I recently got notice from my job, as CTO of a small dotcom, along with the marketing manager so that the company can financially survive (official reason). When I joined the company, the site was already two-thirds finished and I discovered that the developers had been working off the requirements documentation rather than a technical specification and as a result the whole thing was foobared.

For those who are not in IT; a requirements document is a high-level "this is what we want it to do" description of a piece of software, while the technical specification is a detailed specification that works out the full business logic and leaves little or nothing to the developers' imagination. Without the latter, what can easily happen is that the project gets interpreted by the developers, the full implications of "what happens if a user does something unexpected" are not covered and the whole thing becomes a disaster.

Anyhow, back to my sorry story, and cutting it short, I've managed to drag this steaming pile of 1's and 0's to a vaguely usable level, all the while attempting to hit impossible milestones (based upon a project that was done correctly from the onset), daily changes and pretty appalling management (which included being overruled on doing any testing before going live with a delivery - with 'hilarious' results).

Eventually the investor had enough and in a bid to save the company / money, both I and the marketing manager (all the management bar the CEO) got canned. Grand. No problem. Life goes on.

However, seemingly both of us were also scapegoated also, in a bid to convince said investors that the problem could be solved. Now we both face a situation whereby we are looking at lukewarm (at best) references because our culpability has become a necessary doctrine for the company/CEO to save face (and possibly the financing).

I can't speak for my colligue, but if it came to it there is actually plenty of evidence that dipells this version of things. Problem is that I really would prefer to avoid going legal (assuming I even could) as the only people who win in such scenarios are the lawyers and would drag this matter out even further.

In short, what is my best course of action here?

Get them to agree that you write your own reference, or at least give them a list of your achievements that they will include, in English (for transparency). If you are being canned to save money then there should be no reason why they would not go for this.

Any chance of meeting the backers for a coffee and gipfeli? If it seems you hold the key of insight, you may find the money talks and the bushllit walks. Good luck!

There are surely different ways to handle it: I guess it boils down to your relationship with the CEO: Do you somehow agree to the way things are handled or are you pretty angry to be the scapegoat?

Talk to him first and demand a good reference. First of all it is your legal right. Even if you would really be repsonsible for the **** up, you have the right to receive a reference that describes your work positively.

In your situation, as you are fired and do not seem to have a chance to go back anyway, you are in fact in a pretty strong position:
1. The CEO will know that you are not to blame, CEOs are usually not stupid
2. He will know that you actually have some crucial knowledge you will need to hand over to whoever makes the job in the future
3. He will be really scared that you might want to have a chat with the investor yourself.

In short, he should be pretty helpful, otherwise remind him to be. My suggestion would be simple: Two references, one to please the investor or the official line and one you will actually use in the future. I have seen this happening and think it is the best option as the company politics with the investor should not be your problem...

Already attempted and rejected. I've been assured, verbally, that it will not be a bad reference, but I've also been told that there is no such thing as code in references in Switzerland...

Bare in mind that it may still be possible to get a wording that is acceptable with everyone, but this is by no means guaranteed and meanwhile my notice period (and thus whatever remaining leverage I may have) is ticking away.
And this would help me how?

Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty pissed at being in this situation, but I'm not looking for revenge or payback - as far as I'm concerned, the reality of the situation will become evident in a few months time when there are no more scapegoats and the situation is still foobared.
Not sure on this one. The CEO has an artistic temperament (I cannot explain further without giving away who the business is) and thus may well have convinced themselves that they are blameless, regardless of the evidence.
True, which is why even my interim reference is being delayed (it was agreed that I would get a draft within 14 days, the latest is that it will be closer to a month before I see a draft).
Things are still relatively civil and friendly, and so I would prefer to avoid letting loose the dogs of war. Additionally, there is no definitive smoking gun; there are numerous emails that when put together write a rather damning story, but this is a complex case that would even require that qualified people verify certain details and claims.
This may be something I can suggest at a later stage, but as I said everything is still officially friendly and I'm still officially getting a good reference.

First of all, at CTO level, you write your own reference, period. Puts you in a whole different ball game. Secondly the CEO doesn't or shouldn't sign. The Verwaltungsrat president should, if he is also the CEO well then that is going to be difficult. You need a second signature, an investor or other VR member should suffice. Thirdly, advance a project plan with financials and marketing strategy to the investors.

By law, they have to give to give a positive reference (not good, not great, but positive).

You have on this (long) thread a similar case:
I think I am about to lose my job...

It is possible to win this on court without a lawyer, though it would be very difficult. Actually, my RAV Berater has volunteered to talk to my former employer about this, although it was not really necessary.

I would recommend you however, not to burn any bridges with your former employer. If your future employer wants to check your reference, he might get a different version of it; also, as long as you have a litigation, it will be very unlikely that some one will offer you a job.

You also can find a list of codes here (keep scrolling down....)

Zeugnis [reference letter] - Q&A thread

Best of luck,

Lucy

I'm not an expert on Swiss references, so this seems a bit odd. I've had no problem being able to write my role responsibility for my reference, it is the performance that is in question and this would realistically have to be written by my line manager (the CEO) - at least in my post, non-Swiss, experience.
One and the same.
Is this a legal requirement?
Marketing is not within my remit and I've been micromanaged on budgets since day one (not as much as the marketing manager - I weep for what she had to go through on that front). I could forward a project plan, but cannot see the advantage in doing so at this stage - if anything it could be used as another stick to beat me with in the future.

As I understand a Zwischenzeugnis must be offered more or less on demand. This is a reference issued during employment and you are not obliged to justify why you want one - although in your case it's clear.

Does anyone have knowledge on the statutory time limit on supplying a Zwischenzeugnis? A couple of weeks seems a bit long...

According to an employment lawyer, employees not getting the interim reference should ask for it in writing and give a deadline 7-14 days in the future (source). If this doesn't help - go to court...

How amicable is this relationship really, I wonder?

Did that, in writing and citing 14 days, on the day I received my notice, three weeks ago.
Good question. Certainly they want to keep me sweet during my notice period as my role is pretty essential (bare in mind, this was a cost cutting measure and the budget is not there to replace us - unless they pay sweat equity).

It may simply be down to a fear that with a reference in my hand I would lose impetus to do the silly hours I do, or it could also be that with a bad reference in my hand I would lose impetus to do anything. Unfortunately, the longer this goes on, the more it looks like the latter.

In one post you say luke warm references (at best) and then later you say you expect a good reference, so I'm not sure how the relationship really is with the CEO, but until you get a reference in your hand you won't find out.

I had a friend who was shafted by his employer and he had to take legal action to sort it out, but luckily it was included in his insurance and it was sorted out OK for 'free', but took a little while.

Try to negotiate a reference from the CEO but check your insurance just in case you decide to go down that road. A coffee and gipfeli with the investor wouldn't hurt and may lead to another role somewhere else. Investors have the knack of opening doors in the most unexpected places...

I've no expertise in your area or in swiss labour law, I just know that honourable behaviour can sometimes be one-sided in professional relationships, especially when the power-holder has his eye on the bank balance. Do what you can for yourself now, just in case nobody else has your best interest at heart.

Nope - you are waiting for a document and once it has been written you have to argue against it. If you write it yourself then the onus is on him. Secondly you put in what you want to see for instance - translated requirements documentation into technical specification - It is therefore fact that you did the work as you saw fit, whether your advice was acted on is a different story.
CTO is a board level position, a second signature is always good. Suppose you wrote yourself a reference and then said all the things you did, for instance wrote the specs, the test plan etc and then you go to the most important investor to get a signature, who for the first time sees a different story to the one he is being told ... is the CEO going to refuse a signature then ... and if he does so what! You have a reference - I hope you saved some company letterhead.
You can't have a VR on your own, who are the other board members?

No but if the CEO isn't going to last long the investor needs an opportunity to save some of his investment and if you present a plan then he has somebody to turn to in a couple of months time. If you go slinking off now he will never know he had a second choice.

An alternative would be, if your CEO makes an issue with your reference is to casually inform him that you will be meeting with mr. investor and presenting this turn-around plan ... he'll get the message alright.

I cannot really quote any law or regulation about this, but all the reference letters I have seen had been signed by an HR representative and the in-line manager. Somehow I have on the back of my mind this is the formal way of doing this. The company will send you a document, and if you don't like it, you return back for ammends. You don't have to accept it if you don't like or you cannot use it, but they are not obliged to give you an outstanding letter. Actually, HR are to ones to get approved and ship out the letter.

Let me clarify; everything is smiles and I have been told I will get a good reference, however the signs and circumstances are increasingly pointing in the opposite direction.
Thanks for that. I have not received any explanation as to why this was rejected apart from being told that it was apparently 'exaggerated'.
The marketing manager... heh.
As I said, the marketing manager and I have been turned into scapegoats, is our guess. Unless this opinion is reversed (which would require a complex presentation of proof, not to mention an effective declaration of war on the CEO) I doubt that I will be entertained by the investors.

One thing is making you a public scapegoat, and giving you a rough time. A completely different thing is what they actually will write about you. I would suspect they don't want to have any problem or litigation. Or anything that might draw the attention of the investor. It is not clear to me whether you have got your letter yet, but in case you don't I would suggest you talk to HR (who is supposedly a neutral party) and talk to them. Again, they cannot bring negative stuff about you. For example, they cannot say you gave them really crappy strategic advice. The sentence must be formulated in a way that it says that amongst your duties was to give them advice, that was positively received. Whether it was followed it is a different story, as HTD said.

As a first step, I would send them and e-mail reminding them about the reference letter, and giving them a deadline to do so. Your employer probably knows as well as you do, that you will have a very good chance that a judge will decide in your favor and that this will be a very expensive thing. Also, if they don't act as stated in the law they might be fined.

A good strategy is of course important, but I would rather start to think what achievements you want to mention (and how they can be backed up, in case it is need), the job description you want to see (and, again, how to be backed up), etc, etc....

You would be seriously surprised as to how eager investors are to hear the other side of the story, these guys aren't stupid, they know every CEO bullshits somewhere along the line, they just aren't in a position to prove it. The might not believe you - if you harp on about minor operational details, like the difference between requirements and technical specifications, then they might well bury their hands in their head and moan, but they will listen to you.

Furthermore you shouldn't care what they think about you, you are presenting your opinion on how a technical department should be run, not defending yourself. IMO you are taking this too personally, and thinking/behaving like an archtypal technician (which is why I'm being more penetrant than one might expect - I've been there), at board level it's all a personality game (unfortunately), there is no wrong and no right, just a matter of self-assertion.

Again - if you haven't got your Zwischenzeugniss yet I would take the initiave, write one yourself and ask for it to be signed. When you are writing it remember you are building a platform for your future career not getting closure on your last job. If you need a template mail me.

Possibly, but my primary aim is to maximize what I get from my references without getting tied up games. It's not that I am afraid of them, only that I am aware that such games end up eating up time.

I also don't think that it is as simple as my whispering in the investor's ear and the scales falling before their eyes. I have been systematically excluded from meetings involving them since February and so I suspect I would have to do more than have a simple coffee with them to turn them around.
Not really all that personally, TBH. Think of it as the aforementioned self-assertion. Nonetheless, I take your point.
I finally received an English draft this morning of the interim reference, which certainly appears based upon a version that I suggested to them. I will need to study it and perhaps get a few opinions on it, especially as to how it would look in German.

The performance part (excluding social, which is good) goes as follows:

To me it all seems very positive except this part which seems to imply that you have a problem with authority...But I could be wrong I am not a specialist.