Becoming a go-to person gets you promoted
careercutler.substack.com
careercutler.substack.com
Being able to get rid of (1), either through automation or delegation, allows you to go to (2). If you’re stuck on (1) for too long, it’s better to leave.
Then when I left they replaced me with 4 people cause losing a decade of deep dive rather than topical knowledge hurts.
Had they promoted me, I could have just trained a new person.
Also they greatly reduced bus factor. Looks like a win for the manager.
I've known several people who never got promoted because their bosses knew they'd have to hire 2-3 people to replace them, and there was no budget for extra people.
Of course they did all quit eventually, and I assume the budget for the extra staff was found somehow - albeit too late to keep their expert.
Go-to for correctly operating a dated tool deep in the bowels of the machine? Cog.
Go-to for all questions related to the machine, its history, future, and all machines like it? Not cog.
Boiling it down, is your recognized expertise high or low in scope?
> Go-to for all questions related to the machine, its history, future, and all machines like it? Not cog.
The difference between these two is the people you work with. If people come to you to have their questions answered but can't execute on it properly then... you become #1. Of course this can be twisted around to theoretically be a you problem or it could be an endless churn of warm bodies coming through hiring.
Are you constantly being asked how a system works? Take some time to document it, and then answer future questions by just linking to those docs. It's harder up front, but saves you time in the long run, and also mean that come performance review time you can say "I wrote this documentation <link>!" instead of having to vaguely claim that you definitely answered a lot of questions for a lot of people.
Of course, some companies don't respect that sort of work. I would struggle to be happy at those places.
However, becoming an expert on something is still valuable as long as that something has value outside the company (ie: you can advertise that kind of expertise in an interview).
So becoming an expert in something is valuable and if you realize you've become the "load-bearing employee that never gets promoted or otherwise has company mobility" then it's strong signal that you need to start replying to recruiters.
They are the go-to person for managing projects, but not doing any of the lower level work. Just my experience.
This is obviously anecdotal, but this sorry isn’t atypical from my experience. People aren’t credited (or promoted) unless they ask and work for it. My own strategy was sort of silly, I let my bosses know how much more money I could make if I took up one of the offers I get (there is a severe lack of developers in my area or the world), and well, it worked well enough to get me good raises and into management before I decided I didn’t want to be a manager at all. I’ve cruised by people who sacrificed themselves way more than I’ve ever done, simply by playing the social and political aspects of working, and I’ve seen so many people not get their due, that I really doubt the articles point. That being said, it’s easier to position yourself well in an organisation if you’re genuinely nice to work with and being a go-to person obviously helps with that. Not only because of your knowledge and willingness to help, but also because people who have that last part are generally just more approachable. But unless you figure out a way to turn that into money, then I really double it’ll help you much in the modern job market.
Quality of work doesn’t even really do a lot for people. I’ve worked with three people who did exactly the same job, and the one who produced the best quality work was paid 50% less than the two others because they were “bad at negotiating” pay… I’m sure their manager was happy about that, and it wasn’t even too dangerous as the person was simply “content” which was really a MBA way telling me the person was so uncomfortable with big life altering changes that they would likely work that job until retirement.
Personally I did manage to get promoted, but not before giving notice.
Becoming a technical domain expert doesn't automatically make you helpful to others. You might not have the ability to communicate knowledge, or the ability to foresee how being helpful is ley to moving ahead the corporate chess board.
There are unspoken rules of corporate ladder advancement, which are not discussed in OP's article.
- ladder climbers: people who drift from shop to shop or team to team in search of the next promotion. Theyre on your team just long enough to get real visible with the boss and then theyre gone. they make terrible leadership decisions because the only thing they have to offer is charisma and feel-good meetings.
- walking wrecking-balls: people who complete about 30-45% of a project and cant communicate what theyre doing or the outcomes from their actions. they are unaccountable even to their peers, they walk away from hard tasks or challenges and if something fails they make up excuses before anyone can walk back the root cause to something they did. these get promoted to get them out of the teams way or they spread like a cancer to some other team thats never heard their name before. these people care about having an office, but nod through meetings like a supreme court justice. their direct reports will never encounter them. this is a quarantine promotion.
I think being known for learning quickly and making good decisions under pressure is what gets you promoted. At senior levels not being an asshole is also a prerequisite.
Wisdom says, work hard enough to earn your wage, but remember everything that matters in life happens after hours.
For all your hard work you get rewarded with ... more hard work.
Teach a woman to teach a man to fish. :)
If you like what you do, and they give you new challenges that you enjoy (more pie) and more money/benefits. It's a win win scenario. I realize is not always the case and maybe in many jobs is rarely the case. My whole career almost every promotion has had substantial benefits, opportunities and growth. I am working nowadays less than I did my first 10yrs of career and doing almost 10x the comp.
The shit generally follows the path of least resistance. The more you handle, the more that flows your way.
And now you get nothing. Sure a few people get lucky - but that’s clearly luck with such obvious systemic issues. Like do you not know people? I know way more people who will never retire or own homes than the opposite.
People shouldn’t work hard if the deal gets worse every year. Don’t reinforce this bad system. Tear it down.
woah, this a completely different topic. We're talking here about getting promoted. If you want to discuss the topic of how capitalism has degraded the benefits for workers this is not the thread for it.
> People shouldn’t work hard if the deal gets worse every year. Don’t reinforce this bad system. Tear it down.
You're not "tearing it down" by doing the bare minimum and not getting promoted. You're just hurting your own odds. I did not say work yourself to the bone, there are plenty of ways to show initiative and engagement in your 8hrs at work.
re: "tear it down". Replace it with what? we need serious adjustments, but there's no need to descend into anarchy.
Also it is more beneficial to look like you are hard working employee than actually be one.
In IT scope of the work is endless, there is no point to rush. If you finish early you'll get next ticket.
No doubt they do, but for an idea like "hard work is usually worthwhile" to have any merit, these companies would need to be the norm, and not the subject of "they do exist, they're out there I swear!".
Nope. You get rewarded with exactly how much you're able to get away with demanding via negotiation. The CEO won't suddenly swoop down and say wow what a hard working guy let's double his salary. You get rewarded if you're the only person who's able to do something but you're going to quit because a better company offered you more money. That puts them in the position of either rewarding you or watching you leave.
At most jobs, doing more work without a promotion already on the line just means you'll be expected to do more work going forward and your future evaluations will be based on your higher workload rather than your original baseline, which will make reaching that promotion even harder. Ask me how I know that...
I also don't think that, as I've gotten promoted, I've actually taken on that much extra work. The work itself has changed a lot, but it's work I find easier and more enjoyable so for me it almost feels like I'm taking on less. I'm also militant about my work life balance, and maintain very strict hours where I'm reachable.
One could think of humanity's work as, "we're helping to build a universe." [1]
[0] https://sacredstructures.org/mission/the-story-of-three-bric... — this story supposedly dates back to the 17th century.
[1] https://www.questioningchristian.org/2006/06/metanarratives_... (self-cite)
If you teach them you know how to fish once, you're their personal expert oceanographer for life.
Sadly through that process my role was orphaned, so I was also let go in the round of 2,000+ layoffs that shortly followed.
I really regret telling him what I was working on.
It’s not about what you do at all, it’s just about how you play the game. Many (most?) cases of positioning oneself for promo just involve casting a bigger shadow on the wall by doing the exact same work closer to the flashlight.
At L5+, if you are not playing the game you have very little chance of promo (you will have to work harder than any L+1 around), so if you are largely just interested in building and not posturing, you should just switch companies and make a diagonal move (and then, perhaps, come back).
This is also why you can’t do anything too risky (regardless of the potential reward) at Google unless you are capable of dishing out promotions - this game is what matters to Googlers, and things that don’t help with the game are efficiently discarded.
There are 4 types of questions
1. Questions from architects/leads
2. Questions from peers which learn from what I am saying
3. Questions from peers which do not learn but wants me to do their job
4. Questions from product owners
Naturally 5. Own work - suffers.
1, 2 & 4 are ok. I would like to get rid of 3.
I think my way out would be to promoting 2. to help me with 1, 3 and 4. So I can do more of 5.
If you don't get promoted, there is a risk that you become the guy that is just there to solve everyone else's problem.
Don't be the person who knows how to feed paper in the line printer.
Or repair the coffee maker. (Nowadays, that might be "Know how to make it work when the internet goes down.")
Good article. I wonder if and how it might apply in other fields.
"Nope, no idea."
Stick by this religiously.
Working on incidents gets you involved with everything. Promoted annually for four years before promo growth couldn't compete with external offer
Having good managers is definitely important
My advice is to be thoughtful about your career and understand your company and industry's value system, but avoid cynicism and cynical people.
I'd be more inclined to believe your advice if your other comments on this topic was... realistic or actionable I guess? Caution = cynicism, and companies are either "good" (reward hard work) or "shitty" (??? not good?).
It's my opinion, not particularly advising anyone.
> I'd be more inclined to believe your advice if your other comments on this topic was... realistic or actionable I guess?
Not really asking you to listen to my "advice", just sharing my perspective.
> realistic or actionable I guess?
Not being cynic is pretty realistic and actionable.
> Caution = cynicism, and companies are either "good" (reward hard work) or "shitty" (??? not good?).
That's your understanding. I am a cautious person myself, a bit cynic at times, but they're different things and I'm not the one mixing them up.
You are also oversimplifying "good" and "bad" companies. I never said it was sufficient for a company to reward good work to be a good company, but good companies do reward good work (either with promotion or just better comp and benefits).
A company that doesn't reward good work is shitty yes, I did not think that was controversial.
You want us to "work hard" for the chance of getting a raise or a promotion? We're working, not playing the lottery. If we wanted these risks, we'd start a company. How about these managers write down these rewards in the employment contract instead?
I guess we just don't see things the same way. I'm not a business owner. You're seeing things black and white. "The profits are on their side" is a black and white statement. You do get some of the profits through your salary and sometimes bonus, stock options or RSUs (depending on the company). It sounds like you're unhappy with your share that you don't feel is worth doing any "extra" effort. See my other comments here. You need to find companies where you feel this balance is fair, so you don't get taken advantage of.
> You want us to "work hard" for the chance of getting a raise or a promotion? We're working, not playing the lottery. If we wanted these risks, we'd start a company.
I don't want you to do anything. I am just sharing my experience getting promoted and then as a manager how I have seen other people get promoted. You're free to take or dismiss my experience of course.
You're severely misunderstanding magnitudes of risk. I was only a "business owner" for a brief period early in my career. I did not get a salary at all when I did not make a sell or found a customer, no social security, vacations, or any benefits to speak of. That is way closer to "playing the lottery". I did not have a good social safety net and decided to become an employee. As an employee you get a "guaranteed" salary and benefits for doing some work most of the times for white collar workers in fixed schedule. A "cushy job". You don't get a guaranteed promotion or more salary for the same work however. Do you really think you're owed promotions or increased benefits for doing the same work?
> How about these managers write down these rewards in the employment contract instead?
What do you imagine they'd write? what kind of guarantees about increased salary or promotions do you think they can make in a contract?
Management likes more: - someone who are loyal to them - someone who knows how to communicate to them in a right way - someone who won't threaten them, being promoted to the new role
Becoming a go-to person is necessary but not sufficient to advance. If all you are is a reliable Swiss army knife for the company, you will indeed be stuck with the salary and station of a reliable Swiss army knife.
The tricky part is to be able to decouple the "knowing" and the "doing." If you know how to do all the work, and you also actually do it, yes, you become the infinite sink for all of those things.
If you can, instead, be a sink of knowledge and wisdom, e.g. "here's how I'd approach the problem", "maybe you should connect with Joe in...", "hasn't this problem already been solved with...", that starts to look more like L6+ behavior.
It's the hardest pill to swallow for builders, though - that you can never be good enough at pure building to justify promotion beyond senior level. It's like professional sports. If you're a greater shooter but you can't get other people involved, there's a hard cap on how far your team can go and how far your career will go.
Got it...
And as they are not present, they do not take blame for the issues caused by them.
But for the most part, doing an ok job combined with being liked by your supervisor is far more effective.
promotion for promotion sake is unhealthy, and a symptom of a culture losing its identity