>>124676242And most of the time people get mad at you it's for three reasons:
One- They don't actually know how to do what they're asking for, or have only vaguely defined what they're asking, and they think you're calling them out.
Two- To them it is incredibly obvious how to do what they want and you are being passive aggressively obstructionist.
Three- They have an outcome in mind, but have not thought about any of the details on how to achieve it. By not specifying a method, they can take credit for success and shift blame for failure. Your asking for details or bringing up problems risks making them responsible for them.
You can deal with one and two by proposing a method rather than asking for instructions, if necessary after asking around or doing research. "I'm going to do X, Y, and Z, is this correct?" In extreme cases get it in writing. In the case of someone who doesn't know. this leaves them off the hook as they can pretend that's what they meant all along. In the case of someone for whom it's a trivial task it lets them know you're engaged and not just sandbagging.
Three just keep your head down, shut up, and find a way to go somewhere else. If you need to think consciously about this kind of thing you do not have the social skills needed to play the suck up game that's the only way to win.
>>124676320I try to start by explaining the outcome they are trying to get to, explain as much of the reasons why as possible, and only check over the results. I had to learn this as I would otherwise just get frustrated and wind up doing it for them.
Basically I realized, if you want someone to get where you want them to go, give them a map.
