The best way to explain undermining authority to a supervisor who is doing it to another supervisor is to provide them with SPECIFIC examples of what THAT person is doing to undermine the other supervisor’s authority and explain to them HOW their actions are undermining that person’s authority.

For example: Supervisor A repeatedly tells the employees that they never would have done something the way Supervisor B did it.
Even if it was not their intention to undermine Supervisor B’s authority, Supervisor A is essentially making the employees question Supervisor B’s abilities (obviously, INSTEAD of providing a united front and setting a good example). This undermines Supervisor B’s authority by making it less likely that employees will trust Supervisor B’s judgement.

Here is an example: A small business owner hires a top-industry executive (TIE) to help the company transition into its next phase of development. The owner, who is inexperienced with bigger business models, quickly gives more and more authority to the TIE. The TIE, now with accountability for 80% of the employees begins to “run” the company and make decisions based on the agreed upon strategy between the owner and the TIE. Shortly, the TIE is released by the owner for undermining authority. Why?

There are numerous possibilities, yet here is the most common I have experienced–fear of losing control or imagination of loss of control. Often inexperienced top-executives worry about losing control so, they compensate by mirco-managing everything. This can work for very small companies, yet as the company grows this can hinder natural evolution of the company.

The fear of losing control or trusting another to take control is hard for the small business owner. They have a hard time adjusting to new ways of thinking, stepping to the side and admitting there might be a better way to run the business. Their “egos” have a hard time adjusting and they begin to view the TIE as a threat to the kingship.

This causes unprovoked tension. Though they both have a role in the new company, the owner is the strategic commander and the TIE is the tactical commander executing to the strategy, the owner tries to hold on to both command posts. Further, the owner begins questioning the TIEs motivations due the fear and insecurity felt by the owner of the new experience.

Instead of re-grouping with the TIE and questioning motiviation and strategy the owner terminates them for it is easier to not change than to accept change both professionally and personally. The swift action shocks the employees, bringing them back submission to the the owner through fear. How ironic.

What is disappointing is that the owner really never lost authority it has simply been recast to a higher purpose–focus on the strategic functions of the company verses energy being divided between two functions–tactical and strategic.

The TIE is unemployed and wondering what happened…

Basically, to have your authority undermined you have to be in a position to execute authority in the first instance.

Put simply: if you are a manager responsible for a team and you make a decison or judgement call on a particular issue that is within your delegation and job description, and a member of your team questions your decision and instead of discussing it with you, they go to upper management or the executive and have a discussion around your back, then the person they approach SHOULD defer them back to you or call a meeting to discuss with you. If they were to be undermining your authority then they would make a decision based off the facts of your employee without consultation with you; the manager, and overturn the original decision.

Hope that is helpful.

Have you had a frank discussion with the boss, not about this issue in a confrontation manner, but just concerning this project, centered on, but not exclusive to your performance and areas in which you can improve?

If it is an issue where he is simply giving choice pieces of projects to those who survive on idle flattery, well that is not ideal, but on a long list of less than perfect working conditions that is pretty mild, though not aggravating.

It’s a long story but to make it short, I’ve been in charge of a project for nearly a year. I go away on vacation and come back and rumors about me all over the place and my boss pretty much gave my project away to a couple of brown nosers.

I confronted him about it and he still says I am in charge so I boldly take charge and I think things are going ok again until I find out both he and the project manager is undermining my authority behind my back.

Not sure what to do about it at this point.

These people display difficult behaviour but might not be difficult people. They can be described as ‘outlaws’ (ignoring company and business best practice); ‘meddlers’ (interfering because they feel insecure about an aspect of their role so to detract attention from their own inabilities – busy themselves with others work to feel important).

For example, your immediate supervisor instructs your team to carry out tasks without your prior knowledge and forgets to update you, or publicly supports your decision or approach on a matter but privately does the opposite, e.g. you recommend changing a supplier for factual reasons and have proof, but your supervisor has the ear of upper management and doesn’t support your idea thus discrediting you – creating extra work to manage your own reputation internally.

Always very difficult to catch the underminder out. Best advice, keep your wits about you, when an instance arises of your supervisor undermining your authority address it with them privately and quickly. Cite the example backed by facts. Keep any emails or dates (descriptions) of when it happened and if their behaviour continues seek to meet with your supervisor’s supervisor to address the issue formally. You then have a track record.

It does require energy and distracts you from the job in hand but unfortunately this is a common scenario in the workplace and longer-term, you will benefit as a manager from the experience.