Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How do managers get stuck? (2017)

elidedbranches.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 67 posts

Re: How do managers get stuck? (2017)

#41

Post by stormking »

stormking wrote: post #30
ExBritNStuff wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using something like Helpdesk as an example; "having been operating at a higher level" is a Level 1 person who does Level 2 work, and "shows potential to do more valuable work" is a level 1 person who only does level 1 stuff, but knocks it out the park and looks like they will succeed doing higher level work.

I still don't see how that's different. How would a level 1 person "knock it out the park and look like they will succeed doing higher level work" if not by either doing level 2 work or succeeding in some other area that is technically above his paygrade?

Dear downvoter, how about you join the discussion and point out where I'm wrong?

Re: How do managers get stuck? (2017)

#42

Post by walshemj »

SaltyBackendGuy wrote: post #19
hinkley wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder sometimes if the almost-military model of business hierarchies is intentional, unintentional, or emergent behavior of the system. The line manager and lead developers are not unlike non-commissioned officers. They are supposed to be able to talk to the grunts, and even though they don't do the "shit", getting shit done is not abstract for them. They know how to do it in a more concrete way. If they didn't, n…

> If you've been a middle manager for 20 years there must be something wrong with you. In my experience, the Army was the same. If you saw a 18 year E-6 he/she probably had a problem staying out of trouble or were just incompetent. Edit(context): Active duty in a combat MOS.

Really isn't that about the top of the tree for NCO rank as it in the UK - as there are not that may RSM's or even warrant officer roles.

Re: How do managers get stuck? (2017)

#43

Post by draw_down »

stormking wrote: post #22

When it comes to promotions, there is one simple rule: A promotion is not a reward for doing a good job in your current role. For a company, promoting people is an optimization technique. Good employees are hard to find and if you already have one and he or she shows the potential to do even more valuable work, you promote them. It's as simple as that.

Boy oh boy. Does it ever actually work that way? I feel like the reality is, they promote you when you've already been doing the new job for months, maybe years. Or maybe they just never do.

Re: How do managers get stuck? (2017)

#44

Post by adewinter »

stormking wrote: post #30
ExBritNStuff wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using something like Helpdesk as an example; "having been operating at a higher level" is a Level 1 person who does Level 2 work, and "shows potential to do more valuable work" is a level 1 person who only does level 1 stuff, but knocks it out the park and looks like they will succeed doing higher level work.

I still don't see how that's different. How would a level 1 person "knock it out the park and look like they will succeed doing higher level work" if not by either doing level 2 work or succeeding in some other area that is technically above his paygrade?

Let a Level 1 job consist of doing tasks "foo", "bar" and "bash" on a daily basis.

Let Level 2 tasks consist of doing "aleph", "zeta" but also sometimes a little "foo".

Some L1 employee killing it in terms of time-taken-to-complete bars and bashes, as well as being solid at foo...

Is not the same as

Some L1 employee is [okay to above average] at their regular job responsibilities (foo, bar and bash) and every now and then handles aleph and zeta without trouble (and sometimes excels at it).

Re: How do managers get stuck? (2017)

#45

Post by wglb »

stormking wrote: post #41
stormking wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still don't see how that's different. How would a level 1 person "knock it out the park and look like they will succeed doing higher level work" if not by either doing level 2 work or succeeding in some other area that is technically above his paygrade?

Dear downvoter, how about you join the discussion and point out where I'm wrong?

From the guidelines (see link at the bottom of the page):

>Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading.

Re: How do managers get stuck? (2017)

#46

Post by pdpi »

cutenewt wrote: post #26
eitally wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. Well, I agree, but with nuance. A promotion for a knowledge worker role is typically a recognition of already having been operating at a higher level than the employee is currently mapped to. This is not the same as promoting someone because you recognize potential, but those two concepts do usually coexist.

This sounds like the typical corporate line explaining why someone hasn't gotten a promotion: "A promotion for a knowledge worker role is typically a recognition of already having been operating at a higher level than the employee is currently mapped to."

I appreciate where the cyniscim comes from, but e.g. Facebook is fairly explicit about working this way, and makes it work quite well. First, because the criterion for promotion is precisely “performs at roughly the middle of the pack for the next level over”, so there is an objective(ish) metric for what you should be doing. Second, because performance bonuses are mapped such that your effective pay before and after the promotion are essentially the same (so you were both performing, and earning, as if you had the promotion).

Re: How do managers get stuck? (2017)

#47

Post by sokoloff »

walshemj wrote: post #37
habnds wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience, companies that have a policy of type 1 promotions are not to be trusted with one's career.

Yes sounds like a company with rigid hierarchies "you cant have a chair with arms on as your not the right level". Or rules about what the wood a managers desk furniture should be made of and how many square yards of carpet "he" was allowed - note the use of the male pronoun. These are examples from a company I used to work for in the UK.

I once had a Vice President explain to me the rules at the bank he worked for. A person of level X was entitled to an office and one piece of art. A person of level X+1 was entitled to an outer office and two pieces of art, and so on.

When he started telling the story, I assumed he was pulling my leg. Once he got about three levels in and had clear details on all the differences, I realized (sadly) that he wasn't kidding.

Re: How do managers get stuck? (2017)

#48

Post by notmyfuture »

sokoloff wrote: post #47
walshemj wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes sounds like a company with rigid hierarchies "you cant have a chair with arms on as your not the right level". Or rules about what the wood a managers desk furniture should be made of and how many square yards of carpet "he" was allowed - note the use of the male pronoun. These are examples from a company I used to work for in the UK.

I once had a Vice President explain to me the rules at the bank he worked for. A person of level X was entitled to an office and one piece of art. A person of level X+1 was entitled to an outer office and two pieces of art, and so on. When he started telling the story, I assumed he was pulling my leg. Once he got about three levels in and had clear details on all the differences, I realized (sadly) that he wasn't kid…

I worked at a (big) company where this happened: Very expensive HQ offices built with policy that >= Director get private offices. Due to miscount, restructuring or some combination thereof there ended up being ~3 offices less than needed. "Fixed" with a policy change that only >= VP get private offices. This left a very large number of vacant offices and the HQ looking a ghost town.

Re: How do managers get stuck? (2017)

#49

Post by o-__-o »

badfrog wrote: post #33
human20190310 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience, managers who step into a role that someone else has already occupied tend to get stuck. Those who grab territory and take newly created roles as a company expands tend to move quickly.

> In my experience, managers who step into a role that someone else has already occupied tend to get stuck. Those who grab territory and take newly created roles as a company expands tend to move quickly. Sounds like that could just be because the latter case indicates the company/org is growing quickly and making room for people to grow.

Or it sounds like the Gervais Principal to the T[0]. On one side Ryan climbs the ladder and has opportunity for getting the director title in front of him within weeks of joining. The other hand, Michael Scott almost put Dunder-Mifflen out of business with his tenacity to do better or growth. What I’m trying to say is that sociopaths are still on top.. they are just a bit nicer these days thanks to the liberalization of drugs

[0] https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-...

Re: How do managers get stuck? (2017)

#50

Post by closeparen »

eitally wrote: post #24
stormking wrote: post #22

When it comes to promotions, there is one simple rule: A promotion is not a reward for doing a good job in your current role. For a company, promoting people is an optimization technique. Good employees are hard to find and if you already have one and he or she shows the potential to do even more valuable work, you promote them. It's as simple as that.

I disagree. Well, I agree, but with nuance. A promotion for a knowledge worker role is typically a recognition of already having been operating at a higher level than the employee is currently mapped to. This is not the same as promoting someone because you recognize potential, but those two concepts do usually coexist.

This kind of promotion structure basically just launders a manager's intuition through a veil of objectivity. The committee studiously evaluates, with careful argumentation, checks & balances, neutral parties, and appeals, whether the candidate has been doing L + 1 work. But the decision to assign the candidate an L + 1 scope/impact project is made unilaterally by her manager.
Post reply on HN