
How To Rise Fast At Work: A True Story - svjunkie
http://www.forbes.com/2009/12/21/rise-fast-job-leadership-careers-employment.html?feed=rss_popstories
======
wallflower
One of my co-workers decided to go the project management route. Our boss at
the time was very supportive, letting him help with the project management
tasks for the current release while still doing some coding duties. This was
probably 5 years ago. He took on project management for another product for a
year and half. And then, what really made his reputation, a high visibility,
high risk project, etc. etc. Now managing 40 people. If I had to hazard a
guess, he's making double what he did as a coder and happier because he was
_never_ happy coding/fixing bugs. If you're not happy coding, maybe management
is a better fit for you. Beware that many of those who leap the chasm to
management don't make it and those who do have to pull themselves up to the
edge of the cliff with their fingernails.

In general, the people I know who were coders who have risen up in the ranks
(probably 2,3 levels above me) in management had a game plan. They knew what
they were trying to accomplish. They had a very good mentor. And they've done
it.

------
BigZaphod
Perhaps I like being a coder/doer too much, but there's an assumption that the
ideal to strive for is to move up the chain into management as quickly as
possible. What fun is that?

~~~
gaius
It's an insidious problem, because ultimately in most organizations hiring
decisions are made by people who _do_ believe that (i.e. they control the
budget), and believe that doing so counts as "success". Which is why you can
be a 40-something with 20 years experience as a hands-on programmer and can't
get hired, because you are viewed by these people as a "failure" for not
having made it into management in your 20s.

~~~
BigZaphod
Sometimes I dread getting older for political reasons... I'm 30 now and have
not had (or wanted) a "real" management position. I guess I'm doomed.

~~~
gaius
Staying hands-on is pretty difficult in other industries. A good friend of
mine is a research scientist. She loves what she does and is good at it and
wants to go on doing it. But now she as been offered two choices, she can go
for a Fellowship and spend her time writing grant proposals and mentoring
students or... Well, no-one really talks about option B. And no-one who's
taken option B is around the lab to ask.

Same in banking, you might be able to stay a trader, if you're good. You
couldn't stay an analyst, it's up or out. Or in engineering, you don't get to
_actually_ design machinery or chips or whatever for long, again, up or out,
gotta make room for the fresh intake of graduates.

This might not be the best way to work, but it's the norm, and a programmer
who really can stay hands-on their whole career is fortunate indeed. My own
strategy in this area is to stay hands-on but do less work directly, spend my
time automating common tasks and developing tools to make junior members of my
team more productive. We'll have to see how that plays out...

~~~
blackguardx
Most of the top people in electrical engineering at any company will be in
their 50s. These aren't managers, these are very senior engineers who design
from a system level.

It is hard to become a system architect without many years of experience under
your belt.

------
jakarta
This article is funny.

It seems like both candidates worked at an investment firm, but neither were
promoted for anything related to doing what investment firms are supposed to
do -- finding good opportunities to invest in.

The 'good' candidate merely figured out how to use excel better and become a
manager. The other guy completed tasks and made friends with fellow analysts.

I have to say, I doubt this place was training their analysts to be good stock
pickers and instead pumped out mediocre returns while gobbling up fees off of
their clients/investors.

~~~
Tawheed
Here is probably how I'd break it down (based on what I've seen my friends in
the finance industry do): Analyst = excel grunt work VP = budget grunt work
Senior VP = investment work

~~~
jakarta
It depends on the fund. All funds are different so it is tough to generalize,
especially since they widely vary in size and responsibility.

I have a good friend that works for a large mutual fund who already pitches
stocks to the PMs. Other guys I know are simply excel monkeys.

In investment banking, it is a bit different. Analysts and Associates are
excel jockeys with the job translating towards sales/deal sourcing as you
climb up the ladder.

------
kentosi
I've got a few points and opinions to throw out here.

Firstly, after reading a lot of comments here it seems that many people are
talking about how NOT to get into management and stay with the job you love
(particularly in reference to programming).

Though this sentiment relates to this article I also find it somewhat
disconnected in the context of Mark and Ted's opinions of their roles. A lot
of commenters clearly seem like they're already in established programming
roles with a degree of authority they enjoy, whereas these two guys in the
article aren't. They're new to their company, and are striving to get to a
place where they're satisfied (quite the opposite situation from many of the
commenters).

Next, the general message I gathered from this article is that being
successful in an organisation is apparently about having an awareness of your
surroundings and making small yet persistent changes without getting in the
way of others. Doing the opposite, which in Ted's case was shameless self-
promotion, working hard, working overtime and being highly-strung with a drive
to get further is not the way to succeed.

Now I find this VERY debatable, because a lot of it is subjective to the
organisation's culture. What's to say that in another organisation that values
aggressive proactiveness Ted would've been promoted instead, while Mark would
have taken another year or two to move up? You cannot teach people how to be
successful in management based on one case-study. Furthermore, each staff had
no idea of their performance until the actual bonus time and hence were kept
in the dark. There's something wrong here if Ted was convinced he was on the
right track. Isn't this what mid-year reviews are all about?

The key messages I can see here are to have an aim, observe and adapt. Mark
had an aim, which was to somehow distinguish himself from the pack. He
observed his environment and he adapted. Ted had an aim too (promotion +
bonus), which he clearly observed because he seemed to have worked his butt
off. Having failed to get his promotion he now has to adapt (move to a new
company, change his ways, whatever).

The story isn't finished yet. A year later tables could turn. Mark could get
comfortable with where he is and slip, while Ted could make it very big.

------
lhuang
A quick point... Excel is a dangerous weapon because the vast majority of
people, office drones included, don't know how to use it.

Really what it all comes down to is positioning yourself in a position where
you aren't easily replaceable is really the "secret" to rising up on the
corporate ladder. Networking and having good visibility into the company's
overall workings and being a rockstar Excel jockey are really just two sides
of the same coin.

From what I've seen, to rise above middle management you need both. A deep
working knowledge of your tools and a good grasp of the big picture and all
its moving pieces.

Also as other posters have mentioned some of the details in the story are
suspect. Ordering supplies and lunch in IBD? Doesn't he have analysts to boss
around and endless pitchbooks to compile?

------
byrneseyeview
_He began ordering lunch for the investment group's weekly meeting and making
sure office supplies were ordered on time and in the right quantities. It was
obvious he didn't mind pitching in where help was needed, and his supervisors
began to notice his work ethic._

That's surprising. I would think that if someone did that at an investment
bank, they'd get fired and replaced with an administrative assistant. Same
work, less pay.

It also sounds like Ted made himself a real pest.

~~~
Retric
A lot of investments banking jobs average 12+ hour days. People waste a lot of
time sitting at their desk with little to do, because they can't leave until
their boss does, and their boss can't leave untill his boss leaves, and the
people at the top got their by working late for years.

------
sriram_sun
In my company, the unwritten rule is that incompetent managers usually take up
the responsibility of ordering lunch and office supplies. Occasionally, some
nonsensical "compliance" paper work is generated to produce the illusion of
work.

------
scrr
Good article. Reminds me of the advice given by this Foerster guy.
<http://www.careeradvicebook.com/> Almost exactly what he recommends.

------
aresant
If we all took the advice of this article, we'd manage ourselves right out of
business.

In my experience rewarding the top performing "hamsters" nets greater
retention and gains for the organizations productivity than a sole focus on
rising managers.

~~~
knieveltech
Or you might manage yourself into a highly efficient team structure with
managers who are actively enabling their people instead of jealously guarding
a fiefdom.

------
sree_nair
Sound Pretty biased to the management side of the story. If Ted & and mark
were equally intelligent/smart, and knowing that ted worked hard to do better
than his collegues , Soon he would have been the "go to member of his team".
and mark would remain the networking guy.

Felt this article assumes Mark is double smart. i.e he can network, see &
improve what other departments are doing & be the "go to member" of the team.

------
efsavage
I'm a little disappointed that this type of "you too can make sacrifices and
work hard...for America!" propaganda made it to the top of HN, and really
disappointed that it wasn't due to irony....

~~~
tkahn6
Where are you getting this sentiment from? At what point does the article
mention "work[ing] hard for America"?

