# How should employees raise a concern about their manager? **Raising a concern about a manager** works best when employees describe events, repeated behavior, and consequences for the work. A skip level leader should make that standard easy to meet, protect people from unnecessary exposure, and never demand a group confrontation. The purpose is not to prove that a manager is a bad person. It is to show what needs to change and why. ## What should an employee bring to the conversation? Bring two or three recent examples rather than a complete history of every frustration. For each example, note the date or work stage, what decision or support was needed, what the manager did, and what happened next. This shape helps a skip level see a pattern without requiring the employee to sound like an investigator. For example, say that the team requested approval for a rollback plan before a release, the deadline passed without a decision, and the release remained blocked. Or say that a design risk was interrupted during planning, then two engineers went to a staff engineer for an answer because they did not believe the concern could be finished in the meeting. Describe your own experience plainly. You can say that you hesitate to raise risks because previous attempts became public criticism. Feelings matter, especially fear, but connect them to behavior so the leader can act. The combination explains both the human cost and the operational route that now hides information. ## How should employees avoid turning evidence into a verdict? Avoid opening with a label such as disorganized, reactive, or incompetent. The label may reflect a real pattern, yet it invites an argument about personality. Open with the effect: decisions arrive after their useful moment, incident discussions become louder without gaining an owner, or the team seeks unofficial approval elsewhere. Do not claim to know intent. A manager may interrupt because they feel urgency, because they misunderstand the risk, or because they resist dissent. The reason matters later. Your first task is to show what occurred and what it caused. A leader can verify an event more reliably than a theory about motive. Include variation. If the manager responds well in some settings, say so. Perhaps written concerns receive attention while live concerns are cut off. That distinction can lead to a faster remedy and makes your account more credible. Accurate evidence does not become weaker because it includes conditions where the problem is absent. ## Who should raise the concern? One employee may speak first. They should not be rejected as a personal conflict, but they also should not be asked to represent every coworker. The skip level can gather other perspectives independently. This limits coordination pressure and prevents the manager from treating a group presentation as organized opposition. Several people reporting similar events creates stronger evidence, especially when their examples involve different projects and moments. They do not need identical language. In fact, naturally different accounts that point to the same decision failures can be more informative than a rehearsed statement. Do not build a petition unless formal policy requires one. A petition exposes names, encourages argument over popularity, and may leave quieter employees unprotected. The relevant question is whether management behavior repeatedly harms work and voice, not whether a majority is willing to sign a verdict. ## When should the employee talk to the manager? If the relationship is safe enough, try a narrow request close to the event. Say that when a design concern is interrupted, the risk remains unresolved, and ask for two uninterrupted minutes before discussion. Or agree that release approvals will be decided or delegated by a stated time. Watch the response. A manager need not agree with every interpretation, but they should be able to hear the example, ask questions, and discuss a workable change. If the conversation produces curiosity and a clear experiment, give that experiment a chance and record what happens in the next similar event. Go directly to the skip level, employee relations contact, or another designated leader when the manager retaliates, threatens consequences, targets assignments, or repeatedly blocks dissent. Safety is not limited to physical danger. Career punishment and public humiliation are legitimate reasons not to confront the person alone. ## How can a skip level receive the concern well? Do not ask, why did nobody tell me sooner. That question makes the speaker defend their fear before you have addressed its cause. Thank them, ask for one event at a time, and explain your next steps. If you need names for a formal process, say why rather than collecting them casually. Reflect the pattern in neutral language. You might say that the concern involves delayed decisions, interrupted risk reports, and engineers routing around the manager. Ask whether that summary is accurate. This shows that you heard the work problem without promising that every conclusion is already established. Set a return date. Silence after disclosure feels like confirmation that leadership protects managers. Even if the investigation is incomplete, return when promised and state what you have done, what remains, and when the employee will hear from you again. Follow up is part of psychological safety in practice. ## What evidence format is most useful? | Include | Useful example | Avoid | | --- | --- | --- | | Event | Rollback review requested Tuesday | Always chaotic | | Behavior | No decision by Friday | Does not care | | Impact | Customer date moved | Everyone hates it | | Pattern | Three approvals missed | One vague memory | A short record is enough. Employees should not be expected to create a legal brief while continuing their jobs. The skip level owns corroboration. The format merely turns a hard experience into information that can guide observation, coaching, and a role decision. ## What steps can an employee follow? - Choose two or three recent events. - Write the needed decision or support. - Describe the manager's observable response. - Connect it to delivery, quality, safety, or voice. - Decide whether direct conversation is safe. - Ask the skip level for protection and next steps. - Record what changes afterward. This sequence should reduce risk, not create another performance task. Bring notes if stress makes recall difficult. Ask whether your name will be shared and what happens if the manager reacts badly. A responsible leader should answer directly and own the next stage. ## What should happen after the concern is raised? The employee should not become the manager's private coach. The skip level observes meetings, reviews decision flow, gathers other accounts, gives feedback, and sets the change test. Employees can report new events, but they should not be asked to monitor every interaction or persuade reluctant executives. Look for concrete movement. A delayed approval process may gain a clear deadline and delegate. Planning may include uninterrupted risk rounds. On call work may gain calm ownership and timed updates. The employee can judge whether those changes make it safer and easier to do the job. If nothing changes, raise that fact using the same evidence format. Say that feedback was given, identify the comparable events that followed, and name the continuing impact. At that point leadership has evidence about response to coaching, not merely the original problem. The decision belongs above the employee. ## How can employees prepare for difficult follow up questions? A skip level may ask whether the manager had the information required to decide, whether the employee stated the deadline, or whether another explanation fits. These questions can feel like disbelief, especially after a stressful disclosure. A good leader explains that they are checking the event, not putting the employee on trial. The employee can answer what they know, separate assumptions, and say when a detail is uncertain. Prepare the central request before the meeting. You might ask the skip level to observe planning, establish a protected route for urgent risks, or review three missed approval windows. A request gives the conversation direction without making the employee responsible for selecting the manager's consequence. It is reasonable to say that you need leadership to investigate and decide. Ask what will happen with your examples. Will they be summarized, shown to the manager, or used in a formal process? Who will know your identity? What should you do if assignments, feedback, or access change afterward? Clear answers let you assess risk. If the leader cannot answer immediately, ask when they will return with the process. If the first leader dismisses specific work impact, use another legitimate route. Keep the account consistent and factual rather than escalating the language to force attention. A people partner, another senior leader, an ethics route, or a formal reporting channel may be appropriate depending on the conduct. For urgent safety, legal, or retaliation concerns, follow the protected process rather than waiting for an ordinary skip level conversation. Afterward, keep doing your job rather than staging failure to prove the point. Do not deliberately let dates slip or withhold the informal help that keeps customers safe. Record the hidden coordination honestly so leaders can see its cost. Skilled employees should not have to perform worse to make management damage visible. Your evidence should reveal the burden of compensation while you continue protecting colleagues, customers, and the engineering work already in motion. ## What are common questions? ### How many examples should an employee bring? Two or three recent, specific examples are usually enough for a leader to begin checking the pattern. ### Can one employee raise the concern alone? Yes. The leader should investigate other perspectives without making that employee recruit a group. ### What if the manager asks who complained? The skip level should redirect to the observed behavior and protect names unless a formal process requires disclosure. ### Should an employee keep notes? Brief factual notes about dates, behavior, and work impact can help, subject to company privacy rules. ### What if direct feedback feels unsafe? Skip it and use the skip level, employee relations, or another protected reporting route. Related: [a team afraid of their manager](https://isilta.com/blog/when-a-team-is-afraid-of-their-manager/), [evidence for manager coaching](https://isilta.com/blog/what-evidence-shows-a-manager-needs-coaching/), [investigate a manager complaint](https://isilta.com/blog/how-to-investigate-a-manager-complaint/).