
How do managers get stuck? (2017) - luu
http://www.elidedbranches.com/2017/09/how-do-managers-get-stuck.html
======
aerophilic
This analysis resonates with my experience. It also (somewhat) correlates with
the Peter principal [0], people get promoted to their level of incompetence.

That said, I still remember “the rules” my High School math teacher told me
about “Corporate Life”: 1\. Be able to do your Boss’s job 2\. Make sure you
have someone that can do _your_ job 3\. Dress/act the part of your boss

1\. Is important because the best way to prove you can do the role is to
actually do it. If you can “step in” while your boss is elsewhere, it proves
your ability.

2\. Conversely, if you don’t have anyone that can take over your role, you are
“stuck” especially if your role is critical

3\. As mentioned in the article, your boss/their management needs to feel like
you will be able to represent them appropriately. If they have any doubts,
there is no way you will get the opportunity to prove you can.

[0] [https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/peter-
principle.asp](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/peter-principle.asp)

~~~
taneq
I can see 3) coming across negatively if your boss feels like you’re treading
on their toes, which could be career limiting.

~~~
gondo
also 2) can be dangerous as there will be someone to replace you and make you
redundant

~~~
taneq
True, but if you can't be replaced, you can't be promoted.

~~~
mandeepj
> True, but if you can't be replaced, you can't be promoted.

Not exactly true. If you can't find a replacement internally (or when there is
a conversation about your promotion) then do an external hire

~~~
aerophilic
While nice in principal... that adds friction to your ability to be promoted.

Usually someone promoted someone into a role to fill a specific need. If you
need x months before you can cut over, that decreases your ability to fill any
but the longest term needs.

If however you can leave almost at a “drop of a hat” because you have someone
that can fill your spot, then the moment the org has a need you can fill, BAM
you fill the need. Much lower friction.

------
stormking
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.

~~~
eitally
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.

~~~
cutenewt
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."

~~~
pdpi
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).

~~~
scarejunba
Interesting. So Facebook assumes that some large number of promotions will
fall behind previous performance? Probably a valid assumption. But interesting
that they'd perform at one level and then degenerate when that's recognized.

~~~
pdpi
Sorry — when I said “middle of the pack” I meant performing at “meets all”
level for the level above.

~~~
scarejunba
That makes sense.

------
PorterDuff
Just to play grumpy old guy for a sec., I can't say that I've ever seen this
in action. In my experience.

. Line managers rarely make the leap, if anything they jump laterally or go
into 'new opportunities'.

. Actually escaping the gig and advancing, and I'd say that being a manager
manager is a far more desirable line of work, seems to be more tied to selling
yourself and to being associated with high visibility/profitable/successful
projects which often has little to do with your own personal skills.

The article sounds quite plausible though.

~~~
human20190310
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.

~~~
badfrog
> 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.

~~~
o-__-o
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-...](https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-or-
the-office-according-to-the-office/)

------
chase-seibert
I've done both roles, but my sense is that manager of managers is essentially
a more risky role -- chances of being laid off are higher, with accompanying
risk. Line managers virtually never get laid off.

Compensation seems similar, as well.

~~~
hinkley
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, nobody below them would respect
them. (Though I have heard tales of new NCOs being sweated by their reports
because they clearly did not know anything in a concrete way. They were either
going to learn or they were going to be forced out.)

For everyone else there's a lot of up-or-out. If you've been a middle manager
for 20 years there must be something wrong with you.

~~~
SaltyBackendGuy
> 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.

~~~
walshemj
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.

------
cosmotic
This list seems largely biased toward thriving in a highly-political
organization and largely biased against Actually Getting Things Done.

~~~
raz32dust
Probably true. But then, I think all organizations achieve these
characteristics beyond some critical size. Good executive leadership can help
somewhat, but politics and difficulty in getting things done (a.k.a.
coordination overhead and communication loss) is part of any large org. So
these tips are definitely good to know unless you are planning to always be in
small companies (< ~100 employees).

------
aj7
It’s at least 50% appearance and image.

~~~
dlphn___xyz
in other words - its politics.

------
ed312
If you feel you're doing all three of those categories reasonably well, and
there just are no open roles to advance in your company, what do you do? Does
an MBA help you "level up" in the eyes of HR etc.?

~~~
thinkingkong
Your feeling of how youre doing isnt the goal in these circumstances. You get
promoted based on the opinions of 3 separate groups the least weighted is your
own.

------
test1982
Lack of empathy

------
kyberias
Define stuck, please.

~~~
munchbunny
Wanting to move up or get promoted within the current role, but not getting
promoted after several years.

"Stuck" is in the mindset of the individual.

Edit for clarification: I mean that a person is "stuck" when they feel/think
they are stuck.

