Jack has total 15 years experience, 12 years experienced in a company XYZ, Jim has total 15 years experience in same field as jack but 10 years in XYZ. That makes Jack a senior to Jim technically. But in Jim's head, he thinks he is equal to Jack.

Now the situation is Jack is given a project to execute and assigns Jim to do a part of it. Jim gets the planning dept involved to prepare some bar charts for his part. Upon finalizing the barchart with the planning dept, Jim submits the chart to Jack. While reviewing it Jack finds missing links and tells Jim to correct it. Jim (thinks jack is bossing) diplomatically dismisses as if it is trivial thing and does not need to be corrected.

Now after a few hours. Jack, Jim are called in for a meeting with management. The managements discusses a lot of other things. Jack highlights the trivial thing that Jim has dismissed about the bar chart without pointing finger \at jim's reluctance. The management reacts saying it is important to get it changed because the management will be owned by the Client during their meeting with what ever trivial matters there is in the chart.

Jim come out saying true that this is an important point and has to be addressed.

Now the question is What is Jim doing when he dismissed the issue as trivial when a only one year sr. colleague asked him to correct it, but when management remarked he came up saying it was right thing to do and made up an idea to correct it as if he has thought it through all along.

PS: Thing is if management is owned by the client, they will question Jack and not Jim. (if thats necessary for context)


Jack to John: In the meeting Jim was some one else, I could n't believe he ___________ (spoke contrary to what he was saying to me)

  • 1
    You should really add a sample sentence (with a blank to fill the expression in) so that the answers can be focused. Nov 5, 2018 at 7:48
  • The title says everything. I don't think it needed so much of trouble to explain in the body of the question.
    – Kris
    Nov 5, 2018 at 9:57

2 Answers 2


This doesn't quite fit the specific description but a general term could be saving face.

Jim didn't react when Jack pointed out mistakes in the work, but when the manager noticed, Jim was saving face by agreeing to fix it.

  • Jim was not saving face in front of the management, the management would not hold him response even if he won't have responded. On the other hand he capitalized and took credit for something which he dismissed to do in front of Jack declaring it as trivial. Infact in eyes of Jack he is already exposed. What it means is in private conversation with Jack he trivialize Jack's concern but in management meeting he is up for the change..
    – AMN
    Nov 5, 2018 at 8:04
  • Did he just say he would fix it, or did he say he will fix it by using someone's idea without credit?
    – Jay
    Nov 5, 2018 at 8:08

There is this idiom "(a) volte-face" which implies complete reversal of an earlier stance.

In the meeting Jim was someone else; I couldn't believe he did a volte-face.


A complete change of opinion or belief. The phrase comes from the Italian term voltafaccia.
Everyone was surprised when the candidate made a complete volte-face on her stance on taxes.

Farlex Dictionary of Idioms. © 2015 Farlex, Inc, all rights reserved.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.