I am sure that I was not the first to complain of the incomprehensibility of the question.
I will acknowledge that I report to my boss, but I’m not going to automatically call him superior to me.
Let the record show that the folks who are whinging about the terminology, which has been explained, defined and described ad nauseum, are the ones derailing this thread.
Yeah, I know how you feel. Which is why there is are precise words and direct report and staff mean two different things when discussing corporate managerial structures and jargon is necessary within any specialty. If you don’t need to use these words, don’t use them - but they do have specific meaning in context.
Incomprehensible to you.
You’ve been here for all of a month and you’re telling us what is proper and improper language. Sorry, the people who were in a position to help answer the question understand the jargon - which is accurate, proper, and isn’t dehumanizing.
Feel free to find it insulting, it’s certainly your right. But don’t speak for all of SDMB - there are clearly many of us who use the terms regularly and think they are appropriate and accurate.
To get back to the OP:
Document, document, document. But on paper, not on the company servers. And if you have to put this on the company computers, password protect those files.
Promoting them out of your department has some risks too. Is your company big enough to do that? Would you want to work as the same grade as this person and, possibly, for them?
“Always obey your superiors, if you have any.”
I do what my boss says, not because he is superior to me, but because that’s the agreement I made in exchange for my paycheck every two weeks. If I don’t like doing what he says, I can hit the bricks and get a new job.
And he tells me what to do, not because he’s bossy that way, but because that’s HIS job, and if he doesn’t feel like doing it in exchange for his paycheck he can hit the bricks too.
The reason “superior” and “subordinate” don’t work in this context is that while there may be many people senior or junior to you in an organization, you only report to one, and only a few (or none) report to you. It is a clear concept for which there is no traditional historical english word, and so a jargon term was invented. You don’t like the jargon term, but it’s like complaining about “port” and “starboard” when we already have the english words “left” and “right”. Yeah we do, but the jargon terms have precise meanings that are extremely useful, and so the jargon exists to clarify meaning when that is needed.
Of course jargon can be used to confuse and obscure, but this is not such a case.
I went through half the post thinking that both people were above the OP in the corporate hierarchy. I assumed his “direct report” was the person he had to directly report to. Once I figured out what it meant, I had to go back and reread the post. The -er prefix I mentioned would have made it clear who was doing the reporting. (Words like “contact” need no such specification, since the same term can be used for either.)
If he’d just used “employee” or “subordinate” and “boss” or “superior”, I’d have known what he meant instantly. The specificity of “direct report” or “C-level” is irrelevant to the OP’s post. The OP may have thought these terms were well-known in the public at large, but he was mistaken.
As for my suggestion for “direct report”: “direct subordinate” seems to cover all the bases. The fact that the subordinate is “direct” means they report to you and are not just someone under you.
And as for the actual situation in the OP: the answer has already been given. It shouldn’t happen, but, since it has, it’s really tricky to deal with. I defer to everyone else on what trickery can be done to get around this quagmire. This problem is exactly why this sort of thing shouldn’t happen. An employee who is acting out because she thinks she can’t be fired is a liability to the company.
Again, I have multiple direct reports who are not my subordinates.
Bottom line, if the jargon was that confusing, maybe you’re (general you) not the audience for the thread.
I have posted another thread in IMHO directed at the jargon question, so as to not further hijack this thread, if anyone is interested.
Now that is bullshit. It assumes that the only way to have an opinion on sex and power is to have a firm grasp of a specific kind of corporate jargon. You are trying to use jargon to exclude people.
Oh, please. No one is being excluded.
Sex and power in corporate environment, university, military, marriage, etc etc will all have different nuances. If the lingo is that horribly confusing that getting some early clarification isn’t enough (as the more extreme people are suggesting), than you may not have the experience to provide something useful. If someone used military jargon I didn’t understand I’d be smart enough to bow out before giving my opinion, at least until I read more and figured out if I really did have something to contribute.
There is no shame in not having the background to give a useful opinion. It’s just lack of experience, not a moral failing.
The term “direct report” is very commonly understood in business. One of my standard questions of people I interview is, “How big was your team, how many directs?”. And that’s only if it’s not specifically listed on the resume. If your answer is “What’s a direct report?” I’m sorry you are not getting the job.
Oh shit, I used the term “resume”. Hopefully that isn’t utterly uncalled for like puppy torture.
As for the OP (there I go again with the jargon) - You’re fucked. Make performance decisions by committee including your manager and create distance between yourself and any decisions that would impact the person negatively. Or, if you are at a sufficiently large company they could have anonymous reporting. That could work.
Let the record show that the OP is inconsiderate in his choice of language, and that he cannot grasp even the fundamentals of discussion etiquette.
If you don’t know what ‘superior’ means in this context, well, I feel sorry for you.
You don’t ‘have reports’ if you mean human beings. I reject that as solecism.
Yes, I *do *tell you what is correct language. I am a published professional translator. I *do *speak from authority. And no, you are dead wrong! You have absolutely *no *business using jargon of that kind on a general discussion group. It shows a complete lack of awareness. It is alienating and insulting. I may have been here for a month, but I have been using English for more than 60 years.
‘Superior’ has two contraries: ‘inferior’ and ‘subordinate’.
…and I would stomp out of the room and never come back or do business with your firm, and I would blast your firm at every possible opportunity I would do everything in my power to ruin you and your firm.
and you would be the loser, I assure you!
Talk about missing the point.