Dear Jidnyasa-N,
You have asked a query on how to handle a situation when a boss assigns personal work to his/her Executive Assistant (EA). While a learned member has given a reply and you have liked it, I will provide some background on why bosses assign their personal work to EAs. My replies are in the Indian context only. The reasons are as below:
Difference between Personal Secretary and Executive Assistant
a) The work of a Personal Secretary (PS) and an EA is completely different. Not many bosses know the difference between the two. How many bosses understand this difference, and even if they do, how many have the willpower to appoint both an EA and a PS?
Customary Overstretching of Work in India
b) In India, it is customary to overstretch work. Therefore, almost all bosses do personal work while in the office and official work while at home. The lines dividing personal and official work have been blurred long ago.
Personal Work in the Office
c) In the Indian context, while in the office, everyone does some amount of personal work. Do other employees in your company do personal work while in the office or not? Therefore, why single out a boss and question his tendency? Bosses do myriad types of work. The diversity of the work occasionally makes them forget to do some personal work, hence they start relying on their EA.
Understanding "Personal" Work
d) When it comes to "personal" work, one needs to understand how much "personal" it is. Managing his/her personal calendar or scheduling appointments, etc., is fine. However, if the boss brings a grocery list and tells the EA to order it from an e-commerce portal, then he/she needs to be reminded of the difference between the two.
Closeness with Boss's Family
e) When the EA becomes slightly older in his/her job, he/she also starts interacting with the spouse or other family members of the boss. Over time, the EA develops closeness even with them. However, the closeness blurs the difference between official and personal work.
Forgetfulness and Disorganization
f) A few bosses are either forgetful or disorganized. They pay a price for their forgetfulness or for being disorganized. Considering their plight, they "request" their EA to remind them about their personal activities too. In the bargain, how the EA starts entering into the personal arena of the boss, although inadvertently, that he/she does not come to know.
Reliance on Others
g) There are a few types of persons who forever rely on someone else to do something. Many of them are neither computer savvy nor mobile phone savvy. If the boss falls under this category, then whether the EA likes it or not, he/she will start telling the EA to do the personal work. If the EA starts raising objections, then they just change the EAs.
Predecessors' Influence
h) While you might have an objection against the boss for doing his/her personal work, what about your predecessors? Did they also object? If they did not object, then over time, the bosses start taking their EA for granted. A new EA is expected to fall into their frame of mind; otherwise, the EA has a choice to quit the company. Under such circumstances, it is the fault of your predecessors and not of the bosses.
Superiority Complex
i) Most bosses deal only with subordinates. However, dealing only with persons from the lower level of hierarchy, they develop a superiority complex. They expect the juniors to follow their orders, whether the orders are for personal work or official, that does not matter. A few other bosses develop a superiority complex for reasons like their business success, high IQ level, outstanding academic performance, etc.
Dominating Nature
j) Many bosses have an extremely dominating nature. They behave as if their company is their fiefdom. If the company has a "Sultan-Khadim" culture or "Ji Huzoor" culture (a culture of unquestioned obedience), will they not expect their EA to be part of this culture?
Hope you understand why bosses tell their EA to do personal work. By writing the above points, my attempt was not to justify the tendency of the bosses. My point was limited to putting forth the context only.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar