I was outsourced out of a job where I had a good degree of autonomy, independence, and ability to plan and do things.
I had to take a lower paying job where I have bumped against various 'blocks' or 'bottlenecks' as I think of them or what I consider excessive adherence to protocols and rules for no obvious good reason. Some of them were seemingly pointless or the supervisor person holding on to power.
For example where I have to work now, I was told I couldn't do certain things (which I took for granted in my previous job) because only certain people were allowed to do them, never mind that my job and work should naturally provide sufficient trust and respect that I should do these things in an appropriate way??
What are some good questions to ask to ascertain whether a supervisor or department has at least some reasonable degree of flexibility in this kind of things with regard to the work I do??
I am an IT systems administrator, sometimes there is a valid need for me to email all staff about updates or issues and such.
I got told I couldn't do this because only certain people were allowed to do this, I have to have someone else do this. Which felt disrespectful and distrustful. I understand why they said this, supposedly they had had problems with this in the past but that does not mean they should assume I would cause problems etc.
I understand what I was told but I don't like the feeling of disrespect and distrust I got from this so I am endeavoring to understand how to ascertain during an interview (probably 2nd round) how much leeway or trust I really will have, even though now I know that any new job I can get (for better money) will have even more rules and protocols!! (but now I can be prepared for this whereas I taken by surprise before)
Stuff like this isn't typically in the HR handbook. :)