always lots of important but tedious work like bottle washing). When I edit, I don't totally rewrite a post, I just add to it. It bugs me that you assume I was being flippant or dismissive of other fields--in fact I felt that a field like education was much less likely to have trivial busy work than my own, hence the need change my comment and elaborate in a more constructive way. So I guess we both rubbed each other wrong.

 

WV, sorry to hijack the thread. I'm sorry about the situation, and think that ending this now will lead to less unpleasantness than allowing things to devolve. If you have to, perhaps you can ask your PI to step in and say that it wasn't really OK to bring in others/you didn't ask, whatevs to wrap up the issue. Then you can apologize profusely for not checking first and chalk it up to a learning experience--the white lie and taking some trivial blame might make things smoother for everyone.

 

Au contraire, Usmivka... we have our share of tedious tasks, too (e.g., coding--not computer programs but hundreds of participant responses).

 

No need to apologize.

 

But, your comment makes me think... so #2 joined our research group because #1 asked me if I thought it would be okay for #2 to email my advisor about it. Of course, I said. No problem. So, it's not as if my advisor thought we needed another person in the group. He's just very generous with his time and wants to give people opportunities. However, I'm different because I'm officially doing this for my RA while #1 and #2 are doing this "for fun."

 

So, for example, he invited #1 to continue with the project this semester if #1 wanted to... but made it clear that there was no expectation on his part that #1 stay with the project.

 

Sigh. So does this complicate the issue, or make it easier?

[Usmivka]

So does that mean you could put #2 to coding, or are they not detail oriented enough or some such? I know I never let REUs near my data entry or flagging even though it is my least favorite job, but if it is something you can safely entrust, this seems like a good option.  If there really is some place where the pace of work by #2 doesn't affect your progress, then you haven't lost anything, but might gain something by keeping #2 on. The danger is when you are reliant on someone who doesn't complete what you need in a timely manner--otherwise you have to do the job yourself, plus manage the non-performer.

 

Based on the "invitation," perhaps your PI could simply not invite #2 to continue next semester ("Thanks for your help, but we don't have work that is easily separated from...this semester")? That is waiting, which I still think could go really wrong, but that would only be, what, 10 weeks from now? 

 

Regardless of whether the solution is more active or passive, if you are the only RA, this is your job--the work quality and pace are your responsibility. I'd be very hesitant to let someone else stay attached that could decrease either. It might still be possible to identify a project that is more "fun" for #2 and direct them towards it and out of your hair.

Edited February 6, 2013 by Usmivka

[wildviolet]

 

Regardless of whether the solution is more active or passive, if you are the only RA, this is your job--the work quality and pace are your responsibility. I'd be very hesitant to let someone else stay attached that could decrease either. It might still be possible to identify a project that is more "fun" for #2 and direct them towards it and out of your hair.

 

I think is the take-home point for me... I am responsible for this project, and I need to take charge. So, I plan on sitting down with #1 and #2 and explicitly stating boundaries and responsibilities. I'll report back about this soon!

[TakeruK]

Reading this thread has given me the idea that if I ever get people that I don't know too well to "join" a project that I'm invested in, maybe some initial "probation" period would be a good idea. Like maybe something small first, with clearly stated boundaries / no commitments for the future. Thank you for sharing your experience so that others can learn from it! And I'll be interested in hearing the outcome!

[Dal PhDer]

Hey WV!

 

Sorry for the situation. I have been in a similar situation where I was a research coordinator, and had several students working on my project- and they didn't all get along. I held a meeting with them saying that part of the learning process with research is not only developing research skills, but also learning how to work on a team. That means handling various personalities, sharing ideas/problems/issues, and communicating effectively. 

 

I also knew that one of the students was a telephone line to my supervisor- so I made sure to watch what I said in front of them for my sake.

 

Personally, I feel that (in terms of the personal issues between #1 and #2) in the real world you have to work with people you don't like and you don't always have a choice- so why would the research experience be any different. Its much like group work in class- i tell students the same thing...people have problems with others in the real world and it's good to learn how to deal with it early on.

 

In the end, you can't reprimand someone for not being likeable. If they are doing their job and completing tasks, then they're doing what they're suppose to. However, if this person isn't meeting the objectives/tasks that they should...you should talk to them.

 

A system that I think works is setting up weekly meetings. In them, clearly list your expectations of what they should complete during the week. Make them take notes and send them to you. Then the next week, go through them to update you on the status of each (problems, completion, etc.), and make a list for next week. This could be a 5 minute meeting, done over email, or whatever...this will allow you to make sure they're meeting their responsibilities...and if you do it together with them (i.e., all of you), you can also address any personal issues with them both- as I'm sure #2 wouldn't want to know that #1 is bitching to their boss, right? It might seem like micromanaging, but I have found that if there are issues, these helps clear it up....

Good luck!! xo

[wildviolet]

**UPDATE**

 

So... I sat down with #1 and #2, and we talked about boundaries and responsibilities. All seemed well.

 

Then during today's meeting, #2 says to my advisor: "Yeah, I think we have a schedule worked out now, and wildviolet laid down the law, so we're all good."

 

What?!?!? I did not even look at my advisor to see the reaction on his face! I mean, I guess that could be taken as a positive thing, like I'm taking charge and being the leader that I need to be, but still... it doesn't mean you have to tell all!

Edited February 14, 2013 by wildviolet

[Dal PhDer]

It sounds like this person has a serious case of "I don't know what's appropriate to say and what's not!"

 

If your advisor says anything, just tell them the truth: you were taking charge of the situation, and didn't want to bother your advisor over something that wasn't serious.

 

I think you did the right thing!

[St Andrews Lynx]

 "Yeah, I think we have a schedule worked out now, and wildviolet laid down the law, so we're all good."

Hopefully it will come across as a positive thing to your advisor - especially if the individuals involved say that "we're all good" (it would be different if they said anything along the lines of "wildviolet went crazy and yelled at us for no reason"...). I don't think you get any bonus points in grad school for niceness, so stand by your actions and don't apologise for asserting authority. 

Good luck, hope they behave themselves from now on!

[wildviolet]

It sounds like this person has a serious case of "I don't know what's appropriate to say and what's not!"

 

If your advisor says anything, just tell them the truth: you were taking charge of the situation, and didn't want to bother your advisor over something that wasn't serious.

 

I think you did the right thing!

 

Exactly! I don't think he has a good social filter of what's appropriate and what's not.

 

Hopefully it will come across as a positive thing to your advisor - especially if the individuals involved say that "we're all good" (it would be different if they said anything along the lines of "wildviolet went crazy and yelled at us for no reason"...). I don't think you get any bonus points in grad school for niceness, so stand by your actions and don't apologise for asserting authority. 

Good luck, hope they behave themselves from now on!

 

Thanks!

[juilletmercredi]

I have a colleague kind of like this...she often interprets things I say and do in ways that I would never say or do them, and communicates them to my advisor very bluntly.  She says them in front of me, so I know that she is also saying them when I am not there, too.  I say nothing.  Over the course of your relationship with your advisor, s/he will get to know you and know what it is likely that you actually said or did and what is unlikely that you said or did.