My extra mile tends to be taken for granted

Question

I normally do a lot. I deliver what I'm expected to deliver. That's the feedback I've received from all the bosses I've ever had. Speaking in catch phrases, I also go the extra mile. However, I've always had problems with lack of recognition for that. At some point I started signaling that something is more than I have to do in order for people to recognize it, but with limited success.

By contrast, when I signal that an additional task will have to wait since I have tasks prioritized, some people protest or even get angry with me no matter how I formulate it. They even escalate.

On the other hand, using a current example, I'm on a same project with a colleague, let's call him Bob. Apart from us there are 5+ people on the project but they are from different teams and their roles aren't comparable to ours.

Bob and I are on the same grade (that's how you measure the level of seniority/ salary and responsibility at my company).

Bob doesn't do much. Realistically speaking, if he disappeared from the team, the impact would be close to 0. He's been on the project longer than me. When I joined I turned to him for tasks/ deliverables that he in theory is responsible for. This never worked. He didn't deliver and I had problems. So I found work-arounds which mean more work for me. I have shared the situation with my boss but he's hesitant to take action.

Other people are used to Bob's playing a role of an observer more than a participant too.

When he does do something, which is normally for a higher-up, he gets praised a lot although it's normally something quite basic and one-time, not involving a lot of work.

What should I do to get recognition for my work? I need recognition to get more salary and promotion, both of which is important to me.

Answer 1

One of the hard rules of the workplace is that doing your job well is only a small part of being recognized as an asset of value. My own boss always differentiates the know-how, and how-to-get-known, and in his mind, both are as important. In many other setups, know-how is not that much valued, maybe not even at all in some places.

Which does not mean you should not do your work. Which means that you should take a non-negligible chunk of your time making your achievements known. You can mail everyone each time you achieve a major milestone, set up meetings to show your progress (once a year, my boss makes a meeting with the full company, 75 people in our country, and members of the team show the year's progress, just to exist politically), or whatever.

Of course, it's much easier to sell real achievements than fake ones, especially if you're not used to sell yourself. Hence, keeping your main focus on actually doing your job is the way to go. But if you want to be seen as an achiever, you need to sell yourself.

I'm pretty sure Bob is actually working a lot. Working selling himself. To beat him, you have to play the same game - considering you have actual achievements to back up your own self-advertisement, you should outpace him in the eyes of people who matter. As long as you play the right game.

Answer 2

This is hard to explain and even harder to accept. You may not see Bob actually working on the project but he may be working in the background answering direct requests from other members and from executives etc.

It's not always easy as an individual contributor to see the bigger picture of a project or organization. It's also not easy for a boss to always explain that bigger picture (They may not even be allowed to).

Unless your boss is really bad at their job they see your contributions and their importance to the project and company - but it may not be easy to reward you immediately for those. My current company does not allow me to give spot bonuses without many layers of approval. Also I can not simply promote someone on the spot; I have to wait until the twice-annual promotion periods and even in that time there is a long list of non-performance requirements to meet (length of time at company, length of time in current position, education/experience requirements).

Answer 3

By contrast, when I signal that an additional task will have to wait since I have tasks prioritized, some people protest or even get angry with me no matter how I formulate it. They even escalate.

I can ride a bicycle at 60 km/h during a sprint, but I can't do that steadily at long distance.

Sometimes I use this metaphor to explain how my performance works, and it's not unusual to need some time to make it clear for other people what was ordinary and what was an extra about the things I did.

People may genuinely have a hard time figuring that out by themselves, since office workers - unlike cyclists - look the same regardless of whether they are peak performing or not.

Instead of saying that additional tasks will have to wait, you may show yourself open to do that, but telling under which conditions. For example you may propose to rearrange the priorities of your current tasks, to renegotiate the deadline, and so on.

I think this may help understand that you are not rejecting the request for no reasons, but since time, energy and quality of service are limited resources you are just looking for a way to satisfy it without sacrificing any other aspects of your work.