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.
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.
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.
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.
They are the go-to person for managing projects, but not doing any of the lower level work. Just my experience.
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.
- 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.
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.
Personally I did manage to get promoted, but not before giving notice.