I work in an environment that's somewhere between academia and the professional world. I'm an analyst within this environment, in addition to my professional responsibilities dictated by the workplace's main mission, I assist the PhD's with their research. (I have an masters in Statistics)
I've been working on a project with one of the PhD's for over a year (it goes slow, professional responsibilities get in the way of research). The project is going nowhere for a variety of reasons (the first is that the methodology he wants to use is demonstrably flawed--from a statistical standpoint).
Several times over this time period he has dangled the carrot of co-authorship on the paper (at times saying "you will be a co-author", and a few weeks later saying "if you contribute maybe you will be a co-author". This is doubly frustrating when it seems to me that I'm the only one contributing...). He also has mentioned several times bringing his friend in as co-author as well (his friend has contributed nothing thus far. I met him, he didn't even seem enthusiastic about the project).
Thus far the main methodology we used is one he suggested, but actually bringing that through to completion has been entirely me. It yields no fruit, though, and I feel this whole enterprise has been an exercise in frustration.
I have another idea, approaching the problem in a different direction. I haven't yet done the modeling, but I believe the idea to be ideologically consistent with the original goal of the project, and should be statistically sound. The trouble is, I'm not sure I want to co-author with this person.
Am I wrong to consider nixing their project and doing my own thing on my own?