Ex-Amazon VP reveals effective strategy to remove poor managers

A former Amazon executive suggests that removing an ineffective manager is rarely straightforward and can backfire if done incorrectly.

Speaking on "The Peterman Pod," Ethan Evans mentioned that employees often assume that directing complaints to their manager’s superior will lead to action.

However, he notes, higher-ups can often be incentivized to dismiss or minimise these concerns.

"If you approach me with a deficiency in one of my team members," Evans said, there is a "subconscious" decision: presume the report is overly sensitive, or acknowledge it and deal with a much larger problem. If the concern is justified, the leader might have to "manage them out," find a replacement, and handle additional workload in the interim.

"So you see, even if it’s subconscious, there are plenty of reasons for me not to listen or easily believe," he noted.

Instead of individual escalation, Evans suggests a collective approach.

"Never stand alone in a mutiny," he emphasized. Employees should compare experiences with peers to "check the sanity" of whether an issue is broadly shared or just a personal preference. 

If multiple individuals have the same observations, they should report them together or at least indicate that others corroborate them.

Recalling a scenario with a problematic leader, Evans noted he "likely wouldn’t have taken action" based on a solo complaint, but when "multiple reports arrived," it was evident that action was needed.

In a follow-up to Business Insider, Evans suggested that the most impactful strategy involves thorough documentation. 

Staff should collect at least three concrete examples, ideally supported by various people, and present the matter "without emotion," highlighting what benefits the team — not just as a personal grievance.

This is where many workers err. The common mistake, according to Evans, is "complaining bitterly and emotionally," without recognising the manager's positives. 

A more effective tactic is to first commend the manager's good points, then clearly address how their issues affect others.

Evans also noted that skip-level managers are more likely to respond when they believe a poor manager is driving away top talent or posing legal or ethical threats. Otherwise, he pointed out, it's easy to discount complaints.

For those hesitant to confront leadership directly, Evans suggested a different tactic: avoid criticising the manager directly. Instead, make a compelling business case for transitioning teams. 

"Avoid mentioning the manager altogether," he suggested, "just propose, ‘I noticed this other opportunity, and I think I could contribute significantly more in that role because of A, B, and C.’"

Ultimately, Evans emphasised that managing these situations demands careful strategy: "Think strategically, not impulsively."

Many "poor" managers aren’t inherently bad, just untrained, Evans explained, adding that truly disruptive managers share another trait — they "cannot bear to be questioned about their authority," resorting to a top-down approach that can worsen under pressure.

His perspective matches a broader workplace truth: inefficient managers are prevalent because organisations habitually promote high achievers to managerial roles without equipping them to lead. 

Experts like economist Steve Tadelis, in a 2024 "Freakonomics" episode, noted there’s little reason to expect top individual contributors to excel in management roles.

At the same time, companies are reducing management levels and increasing the number of direct reports per manager, pushing many managers to their limits.

Some executives recognise the steep learning curve — Figma CEO Dylan Field admitted he was initially a "poor manager" because he lacked essential abilities such as relationship-building and regular one-on-one sessions.

Success isn’t assured: campaigns can fail in what Evans describes as "stacked flaws," where senior leaders share the same oversights as the manager being criticised, making them less likely to perceive the issue.

In such situations — especially when colleagues stay silent, or the corporate culture discourages disagreement — Evans suggested that the best option may be to seek employment with a company that aligns better with one's values.