At first I was LOL'ing in my head at this, but given the productivity issues in this country there might sadly be some truth
Work and career progression apathy.. Is it much more prevalent now?
- Thread starter 413x
- Start date
And that's what women voted for so I don't feel sorry for them.
You are also laughing if you are an IVF clinic. Making mega cash from egg freezing.
Soldato
If a manager isn't aware of their reports' abilities and successes without them having to waste a week evidencing them just for the chance of a promotion, they're probably not a very good manager
Last edited:
Caporegime
Still better than settling for some loser because you need someone to support you.
I get the feeling there are more than a few "Tradwives FTW" types in here...
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 May 2006
- Posts
- 7,064
I think it all depends on the mentality of the worker.
some people are really vocal, always shouting how good they are, asking for more money where ever they can.
others are more introverted and just get the job done.
Sadly it is usually the squeeky wheel which gets the grease. You could say that employee does not deserve a promotion (as you just did) but at the same time a good manager, part of their job should be to identify those people as well imo.
Short term you could argue screw it, if someone does the job without asking more money then great........ but long term eventually that person will say sod it and stop trying so hard.
funnily enough it is where i am at now........... i used to go above and beyond, even took my computer away and ruined a 5* all inclusive holiday planning for a work conference abroad.... but after years of it i have decided screw it enough is enough, if the powers that be want me to stay in my lane, i will stay in my lane. my role profile is so much simpler than what i had been doing, however i have definitely dialled it back somewhat now. brilliant for my work life balance.
Covid was the final straw really. I was at home working my ass off being an almost single parent whilst my wife who was only meant to be part time worked almost full time in a covid lab.
then when she came home i then had to start my actual job. All the while in stupid heat, whilst my neighbours sat drinking booze in the garden on furlough and the majority of the work campus where i was got an even better deal on full pay doing nothing (because they were unable to WFH unlike me)
Last edited:
Learning to say "No" is a massive boost for your mental health and work/life balance indeed.
Soldato
Heh, I could pretty much have written this post myself.
My levels of "give a ****" are very much non-existent. I'm fed up with trying to do a good job and do things properly (and as a result getting grief for my stats being lower than average), as there seems to be a company culture of "do things as cheaply and quickly as possible with no concern for the quality or customer experience".
As a result my stats are up, and I'm less stressed, but nobody is picking up the ***** bugs that take forever and we're getting more bugs being introduced by crappy rushed code. Oh no, how terrible... anyway, not my problem
I guess another issue is that this extra household income has just inflated house prices. As that seems to be what people who have more spend on.
You don't need a huge 5 bed house for 3 people.
But many people don't really know what else to do with extra cash.
Associate
This is genuinely the case! It's right that everyone should be allowed/able to work but the knock on effect is that work is worth less now as supply has gone up
Although covid did me great salary wise + WFH.. It was difficult seeing others being paid and not having anything to do
But overall I'd still take what I got as in the long run covid done me many favours.
I don't push to exceed though. I just try to do my job. As seems to be common now.
Honestly? On this forum I expected more "I try my hardest" than this thread has produced
. A good manager will see the quiet but effective employee or the loud all talk and bluster, but neither are great traits. Employees need to speak up, make their points heard, manage constructive if heated discussions. I manage someone who is technically brilliant and a really nice person, but he is far too quiet, reserved and introvert to get a promotion to the next level which requires leadership. As a manager, we set out milestones, i give hime ownership of projects where he will have to handle heated discussions, i have put him on training courses etc. Slowly he makes progress but he can't yet reach the next level due to being so quiet and introverted. He will almost always have the right answer, the best new architecture, identify the potentially critical nuances in design etc, but he cannot successful defend that and communication clearly then he simply can't be the technical leadership role. Instead he currently gets massive RSU etc. to reward the talent. I hope together we will get hime to the next stage, but really it isn't for everyone. Big difference between an IC and a technical leadership role. People skills become much more important.
The other point when it comes to promotions is these should be evidence based with clear goals and milestones. There should be regular performance reviews from the manager but also evaluations from the individual and also team. All of this should be reviewed regularly, document and preserved in a centralised system. Then when it comes to promotion it should be relatively easy for either the manger or employee themselves to summarize all the previous talent assessments, performance reviews, milestones set and passed.
Absolutely, but similarly if the employee doesn't have a record of all the performance reviews and career goals available then chances are they are probably not a good employeeIf a manager isn't aware of their reports' abilities and successes without them having to waste a week evidencing them just for the chance of a promotion, they're probably not a very good manager
ehh, no one said the manager shouldn't do that or doesn't know. The point is if an employee can't be bothered to spend a weeks summarising their previous talent assessments then they don't deserve promotion.
To be clear, i absolutely expect the manager to handle everything for a promotion, but that is built on evidence that also partly comes from the reportee providing feedback and reporting their successes, goals, aspirations, failures.
Management is collaborative. If the reportee never puts in the effort to clearly communicate career goals , achievements etc then don't expect the manager to fabricate something out of think air.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 May 2006
- Posts
- 7,064
oh I don't disagree some roles certainly need someone to be able to fight their corner etc..... it all depends on the role. Me personally I don't want to manage people
My wife OTOH has without any training been given 11 inexperienced staff to line manage one of which has some complex needs.
pays well but would be my worst nightmare.
my level however is so far down the ladder I am a way from that anyway. I am incredibly experienced at what I do but because I don't have a PHD they won't promote me but they expect the same from me as people a grade and probably 20% higher salary than me... which I pretty much spelled out was out of order in my appraisal.
Last edited:
This doesn't actually really exist because promotion is usually achieved by the employee proving they are already performing at the next level, so a promotion is merely adjusting compensation to their current abilities. The Peter Principal can only happen if people are promoted without evidence of them performing at the next level.Makes me think of the Peter Principle.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/peter-principle.asp-final-556adb51ee7f45098cbd12bb1ce4f44e.png)
What Is the Peter Principle?
The Peter Principle theorizes that people in a firm will be promoted to a point where they are no longer qualified, leaving a company with incompetent employees in leadership roles.www.investopedia.com
This is why there is a 4-5 page document that takes a week for an inefficient employee to complete. On a serious note - this is exactly why companies want documentation as evidence to prevent premature promotion
Soldato
I agree, but there's a difference between that and being forced to spend a week jumping through arbitrary hoops for "reasons".
There comes a point where instead of filtering out the people who aren't prepared to put in the work, you're filtering in the people who are desperate. If they're that good of an employee, chances are they'll just move somewhere else that doesn't treat them like a performing seal.
Last edited:
Soldato
That's exactly what happened.
You must have worked in some extremely stringent organisations because I have seen clear examples of this in my career. Saying it doesn't exist is a bit of a sweeping statement.
I know my experience is anecdotal so a cursory search suggests that studies have been done on this subject. eg: https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/134/4/2085/5550760?login=false
If anything it seems to be getting worse in corporate land because of HR box-ticking quotas now. When it does happen, they are usually shuffled sideways after a while into something else where the damage can be minimised rather than trying to demote them and all the complications that brings.
Thinking about it, some of the cabinet positions in government have been pretty good examples of people promoted into a role where they are completely out of their depth.
I worked for a major UK insurance firm several years back, they introduced a new system in which a person needed to argue that they deserved a pay rise (let alone promotion) every so many months while under review. Certain department heads and their favourite people (who were often utter ********* that made things more difficult for everyone else) always seemed to get a raise. It was all about nepotism, being part of a certain clique rather than valid performance review based upon your actual achievements. The skilled workers who wanted to get on with things were often refused raises, the nonsense merchants consistently saw them, the skilled workers mostly left, including myself.
There's a point in which selling yourself is important, but "speaking up/being vocal" often means little to more competent workers or even those with the potential for being good managers. I started working for myself by and large due to utterly useless middle management making things ten times harder for everyone else in order to justify their own position. People can rise to positions because they're capable of doing so when skilled at certain tasks and given the opportunity. The amount of highly vocal "go-getter" types who end up in management or even minor team leading roles I've met that are utterly incompetent, but present well, is mind boggling.
There's a point in which selling yourself is important, but "speaking up/being vocal" often means little to more competent workers or even those with the potential for being good managers. I started working for myself by and large due to utterly useless middle management making things ten times harder for everyone else in order to justify their own position. People can rise to positions because they're capable of doing so when skilled at certain tasks and given the opportunity. The amount of highly vocal "go-getter" types who end up in management or even minor team leading roles I've met that are utterly incompetent, but present well, is mind boggling.
Last edited:
Soldato
I'd argue that's been the norm for a while! Several cabinet members are **** at their role... Don't fire anyone, just shuffle them all around into other roles they also don't have experience in!Thinking about it, some of the cabinet positions in government have been pretty good examples of people promoted into a role where they are completely out of their depth.
It's only our nation's healthcare and education right?