Promotion? No Thanks

•  
  asander07/17/08 Report as spam
  1

  The downside

  This approach would work well if everyone knew what they were truely capable of or interested in. It would be hard to apply this to new workers just out of college / university. There will also be workers who are less self promoting and will under-estimate what they are capable of. These people may need the boost of confidence that comes with someone more senior recommending them for a different role.

•  
  Joanna Higgins07/18/08 Report as spam
  2

  No promotion - the downside

  Quite. I've just read Big Think's reference to the Brafman book, which indicates that we don't always choose rationally. And in most businesses, promotions are a recognised reward for performance. But creating a sideways option would certainly give everyone a bit more latitude, wouldn't it?

•  
  mey1607/17/08 Report as spam
  3

  RE: Promotion? No Thanks

  basically, Peter Principle.

•  
  simon.greener@...07/18/08 Report as spam
  4

  Promoting from within can be a bonus

  You should not shy away from promoting from within. However it is crucial to specify rigorous and realistic criteria to assess a candidate's interest, experience, ability and potential for a role. A promotion from within the company to a more senior position couldn't fail to be anything but appropriate as long as the candidate has the potential, ability and interest. Experience is the least important as every organisation has different cultures (the way of doing things). If anything the internal applicant has positive qualities because of their inside knowlege.
  In my experience many senior managers make it a policy to hire from outside an organisation - it's wasting local talent if it exists and increases costs making the hire from outside.

•  
  pinukcom07/25/08 Report as spam
  5

  RE: Promotion? No Thanks

  One of the issues with many talent management and leadership development programmes is that they are founded in the mind-set of the current management (or their HR or consultant advisers). Despite much fashionable talk to the contrary, most of this still thinks in terms of careers as either a) ladders within corporations for those who can aspire to middle-to-senior management and b) zig-zag paths through consulting and top management posts in a number of companies for the jeunesse d'or??e who are born (or at least educated) to greatness.
  
  It was certainly my experience that it was not possible to do what you felt you were best at (or even what others KNEW you were best at) because there was an expectation that you wanted to and needed to broaden your experience (and the company's options of how to use you in future), even if that meant doing jobs that you didn't much like and/or were not much good at, so that one day you could aspire to the jobs held by the people who influenced the shape of the leadership programmes - i.e. you were expected to have the same aspirations as they had had some years previously and to be prepared for some character-forming (i.e. miserable) experiences along the way.
  
  One of the more bizarre consequences of this is that divisions often have a rotation of COOs (new one about every 3 years) who have little empathy with the business they are running or its customers (both of whom know they won't be there long) because this is seen to be somehow better for the greater good and even for the division (better than promoting someone from within it who actually wants the job and might be very good at it? of course!). Customers and employees can get very cynical about this kind of behaviour and react accordingly.
  
  It works (or at least, people put up with it) as long as there is some form of implicit contract of loyalty between the indidivuals and the organisation, however when that is weakened as it has been over the past 20 years - for good reasons, no doubt - then people either a) leave b) stay but decine to play the game any more or c) take advantage of the actions of the a + b types by being one of the few who is prepared to put up with the crap. So the "talent pool" is filled with what kind of people?
  
  Need for a serious re-think.

•  
  rs-k07/28/08 Report as spam
  6

  Response to pinukcom

  Thanks very much for your really interesting comments. I'm setting up a blog to put forward and discuss management issues, particularly to do with managing people and I would like to invite you to contribute. My email is rsk@behaviouralscience.com Drop me a note if you're interested.
  Regards,
  Robin

•  
  billparis08/06/08 Report as spam
  7

  pinukcom pinned it down

  In my last job at an US-based analyst firm, I took many different (but related) responsibilities during a re-organization just to end-up with a crap offer to manage the business development of new services with no team, unrealistic growth targets and a flawed go-to-market strategy. My supervisor's explanation ? "Your 'can do attitude' and credibility within the sales team (doing consulting and pre-sales tasks) are key to the position and you currently do not use your best capabilities". Maybe he was right and I was flatterd, but the new position had absolutely no connection with my career path so far and, after a lot of thinking and double-checking I could not see where it would take me. So, promotions can be perceibed as a dead-end if the perception of loyalty is broken. People need to see the high-level vision for their professional development or, at least, what opportunities may be presented in the near future. In my opnion, that's a good way to translate the company's strategy into personal strategies.