Work constraints: what should you make visible to your manager?
Managers often see the deliverable more readily than the constraints that shaped its production. The useful question is therefore specific: what information should employees provide so that their manager can assess the work without confusing individual contribution with situational effects?
What the literature establishes
Edward E. Jones and Victor A. Harris (1967, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology) showed that readers inferred a writer's personal attitude even when the position expressed in the text had been assigned. Knowing about a constraint therefore does not necessarily eliminate attribution to the person. This experiment did not examine workplace appraisal, but it highlights a relevant risk: treating work produced under constraints as a direct expression of its author.
Accounting for context takes cognitive resources
Daniel T. Gilbert, Brett W. Pelham and Douglas S. Krull (1988, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology) showed in social-perception experiments that cognitive load could hinder the correction of an initial characterisation of a person using situational information. The mechanism thus distinguishes an initial reading of behaviour from its revision in light of context. For the relationship with a manager, this suggests a precaution without demonstrating its effectiveness: make relevant constraints easy to identify rather than burying them in a report.
The premature conclusion
One might conclude that every result should come with a detailed justification. These studies show neither that a longer explanation improves judgement nor that constraints remove individual responsibility. The useful distinction is between what was imposed, what remained controllable and the choices actually made. (our executive and employee training programmes)
What the evidence cannot promise
These laboratory experiments do not test a reporting method between employees and managers. They cannot establish that a particular format would improve trust or appraisals in a Fribourg company. There is also a practical limitation: employees may themselves select contextual details that favour their position, making verifiable records more useful than retrospective explanations alone.
A practical check in Fribourg
Within SHR's programme « Construire une relation efficace avec son manager », an exercise to test in Fribourg is to attach a brief note to a deliverable distinguishing the documented constraint, the available discretion and the action taken. It might concern a quality check in food processing, approval between French- and German-speaking teams in bilingual industry, or access to equipment in the university sector, without assuming that these constraints exist everywhere. During a four-week pilot, the employee and manager separately record the constraints they consider decisive before their discussion, then calculate the proportion of deliverables for which their lists agree. This indicator measures shared context, not performance or trust; disagreements help identify information that is missing or remains contested. To go further: explore the Building an Effective Relationship with Your Manager training in Fribourg in the canton of Fribourg, or browse our executive and employee training programmes in Switzerland.
In pictures: Building an Effective Relationship with Your Manager in Fribourg
- building an effective relationship with your manager
- Fribourg
- research
- training fribourg