When Work's more Fun than Promotion
DIBEYENDU GANGULY
TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ FRIDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2005 01:40:24 AM]
Source : www.economictimes.com
Over the two decades he’s worked with Eureka Forbes, Clyde Rodricks has turned down every opportunity to climb up the corporate ladder, preferring to remain a field salesman instead.
If he’d accepted the numerous promotions the company offered him, Rodricks would be a senior divisional manager by now, with over 100 people reporting to him — but he’d probably be earning much less and having less fun.
The senior management of Eureka Forbes, for its part, has turned the 40-year-old Rodricks into an icon, bringing him centre stage in every sales conference and even producing a little booklet on the sales records he’s set in his career.
The company recently institutionalised the career path Rodricks has carved for himself, by announcing that salesmen who choose not be promoted will still get the salary hike that goes with the promotion. And they can take up the option of moving into management whenever they’re ready.
“It’s an option for the mature,” says chief operating officer AV Suresh. “People are unsure about opting for it because they fear it entails reporting to their juniors — which it would in the long run.”
When Laurence J Peter and Raymond Hull first published ‘The Peter Principle’, which says that “in an hierarchy, every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence”, it prompted many organisations to take a second look at their systems, and many individuals to re-evaluate their career options.
Four decades down the line, the Peter Principle is finding wide application in the knowledge economy, with companies creating structures that separate technical from management talent.
Indeed, the IT era has its own satirical guru in the form of Scott Adams and his Dilbert Principle, a variation on the Peter Principle that says “Companies tend to systematically promote their least-competent employees to management, in order to limit the amount of damage that they’re capable of doing.”
Software products major Adobe Systems has created two distinct career tracks where every technical position is mapped against a managerial post with equal compensation packages.
World-wide, the highest position in the tech stream is that of the Adobe Fellow, a computer scientist who works alone and is a ‘thought leader’ in his field, representing the company at various symposia. “A system like this works where individual impact is high,” says Naresh Gupta, MD, Adobe India.
“We have people who have been doing individual work for 30 years, with no management responsibilities. They work on hard problems of systems architecture, which have major implications on our product.”
With a system that rewards and celebrates those who file patents and write conference papers, Adobe India has been encouraging technical excellence. But Gupta says the lure of the managerial position is still high in India, especially when compared to the USA, and many engineers choose to make the switch if given the opportunity.
“We’re a hierarchical society. There’s a bias towards managerial work and the individual contributor is less respected,” he says.
There’s also the fact that demand for managers with technical experience currently outstrips supply, given the rate at which the IT sector is growing.
“It’s tempting for companies to quickly promote senior engineers into managerial positions, even when they’re not cut out for it,” says Pradip Dutta, MD, Synopsys India, which has a two-track career system similar to Adobe’s.
Like many other global IT companies, Synopsys coaches engineers and evaluates their leadership skills before moving them into management positions. It also has a system whereby senior scientists mentor younger scientists without having to take managerial responsibility for their performance evaluation.
“We’ve made an effort to change the mindset that your worth depends on the number of people you have reporting to you,” says Dutta. “The truth is, a company can get away with having average managers, but technical excellence is rare and needs to be protected.”
Another field where individual talent commands a premium is advertising, and there are cases here where those in the creative side of the business are loath to take up managerial jobs.
At Leo Burnett, national creative director KV Sridhar has put in place a system where a talented copywriter can continue to write ad copy all through his career — and earn as much as the creative director in whose team he works. “Everybody doesn’t enjoy the entire gamut of advertising,” says Sridhar.
“I’ve de-linked peoples’ salary and perks from their seniority or the job they do. If a brilliant copywriter doesn’t want to become a creative director, it’s fine. It would be very unfair to them, as well to the organisation, if we were to force it.”
Sridhar has also taken the step of eliminating the eight step hierarchy that traditionally exists from junior copywriter to creative director. Leo Burnett currently has four designations, which he plans to further reduce to two: copywriter and creative director. It’s a fairly radical step and not unexpectedly, he’s run into problems, as a result.
“Since other agencies don’t have this, some copywriters are worried that they’re not going to get a good deal if they ever want to switch. But those who are committed to staying with us have no problems,” he says.
Research and development (R&D) is another sector where one might expect the lessons of the Peter Principle to apply, but interestingly, that’s not really the case, even in sectors like pharma, where R&D set-ups are large.
Says Ganesh Nayak, executive director, Zydus Cadila, “Basic pharma R&D is still new in India and these are not issues yet. Scientists function as teams, not so much as individuals. But we do have separate administrative support for our R&D centre so that scientists can concentrate on their work.”
One of the cornerstones of L&T’s HR policy is that it lets its engineers transfer to any department, be it finance and accounts, HR or corporate communications. But CFO and HR head YM Deosthalee is a bit ambivalent about those who may wish to stick to one thing throughout their careers. “I doubt whether anyone would want to do that,” he says.
“For those who don’t want to be business leaders and want to focus on engineering, there’s the option of being in R&D. But here too, at senior levels, it becomes a managerial job where they have to supervise a team.”
In the final analysis, much depends on what value an organisation places on a true specialist who’s not interested in moving into general management. Those who opt out of the business leadership sweepstakes certainly aren’t going to make it to CEO.
And there invariably comes a time when they hit a compensation ceiling, when their payhike is reduced to an inflationary adjustment. But those like Clyde Rodricks can’t be expected to be too bothered with such considerations. They’re heroes in their organisations, and that’s much better than being the CEO.
Cheers,
Rajat
From India, Pune
101DIBEYENDU GANGULY
TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ FRIDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2005 01:40:24 AM]
Source : www.economictimes.com
Over the two decades he’s worked with Eureka Forbes, Clyde Rodricks has turned down every opportunity to climb up the corporate ladder, preferring to remain a field salesman instead.
If he’d accepted the numerous promotions the company offered him, Rodricks would be a senior divisional manager by now, with over 100 people reporting to him — but he’d probably be earning much less and having less fun.
The senior management of Eureka Forbes, for its part, has turned the 40-year-old Rodricks into an icon, bringing him centre stage in every sales conference and even producing a little booklet on the sales records he’s set in his career.
The company recently institutionalised the career path Rodricks has carved for himself, by announcing that salesmen who choose not be promoted will still get the salary hike that goes with the promotion. And they can take up the option of moving into management whenever they’re ready.
“It’s an option for the mature,” says chief operating officer AV Suresh. “People are unsure about opting for it because they fear it entails reporting to their juniors — which it would in the long run.”
When Laurence J Peter and Raymond Hull first published ‘The Peter Principle’, which says that “in an hierarchy, every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence”, it prompted many organisations to take a second look at their systems, and many individuals to re-evaluate their career options.
Four decades down the line, the Peter Principle is finding wide application in the knowledge economy, with companies creating structures that separate technical from management talent.
Indeed, the IT era has its own satirical guru in the form of Scott Adams and his Dilbert Principle, a variation on the Peter Principle that says “Companies tend to systematically promote their least-competent employees to management, in order to limit the amount of damage that they’re capable of doing.”
Software products major Adobe Systems has created two distinct career tracks where every technical position is mapped against a managerial post with equal compensation packages.
World-wide, the highest position in the tech stream is that of the Adobe Fellow, a computer scientist who works alone and is a ‘thought leader’ in his field, representing the company at various symposia. “A system like this works where individual impact is high,” says Naresh Gupta, MD, Adobe India.
“We have people who have been doing individual work for 30 years, with no management responsibilities. They work on hard problems of systems architecture, which have major implications on our product.”
With a system that rewards and celebrates those who file patents and write conference papers, Adobe India has been encouraging technical excellence. But Gupta says the lure of the managerial position is still high in India, especially when compared to the USA, and many engineers choose to make the switch if given the opportunity.
“We’re a hierarchical society. There’s a bias towards managerial work and the individual contributor is less respected,” he says.
There’s also the fact that demand for managers with technical experience currently outstrips supply, given the rate at which the IT sector is growing.
“It’s tempting for companies to quickly promote senior engineers into managerial positions, even when they’re not cut out for it,” says Pradip Dutta, MD, Synopsys India, which has a two-track career system similar to Adobe’s.
Like many other global IT companies, Synopsys coaches engineers and evaluates their leadership skills before moving them into management positions. It also has a system whereby senior scientists mentor younger scientists without having to take managerial responsibility for their performance evaluation.
“We’ve made an effort to change the mindset that your worth depends on the number of people you have reporting to you,” says Dutta. “The truth is, a company can get away with having average managers, but technical excellence is rare and needs to be protected.”
Another field where individual talent commands a premium is advertising, and there are cases here where those in the creative side of the business are loath to take up managerial jobs.
At Leo Burnett, national creative director KV Sridhar has put in place a system where a talented copywriter can continue to write ad copy all through his career — and earn as much as the creative director in whose team he works. “Everybody doesn’t enjoy the entire gamut of advertising,” says Sridhar.
“I’ve de-linked peoples’ salary and perks from their seniority or the job they do. If a brilliant copywriter doesn’t want to become a creative director, it’s fine. It would be very unfair to them, as well to the organisation, if we were to force it.”
Sridhar has also taken the step of eliminating the eight step hierarchy that traditionally exists from junior copywriter to creative director. Leo Burnett currently has four designations, which he plans to further reduce to two: copywriter and creative director. It’s a fairly radical step and not unexpectedly, he’s run into problems, as a result.
“Since other agencies don’t have this, some copywriters are worried that they’re not going to get a good deal if they ever want to switch. But those who are committed to staying with us have no problems,” he says.
Research and development (R&D) is another sector where one might expect the lessons of the Peter Principle to apply, but interestingly, that’s not really the case, even in sectors like pharma, where R&D set-ups are large.
Says Ganesh Nayak, executive director, Zydus Cadila, “Basic pharma R&D is still new in India and these are not issues yet. Scientists function as teams, not so much as individuals. But we do have separate administrative support for our R&D centre so that scientists can concentrate on their work.”
One of the cornerstones of L&T’s HR policy is that it lets its engineers transfer to any department, be it finance and accounts, HR or corporate communications. But CFO and HR head YM Deosthalee is a bit ambivalent about those who may wish to stick to one thing throughout their careers. “I doubt whether anyone would want to do that,” he says.
“For those who don’t want to be business leaders and want to focus on engineering, there’s the option of being in R&D. But here too, at senior levels, it becomes a managerial job where they have to supervise a team.”
In the final analysis, much depends on what value an organisation places on a true specialist who’s not interested in moving into general management. Those who opt out of the business leadership sweepstakes certainly aren’t going to make it to CEO.
And there invariably comes a time when they hit a compensation ceiling, when their payhike is reduced to an inflationary adjustment. But those like Clyde Rodricks can’t be expected to be too bothered with such considerations. They’re heroes in their organisations, and that’s much better than being the CEO.
Cheers,
Rajat
From India, Pune
hii yes, i read this article too, and it makes sense. but i dont think its applicable everywhere. do comment
From India, Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Dear Rajat
This is indeed a very different and interesting read...
and i also like it particularly, as to much extent i too belong to this "When Work's more Fun than Promotion" genre...and i had posted such intentions of mine in a reply to "HR people as CEO" in CiteHR topic.
Its nice to see these people actually getting well paid, recognized and freedom to do what they like doing...and so i hope to stick to mine.
Thanks again for the post..
With regards
Pragya
This is indeed a very different and interesting read...
and i also like it particularly, as to much extent i too belong to this "When Work's more Fun than Promotion" genre...and i had posted such intentions of mine in a reply to "HR people as CEO" in CiteHR topic.
Its nice to see these people actually getting well paid, recognized and freedom to do what they like doing...and so i hope to stick to mine.
Thanks again for the post..
With regards
Pragya
Hi,
If this practice is entailed in every organisation, it would reflect truly the phrase, "All jobs are respectable". Sadly, in India, we still regard the "higher" positions as more respectable. Even during my daily course of college lectures, I come across many of my class mates who choose to refer to the "internal experts" as lower level employees. As my Market Research professor aptly said, " These very "lower level employees", as you wrongly refer to them, are the ones who can tell you the whole and soul of the organisation rather than the ones at the managerial positions"
If it's the pay that has to decide whether an employee is to be respected or not for many, though it should be the nature and excellence of the job, then I firmly believe the internal experts deserve a better pay than the one already being offered to them.
Regards,
Vinisha.
From India,
If this practice is entailed in every organisation, it would reflect truly the phrase, "All jobs are respectable". Sadly, in India, we still regard the "higher" positions as more respectable. Even during my daily course of college lectures, I come across many of my class mates who choose to refer to the "internal experts" as lower level employees. As my Market Research professor aptly said, " These very "lower level employees", as you wrongly refer to them, are the ones who can tell you the whole and soul of the organisation rather than the ones at the managerial positions"
If it's the pay that has to decide whether an employee is to be respected or not for many, though it should be the nature and excellence of the job, then I firmly believe the internal experts deserve a better pay than the one already being offered to them.
Regards,
Vinisha.
From India,
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
25ways to fun at work.doc
Trg Games Fun@work.ppt
Fun Ideas at work.pdf