[HN Gopher] Things I wish someone told me about getting a promotion
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Things I wish someone told me about getting a promotion
        
       Author : _ttg
       Score  : 89 points
       Date   : 2021-05-13 10:19 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (radhika.dev)
 (TXT) w3m dump (radhika.dev)
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | Pfhreak wrote:
       | One thing I tell all my folks and mentees is to understand why
       | they are pushing for promotion. Engineering promotions are
       | different jobs. You'll be taking on different responsibilities
       | and expectations, and blindly chasing a level bump just because
       | the number of bigger can lead to bad outcomes.
       | 
       | Whether it's pay, prestige, interest in expanded scope,
       | whatever... Make sure you know that motivates your drive for the
       | promo.
        
       | rjmill wrote:
       | Great points overall. One thing I'd add if you're looking to get
       | promoted in an individual contributor role:
       | 
       | Ask your manager what it would take to get a promotion. It's
       | different at different companies.
       | 
       | Furthermore, asking lets your manager know that you're trying to
       | push yourself to the next level. If you're already operating at
       | the next level, it'll help the manager notice sooner. If you've
       | still got some ways to go, your manager may be able to help you
       | find opportunities for growth.
       | 
       | The worst cases would be where your manager can't help promote
       | you (no matter how much you deserve it) or your manager actively
       | thwarts your advancement. In the former case, asking early can
       | help ease feelings when you get your promotion at another job. In
       | the latter case, your manager has probably been thwarting you all
       | along. But now you know. Don't waste your time trying to impress
       | someone who will never acknowledge your efforts.
       | 
       | If you want to advance, talk to your manager. They can help. If
       | they can't/won't, find an environment that's more supportive of
       | your growth.
        
       | frankfrankfrank wrote:
       | One thing I was expecting to see was that promoting yourself by
       | moving, i.e., selling yourself to other companies is not only the
       | best method for price discovery for yourself, but also that it
       | will not come with excess responsibilities, i.e., promotions
       | without/inadequate pay and mostly more responsibilities/work.
       | 
       | It is an issue and something I have been thinking about, because
       | the corporate machine thinks it is saving itself money by
       | screwing its employees, but there are many other way in which in
       | reality is just undermines value and cuts growth and future
       | earnings potential when your "human resources" decide to take
       | their resources and institutional knowledge to a different
       | company after years of sub optimal deployment due to the
       | corporate culture.
       | 
       | For some corporations the burn and churn model may work; some big
       | finance, insurance, tech, and consulting firms come to mind, but
       | I don't think it can work without having generated a certain
       | (al)lure.
        
         | frobozz wrote:
         | Yes! Several months of doing most of the higher grade work to
         | prove yourself worthy of promotion.
         | 
         | Then you actually get the promotion (normally with the smallest
         | possible payrise). They still won't let you let go of all your
         | old duties while piling new ones on you. And they keep hounding
         | you to aim for the next promotion, which is increasingly
         | unavailable.
        
       | akavel wrote:
       | (Per HN guidelines:
       | 
       |  _> If the title contains a gratuitous number or number +
       | adjective, we 'd appreciate it if you'd crop it. E.g. translate
       | "10 Ways To Do X" to "How To Do X," and "14 Amazing Ys" to "Ys."
       | Exception: when the number is meaningful, e.g. "The 5 Platonic
       | Solids."_
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | impoppy wrote:
       | Don't let this article get in your head if you want a promotion
       | or a raise.
       | 
       | 1 and 6 are total BS. If your company does not have KPI or
       | whatever useless and evil things project managers invent, just go
       | to your manager and tell them you want a raise the moment you
       | feel like you're doing good and deserve it. And if the company
       | still won't give you a raise then I doubt it values you enough.
       | 
       | My salary raised over 200% in half a year just because I
       | underestimated my base tag and asked for a raise every time I
       | felt like I was doing very good. Although that's not only about
       | my performance but soft skills as well as pointed out somewhere
       | in the article.
       | 
       | My manager once said: "Business does not care about you. How
       | modesty can help you achieve things?".
        
         | EricE wrote:
         | Six has been key to my carrier advancement. Every single job I
         | got was people coming to me - because I was visible and they
         | liked what they saw of me and thought I would be a good fit.
         | And in all but one it ended up working out for both of us, and
         | in that one not so great fit I transitioned to other satisfying
         | and mutually beneficial work.
         | 
         | Visibility should never be underestimated - not just for
         | potential positive, but negative effects too. So many of our
         | younger generation doing so many stupid things on social media
         | is going to be a real long term problem if attitudes around
         | things like cancelling people for anything uttered at any point
         | in time on Twitter aren't changed more broadly in our society.
        
         | ironmagma wrote:
         | This is accounted for and preempted at many corporations who
         | enforce that promotions are only given once a year, and at a
         | set time, or something like that.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | txsoftwaredev wrote:
       | "I've had (cis, white, male) friends tell me that they were
       | basically promoted on potential and didn't have to actively go
       | out of their way for several months to prove their performance.
       | It'd be nice if that happened to the rest of us, but don't bet on
       | it."
       | 
       | Where is all this white privilege? I seem to have missed the boat
       | (I have the correct pigmentation apparently). I had to provide
       | value in order to be promoted / get raises and actually speak up
       | and ask for it.
        
         | 908B64B197 wrote:
         | > Where is all this white privilege?
         | 
         | On Twitter.
        
         | eyelidlessness wrote:
         | Just because a type of privilege exists doesn't mean it's
         | universally applied or doesn't coexist with other disadvantages
         | that might dampen it.
         | 
         | I've experienced biased treatment in my favor as a white person
         | who presents male, and against me because I'm neurodivergent.
         | I've also experienced fair treatment, and learned correction
         | toward such, by leadership who value inclusion and listen.
         | 
         | The author isn't suggesting that _all_ white cis men _always_
         | get promoted based on potential without having to demonstrate
         | the relevant qualifications consistently, but that it's more
         | likely.
         | 
         | If you don't think that's true, there are a zillion studies
         | that validate it. I say this because I'm a month and a half of
         | weekends into writing what I thought would be a weekend blog
         | post about addressing comp disparities, and so far all I have
         | is a draft explaining why I chose the source I did. I'd be
         | happy to link it, if you're interested in learning more!
        
       | willcipriano wrote:
       | The visibility point is worth noting. I've noticed that in SE
       | jobs, luck of the draw plays a lot into it. If you make modest
       | progress on a project people are excited about, management will
       | shout your name from the rooftops. On the other hand, toil nights
       | and weekends on a loss leader and people will ask "do we really
       | need Bob?"
       | 
       | If you get put on a project like that, it's probably best career
       | wise to find a new role.
        
         | conjectures wrote:
         | Seems like a variant of the Fundamental Attribution Error.
         | Explain in terms personality something caused by situation.
        
         | muttled wrote:
         | This unfortunate reality is probably why Google services keep
         | ending up deprecated and abandoned as everyone flocks to the
         | new-new.
        
         | Jenk wrote:
         | God yes, and if you work on the literally visible (UI) your
         | work is so much more valued than if you are working somewhere
         | amongst that cloudy bit of the platform diagram with all the
         | lines and boxes that just does stuff.
        
           | thinkmassive wrote:
           | I was on a project to automate provisioning of trial
           | environments (VPC, EKS, our software deployed on top) for
           | prospective customers. Other members of this group were
           | primarily marketing and management, I was the only engineer.
           | 
           | My portion of the work was described as "pressing a button"
           | so I removed myself from the project at the earliest
           | opportunity.
        
           | moshmosh wrote:
           | About the only times I've seen backend work get _any_ kind of
           | positive reaction in a meeting or presentation, like UI does
           | _constantly_ , is when a bad DB query has been fixed so it
           | drops from 20s to 20ms, or something like that.
        
             | ryall wrote:
             | Premature Optimisation is terrible for your career path. In
             | this case premature means "before management notices" ;)
        
         | jerf wrote:
         | A bit of career advice that has served me amazingly well over
         | the years: Stick your head up every so often, maybe every six
         | months, and assess where your position is in the company
         | relative to the company's goals. If you're on a sideline
         | project, or if your company is moving away from where you are,
         | or you're in a project that just isn't doing well, take action
         | to start angling away from that. Try to get moved to a good
         | project. Or, if you've got the institutional reputation, see if
         | you can't be the lead or part of a team for a new project in
         | line with the company goals and headed towards obvious revenue
         | bottom lines. Or, worst case, find a new job, but this is not
         | always necessary.
         | 
         | It may be a months-long transition, even, but often if you are
         | persistent there's nothing impossible about this, and it
         | doesn't have to be something that you're constantly stressing
         | about. It's just a light touch applied every so often. Once
         | you're in such a position it'll usually be some _years_ before
         | you _need_ to worry about this again. But even so, keep
         | sticking your head up every so often and see what 's going on,
         | just to be sure.
         | 
         | But do it on _purpose_. Don 't just sit back and take whatever
         | gets assigned to you. This doesn't even have to be stressful
         | necessarily, because while you may encounter local resistance,
         | at the corporate level nobody is ever going to complain that
         | you're trying to align yourself harder with where the company
         | is going. It's not like you're asking to pursue a pet project
         | on the company dime with no prospect of payout... it's the
         | opposite of that in almost every way.
        
       | pietromenna wrote:
       | Great article, I specially liked that you pointed out 3 points:
       | Visibility, Keep learning and being in the right place makes all
       | the difference.
        
       | EricE wrote:
       | Two followed by Six on his list got me every promotion/increase.
       | Only twice within the same org was I able to get a
       | promotion/increase my salary. While it's possible, it's often way
       | easier to get an increase by moving to a different organization
       | or company. Which can be annoying - or an opportunity for growth
       | you hadn't considered.
        
       | rgblambda wrote:
       | >I thought that the only way to get a promotion was to get a new
       | title along with a new job.
       | 
       | Are companies finally catching on to this and starting to
       | encourage upward progression?
        
         | dominotw wrote:
         | No. Its almost impossible to go to different level of a ladder
         | in a new company. Maybe if its a startup;
        
       | sneak wrote:
       | There's little/no penalty to jobhopping frequently in this field,
       | so I wonder how much benefit there is to sticking it out
       | (presumably underpaid) until you can catalyze a promotion/raise.
       | 
       | I think the best way to optimize your interaction with the market
       | as an FTE is to simply always be occasionally interviewing and
       | scouting around. There are lots of biases and inertia and
       | anchoring and stuff with orgs with which you have an existing
       | relationship.
        
         | dijit wrote:
         | > There's little/no penalty to jobhopping frequently in this
         | field
         | 
         | This is not my experience as a person involved in hiring in
         | Europe.
         | 
         | If you never stay somewhere more than a year it's a red flag.
         | 
         | If it's less than 6months then you won't pass the HR filter.
        
           | Bulpi wrote:
           | i would not subscripe to saying a year or 6 month is
           | frequently.
           | 
           | At least for me frequently is 1-3 years while i do wanna know
           | why you left your company after a year.
           | 
           | But it is easy to come up with a reason why you switched
           | early and in this market, i take one person who swtiched
           | early but feels like a good candidate over one who feels like
           | a bad one.
           | 
           | The market in germany was empty the last 5 years, we were
           | happy to get what we could.
        
           | sneak wrote:
           | I didn't mean to suggest anything less than a year. The topic
           | of TFA is internal promotions; are people getting promoted in
           | their first year?
           | 
           | My suggestion is that you shouldn't wait very long at all for
           | an internal promotion if you can just get a new job that pays
           | better. I can't imagine this is a process that you engage too
           | much in in the first year of a job, where you likely wouldn't
           | be eligible for a promotion in the first place.
        
             | dijit wrote:
             | Ah, I understand. Then I think we're in agreement!
        
         | analyst74 wrote:
         | Job hopping up to senior engineer is fine, but to progress
         | beyond that requires support network and influence, which is
         | hard to acquire quickly if you join as a new face.
         | 
         | Of course, if you made a bad first impression or grew the wrong
         | kind of reputation in your firm, it may be easier to do a
         | lateral switch to start fresh.
        
         | danaris wrote:
         | > There's little/no penalty to jobhopping frequently in this
         | field
         | 
         | As long as you're already wealthy enough to be able to
         | comfortably afford to move. And single, or with a stay-at-home
         | or fully-remote spouse.
        
           | sneak wrote:
           | Who moves in 2021 to write software?
        
             | danaris wrote:
             | I mean, the remote question is still very much up for
             | debate in most places.
             | 
             | Personally, I think any company that refuses to offer full
             | remote work to any developer who wants it deserves to crash
             | and burn. However, I also think that's wishful thinking in
             | the near-to-medium term: I'm expecting to see at least a
             | small majority of companies try to force all their
             | employees back remote once they decide that enough people
             | are vaccinated that they can call the pandemic "over
             | enough".
             | 
             | I think it's massively premature to dismiss concerns about
             | having to relocate for a new job at this point.
        
               | sneak wrote:
               | > _I 'm expecting to see at least a small majority of
               | companies try to force all their employees back remote
               | once they decide that enough people are vaccinated that
               | they can call the pandemic "over enough"._
               | 
               | Small majority means a large minority who don't. It's
               | simple: just work for those. You're also talking about
               | the future; right now, the majority is remote. Get any
               | one of those, then simply don't ever relocate and let
               | them shoot themselves in the foot if they want to fire
               | you.
               | 
               | SWEs have their pick of employers, that isn't up for
               | debate any longer.
               | 
               | The only way labor gets any power is through refusing
               | having their deals made worse.
        
           | Bulpi wrote:
           | I moved to a big city when i started my work life for this
           | single reason: opportunities.
           | 
           | No need to move when you just switch your public transport
           | line.
           | 
           | Nonetheless, honestly i think career progression is totally
           | different if you don't live in a city or if you are not very
           | flexible.
        
         | deelowe wrote:
         | I see a string of 1-3 year stints as a potential red flag
         | personally. Anything less than a year will definitely be
         | scrutinized. There have absolutely been resumes I've passed up
         | on where there was a trend of ~2 years in a role before moving
         | on to another company or team.
         | 
         | My rationale: Especially in more senior roles, 2 years is about
         | the sweet spot where your house of cards can start to fall
         | apart. You start a new role, spend 1-3 months ramping up,
         | another 3-6 months strategizing/planning, and a year or so
         | executing. By the end of all this, you're ~2 years into it and
         | those initial ROI statements of $XM per year will start getting
         | assessed.
        
           | bradlys wrote:
           | And for every person like yourself - there are plenty of
           | companies hiring people like me who are going into their 6th
           | job in 8 years. (Comp is ~400k/yr, was much higher in
           | previous role but that's stock appreciation at work)
           | 
           | :/ 2 years is usually where people can only put up with so
           | much toxicity before leaving. Even at 1m+/yr, I couldn't last
           | longer than 2.5 years. A lot of work environments change too
           | - so, often you're quitting your new manager (who won't let
           | you transfer) and not the company.
        
             | deelowe wrote:
             | It really depends on the context. Nothing is black and
             | white when it comes to hiring.
        
           | triceratops wrote:
           | I've been in the industry over 10 years, only one of my jobs
           | has lasted over 3 years. And even when I don't leave the
           | company, I do change my team after about 2 years.
        
       | tkiolp4 wrote:
       | Sorry but: fuck this. I also work as a software engineer, and I
       | focus on one thing only: professionalism. Professionalism is
       | about:
       | 
       | 1. knowing my stuff. I got my degree, I read, I experiment with
       | new tech and I never stop learning.
       | 
       | 2. responsibility. Am I working on Issue 345? You bet I'll do my
       | best finishing it on time or I'll inform you if that's not
       | possible way beforehand.
       | 
       | 3. don't harm others with the excuse of points 1 or 2.
       | 
       | I don't care about visibility or playing politics. I don't care
       | about levels. The idea of "performing" at a certain level is
       | ridiculous. I do care about getting compensated for the stuff I
       | do, but based only in points 1 and 2 above. It has worked for me
       | in many cases, although sometimes I've had to quit because
       | companies were expecting me to play the game.
        
         | irrational wrote:
         | This is me. Every year at review time I get the usual, where do
         | you want your career to go? What are your next steps? Um,
         | frankly I very happy where I am, with my current compensation,
         | with my current benefits, etc. I don't really want to go
         | anywhere? It has worked for me the past 20 years. Hopefully it
         | will work for the next 15-20 years or whenever I retire.
         | Though, I enjoy my work so I'm in no hurry to retire.
        
       | hansor wrote:
       | >You will never get a promotion or raise if there's no formal
       | performance review process and career ladder.
       | 
       | That is total BS. I had promotion multiple times just because
       | business owner liked me and valued my work.
       | 
       | >You have to be performing at the next level for several months
       | 
       | Total BS too. Maybe in India.
       | 
       | > VISIBILITY
       | 
       | This one is not BS! I have seen many many developers without any
       | rise - just because they do not attend any meetings, they look
       | like bumps(no suits!), and those who do not talk much with their
       | own boss or boss above...
       | 
       | When I manage to do something BIG - i make sure that my boss, his
       | boss, and boss above KNOWS that we tried hard and delivered. It's
       | not a shame to brag about real accomplishments :)
       | 
       | In that way I received 32% pay-rise in past 2 years.
        
         | Clubber wrote:
         | >That is total BS. I had promotion multiple times just because
         | business owner liked me and valued my work.
         | 
         | Yes, I would say in my experience that in an environment that
         | utilizes formal performance reviews, I was _less_ likely to get
         | a promotion. When it 's a small company that is making money,
         | and you wow your boss and make yourself invaluable, you get
         | promotions / raises. It really boils down to busting your ass
         | to get things done and letting the powers that be know it.
        
         | elliottcarlson wrote:
         | > Total BS too. Maybe in India.
         | 
         | That was unnecessary -- this is something that is indeed an
         | expectation in _some_ career ladders -- it's not a global
         | truth, but nothing is.
         | 
         | While the author made generalized claims and absolutes, so did
         | you to the contrary - when the reality is always "it depends on
         | who you are, and who you report to". Claiming total BS is
         | probably more harmful in this case.
        
         | philjohn wrote:
         | Both my current, and previous employer (US tech firms) practise
         | trailing promotions.
        
         | giantg2 wrote:
         | ">You have to be performing at the next level for several
         | months
         | 
         | Total BS too. Maybe in India."
         | 
         | This is not BS. My company in the US expects you to be
         | performing at the next level before promoting you. Where do you
         | work? I work at a company that is regarded as doing the right
         | thing and having good intentions, yet they will make you work
         | for up to years in a role above your own before promoting you.
         | 
         | I did this for at least a year before getting promoted to
         | midlevel. Then I performed the role of senior dev and then tech
         | lead for a year each and still did not get promoted. (They
         | started to talk about it, but wanted me to take a 13% increase
         | in hours for a 7% raise - that's not a real promotion in my
         | book)
         | 
         | I would say the list the OP posted is not great. It might be
         | generally applicable, but every company is so different that it
         | doesn't really matter. Even in the same company with a
         | standardized process, promotions can vary greatly from manager
         | to manager.
         | 
         | I _hate_ visibility. I do begrudgingly agree that it 's
         | necessary to get promoted in most companies. I really think
         | that talent identification and rewards should be handled by the
         | managers. Having people toot their own horn can take away from
         | the team spirit between members and even create a perverse
         | motive for what work/tasks people are willing to do. I've seen
         | terrible tech leads that only for to where they did because
         | they were yes men and would take credit for putting out fires -
         | fires that were a result of their own shortsighted designs.
         | 
         | But hey, I guess that's why I'm still a shitty midlevel dev
         | that's only seen a 30% (22% inflation adjusted) pay increase
         | over 9 years and doesn't even make $100k.
        
           | hansor wrote:
           | >I hate visibility. >I'm still a shitty midlevel dev that's
           | only seen a 30% (22% inflation adjusted) pay increase over 9
           | years and doesn't even make $100k.
           | 
           | My advice: 1. Buy cheapest black or dark blue suit, buy few
           | cheapest white shirts, buy cheapest leather shoes. You can do
           | it under 120$ - and it will be best investment in your life.
           | 
           | 2. BRAG when you do amazing stuff.
           | 
           | Managers WILL notice if you CC them in email or talk about it
           | in public. No need to "steal" success from anyone from your
           | team - honestly brag about stuff that you personally made!
           | 
           | You can for example send email at 9 PM to your team, boss and
           | HIS boss such us:
           | 
           | HI! I'm glad to announce that FEATURE XYZ IS WORKING, I will
           | further test it in night, but it seems that its ready for
           | production. WE MADE IT :)
           | 
           | Otherwise your BOSS and HIS BOSS will never know that you are
           | amazing! You need to show them that you are doing fantastic
           | work - otherwise, they might be too busy to notice.
        
             | moshmosh wrote:
             | 1) A suit at or under $120 will probably be mostly or
             | entirely synthetic. Even used, you may have trouble finding
             | something in good shape that's wool at that price. You're
             | gonna lose a lot of time trawling through estate and garage
             | sales to achieve that, most likely. You don't need a super-
             | expensive suit, but it needs to 1) fit (off-the-rack _will_
             | need a tailor 's hand unless you're the luckiest person in
             | the world) and 2) not look like it's made out of nylon. If
             | you're buying new and plan for regular wear over a long
             | time, also consider getting a second pair of trousers with
             | it.
             | 
             | 2) Don't buy a black suit. It screams "I only own one suit,
             | and it's this". It's the suit-color of CEOs who own 20
             | suits in many colors, and college interns who own exactly
             | one. Navy or charcoal (a very dark grey) are much better
             | for a business-oriented sole suit. Unless your family and
             | friends are pretty fancy, the charcoal can probably do
             | wedding & funeral duty, too, without getting you any funny
             | looks. Works alright for a fancy dinner or evening event,
             | too, unless we're talking something upscale enough that you
             | need to be looking into dinner jackets (tuxes).
             | 
             | 3) $120 _might_ get you used leather shoes that are in OK
             | shape. If you pay that much for new leather shoes, they are
             | assuredly _not_ leather and will fall apart in a hurry
             | under actual wear. It 'll also probably be obvious they're
             | not real leather, especially as they wear in. Leather shoes
             | (not boots--they're higher as there's more material) start
             | around $200-240 new. If you're actually going to wear these
             | shoes more than a couple times a year, go for the real
             | thing. Used is fine, but, again, $120's pushing it on price
             | (most of the used shoes on the market didn't _start_ at
             | $200ish, but more like $300+, is why most are still at or
             | over $120 if they 're in good condition)
        
               | hansor wrote:
               | I'm talking here about bare minimum survivor kit :) [also
               | I'm not from US so prices are lower here I guess]
               | 
               | Even worst and cheapest possible suit ["slim fit"
               | preferably] is still making you looking better than 95%
               | of people around - as they don't know the difference.
               | 
               | Modern nylon can look and feel GOOD if mixed with
               | viscose. Such suits are ridiculously cheap. I have few of
               | such suits, and to be honest - people(let's say ladies on
               | the street) do not see the difference between those and
               | 90% wool ones. :)
               | 
               | Same goes with cheap Chinese shoes. If you take care of
               | them - they will last even if they are shit. For example
               | I still wear 100% leather shoes I bought for 40$ over 4
               | years ago. I just take great care of them and I fix them
               | on my own.
               | 
               | My thesis is: get cheapest stuff and make most of it.
               | Same as: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimax
        
               | moshmosh wrote:
               | On a budget, I'd favor getting a blazer or three and one
               | or two pairs of good shoes/boots over buying a suit, if a
               | person's really starting from nearly-scratch in the nice
               | clothes department. They're (decent blazers) easier to
               | buy used at a fairly low price, aren't quite as
               | tailoring-required as suits, and can be dressed up or
               | down very easily. They also blend in better at anti-suit
               | tech companies.
               | 
               | > Modern nylon can look and feel GOOD if mixed with
               | viscose. Such suits are ridiculously cheap. I have few of
               | such suits, and to be honest - people(let's say ladies on
               | the street) do not see the difference between those and
               | 90% wool ones. :)
               | 
               | This is true! 1) a lot of people aren't great at telling
               | the difference to begin with, so depending on your
               | "audience", it may not matter much, and 2) if you _are_
               | good at telling the difference, it is possible to find
               | modern materials that don 't scream "this is polyester"
               | the way older synthetic suits do.
        
         | jerf wrote:
         | Keep in mind the high degree of variance we're all going to
         | experience due to the fact that there's a lot of variance in
         | the field and in general most of us have held a small number of
         | jobs. Those of us who have held enough jobs to have even an
         | _anecdotally_ -significant sample arguably weren't around long
         | enough in any one place to get a solid sense of how their
         | promotions worked!
         | 
         | There's plenty of places that hand out promotions as rewards
         | for being good at your current job. There's plenty of places
         | that require to you to have been doing some percentage of the
         | promotion already. There's plenty of places that just never
         | promote you. Heck, in different times and places, the same
         | company can end up doing all of the above. Calling bullshit on
         | any one of those because you've never experienced them is not
         | sound.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | hansor wrote:
         | Ohh sh*t. Sorry if i offended anyone by "Maybe in India"!
         | 
         | What I meant is that there are some sane companies where
         | promotion or rise is more about motivation, and its not driven
         | by "up or out" mentality that you can see in Accenture and
         | similar companies exploiting their workers in poor countries.
        
         | KevinAiken wrote:
         | >You have to be performing at the next level for several months
         | 
         | I worked at a slow pace large US tech company and this was an
         | absolutely critical part of being promoted, which could only
         | happen during the one or two promotion cycles a year.
         | 
         | For a bit of context, this was a place where the best of the
         | best during good years (so not the last year) may get promoted
         | from a junior engineer to an engineer II in 2 years, so
         | climbing was pretty slow.
        
           | Taylor_OD wrote:
           | Yup. In larger companies, and honestly in most start ups I've
           | worked in as well, I always said expect something you
           | "deserve" to come a quarter or two quarters after you've
           | "earned" it.
           | 
           | Frustrated that you havnt been promoted even though you have
           | had all the conversations about getting promoted, your boss
           | agrees you should be, and you consistently perform at that
           | level? Give it 3-6 months and it will probably happen.
           | 
           | The machine moves slowly.
        
             | giantg2 wrote:
             | "expect something you "deserve" to come a quarter or two
             | quarters after you've "earned" it."
             | 
             | ... if you get it at all.
             | 
             | You don't _earn_ anything. Pay and promotions are
             | unilaterally controlled by management. They decide who to
             | _award_ promotions or raises to. If it were truly earned,
             | there would be an unambiguous or non subjective set of
             | standards that would definitively say that you deserve, and
             | will recieve, a promotion or raise.
             | 
             | "Frustrated that you havnt been promoted even though you
             | have had all the conversations about getting promoted, your
             | boss agrees you should be, and you consistently perform at
             | that level? Give it 3-6 months and it will probably
             | happen."
             | 
             | I met the same criteria you listed for 2 _years_. It never
             | came. Now I 'm 3 years beyond that and am still a midlevel
             | since I had to switch stacks twice.
        
         | deeblering4 wrote:
         | Some people are happy taking a 32% pay cut in exchange for not
         | needing to wear a suit or attend pointless meetings.
         | 
         | The behavior you describe sounds like that of a good team
         | lead/manager. Praising their team members for their efforts and
         | drawing attention to successes and progress. It's a solid path
         | for advancement up the corporate ladder, but it's not for
         | everyone.
        
         | Manishearth wrote:
         | > Total BS too. Maybe in India.
         | 
         | This has been the case at both my current and previous
         | (American tech) jobs.
         | 
         | And it's pretty racist to assume that a person is working or
         | has worked in India just because they have an Indian name.
        
       | milliams wrote:
       | That mouse trail is so unbelievably obnoxious.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | yholio wrote:
         | I just spent 10 minutes playing with it while my cowworkers
         | were blabbering about. Very relaxing.
        
         | high_derivative wrote:
         | As is pretending that 'minoritized backgrounds' don't know
         | about promotion processes, the white man is hiding them.
        
           | bigbillheck wrote:
           | That's a remarkably uncharitable interpretation of the text.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | high_derivative wrote:
             | Pushing back against ideas of critical race theory is
             | important lest they dominate all our discourse and turn us
             | all into victims.
        
               | pjc50 wrote:
               | Define the "critical race theory" against which you wish
               | to push back and explain how it relates to this post.
               | 
               | (also note that "minoritized background" is a very broad
               | descriptor; people who are the first in their family to
               | go to university and have a white-collar job often
               | experience the same problem of missing pieces of tacit
               | knowledge and not knowing what they are expected to do)
        
               | rgblambda wrote:
               | Although I agree with your interpretation of the term
               | "minoritized background", I think the author's choice of
               | words was unfortunate. "Disadvantaged" or "Less
               | Privileged" would be more appropriate.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | pjc50 wrote:
               | Could you explain why?
               | 
               | This stuff is vulnerable to the "euphemism treadmill",
               | where as soon as someone comes up with more "appropriate"
               | language the same people get upset again because the
               | actual real referent hasn't changed.
        
               | rgblambda wrote:
               | It's my opinion that the working class is not a minority.
               | Although "minoritized" does not necessarily mean
               | minority, that's the idea that comes to mind when people
               | read the word (also, my opinion). The word "marginalised"
               | is perfectly adequate.
               | 
               | I'll admit it's kind of nit-picking. But someone did get
               | the wrong idea from it.
        
               | xupybd wrote:
               | It's where you define people by a group identity. Then
               | compare outcomes across groups. Any inequity is then
               | provided as evidence of discrimination against that
               | group.
        
           | blacktriangle wrote:
           | The subtle racism of low expectations has become blatant.
        
         | dspillett wrote:
         | Maybe I'm a bit desensitized by how obnoxious most of the web
         | is these days, but really?
         | 
         | I didn't even notice it until I went back after reading your
         | comment, as first time around I clicked the link then once
         | their use page-down to scroll. How much were you moving the
         | mouse around to find it _that_ obnoxious?
        
       | gofreddygo wrote:
       | Another post on promotion hacking ?
       | 
       | Top comment [1] from another good HN discussion [2] about this
       | from late last year. Worth repeating                 Here's some
       | of my learnings about getting promoted for those that really want
       | to play that game:            - Only the perception of your work
       | matters       - Attend the social events and get in good with the
       | bosses       - The countability of your major achievements is
       | important. Make the list long, too long to hold in the mind
       | - At the same time the gravitas of your best achievement is also
       | important since that will be the soundbite that is shared about
       | you behind your back       - Get allies who can proselytize about
       | you behind your back       - Be the best. The difference between
       | one and two is bigger than that between two and three, as far as
       | promotions go       - Take credit for your work (use pronouns I
       | and Me when talking about your work, not We) and do not allow
       | others to take credit for your work       - If it's a teamwork
       | situation with other people on your level, don't do most of the
       | work, because the credit will end up being split 50/50 in the
       | eyes of the bosses even if you did most of it       - Make a very
       | good first impression       - Shape the narrative around the role
       | you played in the success of the mission/team/company       - Get
       | the bosses to make a soft public commitment regarding your
       | competence       - Even if you have a really good boss, all of
       | the above is still important, because they are fallible humans
       | and aren't omniscient       - Actually do good work, it'll make
       | the above easier
       | 
       | 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24622111
       | 
       | 2: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24618707
        
         | akarma wrote:
         | This started off quite well and it's valuable to think about
         | the manager's perspective but:
         | 
         | > Take credit for your work (use pronouns I and Me when talking
         | about your work, not We)
         | 
         | This doesn't apply to everyone but having worked in Product and
         | in a team lead and managerial capacity, I can't imagine this
         | coming off well at all.
         | 
         | > do not allow others to take credit for your work
         | 
         | Of course that's dreadful, but there's a difference between a
         | coworker taking credit and a manager taking credit. In some
         | tech companies and many older-style companies (law firms I can
         | say with certainty), the latter is super common and it may be
         | bad for your career to protest too hard.
         | 
         | > If it's a teamwork situation with other people on your level,
         | don't do most of the work, because the credit will end up being
         | split 50/50 in the eyes of the bosses even if you did most of
         | it
         | 
         | There are ways to privately and without placing blame make
         | clear that you did most of the work in a way beneficial to your
         | career. I can't imagine trying that hard to not do more than
         | 50%.
        
         | aliswe wrote:
         | Wth? This sounds like a bunch of narcissistic junk to me.
         | 
         | The sauce to performing successfully is to add value and to
         | communicate clearly - and to also do these two things outside
         | your "box" (intentionally vague).
         | 
         | This stuff on the other hand seems completely disingenous.
        
       | aynyc wrote:
       | Hmm... is this how current startup or "agile" companies
       | environment work now? #1-4 are utter non-sense. #5/6 are
       | generally true in every job if promotion is what you want, plenty
       | of folks just don't care about that. Sad part of me thinks that
       | this will be the future workplace culture, but I want no part in.
        
         | shard wrote:
         | I find #2 and #3 more relevant the higher you move in the
         | hierarchy. For #3, to me it's about how well you can move up
         | levels of abstraction: If you are working on features, can you
         | develop a product-level view? If you are working on products,
         | can you develop a portfolio-level view? A company-level view?
         | Each level up has less to do with engineering and more to do
         | with finances, marketing, company resources, and cross team
         | collaboration than before. It's not easy to see two levels
         | above you. However, relating to point #2 in the article, you
         | have to show that you are able to think and work at the level
         | above you if you want to be promoted. If you have tunnel vision
         | and can't expand your point of view to encompass the larger
         | picture, you're not going to be promoted. This assumes that we
         | are talking about promotions that include more responsibility
         | as opposed to merely a change in title or more salary.
        
       | tristor wrote:
       | My experience, as someone who's had internal promotions multiple
       | times in my career at different companies, is that the only point
       | here that's actually true is #6 about visibility, but that the
       | author's take on visibility is a bit too narrow. Getting promoted
       | is mostly about three things as an engineer:
       | 
       | 1. Execute with excellence.
       | 
       | 2. Establish a positive reputation, preferably as a subject
       | matter expert
       | 
       | 3. Align yourself to the direction of your business unit or the
       | company.
       | 
       | In pretty much that priority order, actually. Whether you have a
       | formal review process, quarterly goals and KPIs, take on duties
       | off the HR-approved job description of the next level up, et al,
       | none of that matters.
       | 
       | Visibility is all about #2. Being the engineer that sits in the
       | dark corner hacking away and nobody even knows you're in the
       | office (if you've ever had the lights turn off while you're still
       | at work because someone else thought they were the last one out
       | of the office, this is probably you) is not going to get you
       | promoted. I am an introvert, and I will tell you directly that
       | you do not need to be gregarious, charming, and a social
       | butterfly to get visibility, nor do you need to go into 1:1s with
       | your boss and brag for 20 minutes every month.
       | 
       | Visibility is as simple as:
       | 
       | 1. Say hello to people at work when you come into the office.
       | 
       | 2. Remember (or write down) people's names and what they do,
       | understand the organizational chart of your company.
       | 
       | 3. When someone asks you a question, answer honestly, including
       | "I don't know." Use these questions as an opportunity to grow
       | your knowledge.
       | 
       | 4. If you find an area where there are a lot of questions and you
       | consistently know the answers, lean in and be willing to answer
       | those questions.
       | 
       | Doing this establishes a positive reputation (or at least a
       | neutral one) and sets you up to be considered a subject matter
       | expert on whatever niche you find yourself fielding questions
       | about the most, which may not even be your specific job duties.
       | 
       | If you're consistently executing your job duties at above
       | baseline standards and your coworkers across teams and
       | departments think positively of you and consider you an expert on
       | some topic, you'll find internal promotion comes relatively
       | easily even if you don't have any formal review or KPI process.
       | 
       | Finally, and this is a big one. You have to ask for the
       | promotion. Do not expect anyone to just randomly swoop down and
       | promote you. It does happen, sometimes, but generally you have to
       | advocate for yourself. In really well structured companies it as
       | easy as asking your boss and they take care of the rest, but the
       | reality is most people don't have great managers or exist in a
       | well structured organization. So figure out who to talk to, and
       | ask them.
       | 
       | I don't touch as much on #3 at the top because even if you're
       | doing maintenance work on a legacy system nobody cares about, if
       | you can become the hero to whatever department uses that system
       | as their SME or be known positively as an SME on other things and
       | are willing to answer questions outside your strict job duties
       | about it, you can get promoted. It makes it vastly easier if
       | you're working on something where your day-to-day aligns with the
       | company's direction and vision, but it's not a requirement.
        
       | intricatedetail wrote:
       | Is this "climb the ladder" thing still relevant when companies
       | move to just in time equivalent for workers? You get hired to do
       | X tasks and then move on to another company.
        
         | Bulpi wrote:
         | Not sure what you mean.
         | 
         | I'm not aware of this schema in big companies or smaller ones.
         | Getting a head count is hard, hiring is a lot of effort.
         | 
         | For everything else you have service providers. If you wanna be
         | independent and work per task, thats a totally different story
         | all together.
         | 
         | You have to do acquisition yourself, you have to do training
         | yourself but you earn a lot more money faster.
         | 
         | I still prefer the jobs where i hire/control an external person
         | while having my career in a stable work environment. Which also
         | means i'm the expert and while you can get experts from
         | external, as a company you still need your experts who keep all
         | the business experience with them.
        
       | notaspecialist wrote:
       | Yeahh...I'm gonna have to ask you to come in on the weekend.
        
       | Ter420 wrote:
       | KE,TAMIN/BLOW/ BARS/benzos/ FENTANYL etc........ Ready for you
       | 24/7. Photo verification with respect to your specifications.
       | cant sell what you don't have right... prices aint a problem.
       | Shipment out next day. hit us up, lets do business.
       | 
       | Email; teryplugofplugs@outlook.com
        
       | sombremesa wrote:
       | Yuck.
       | 
       | The fact that junior devs are learning _this_ as facts of life
       | should be a point of shame for the industry. I thought similar
       | things when I worked at Amazon, but by and large a life built
       | around corporate bullshit is not for me.
       | 
       | There are other companies out there that are much more human and
       | don't force you to restructure your mindset around what it takes
       | to climb the ladder rather than what makes a great software
       | engineer.
        
       | 100011_100001 wrote:
       | I started working as a Jr Dev at 32. Looking at other Jr Devs
       | that entered the company around the same time I have had the
       | fastest rise. Visibility is huge, this is true for any job.
       | However visibility is a double edged sword, because you can fail
       | spectacularly as well.
       | 
       | Here is my perspective, take it as an opinion.
       | 
       | I personally dislike people that talk the talk, but don't walk
       | the walk. So if you want to wow your managers with lies and
       | falsehoods this does not apply to you. (and you are part of the
       | problem).
       | 
       | My approach is based on a few pillars. Work smart, be willing to
       | fail, get uncomfortable, force yourself to be extroverted, always
       | be learning, give something back.
       | 
       | Sometimes hard work is invisible. Anyone that had to spend
       | countless hours on an end of life application fixing endless bugs
       | with no one you can talk to is hard and thankless work. Work
       | smart means fixing the right things, what has a big impact. You
       | can do that anywhere, but doing it for a bleeding edge group or a
       | problem solver group in your company makes the same amount of
       | work appear better.
       | 
       | For agile teams, another part of working smart is choosing the
       | right stories. Some stories are easy but invisible, others are
       | harder but visible, choose the one that have a visible effect,
       | usually they are higher stake, but it's part of the process.
       | 
       | Be willing to fail, goes hand in hand with smart work. If you try
       | to avoid mistakes too much, you will get stuck trying to be
       | perfect which means your output will drop. Also if you are
       | working in high impact teams occasionally things will go really
       | wrong. It might not even be your fault. That's fine.
       | 
       | A lot of people mess failure up. They fail and try to cover it
       | up. This might work for management, but other devs know. Guess
       | what, they will remember that, not out of menace, but it will
       | become part of their opinion of you. They'll know that if things
       | go south you will lie about it, or throw someone else under the
       | bus. In my humble opinion the best way to deal with failure
       | that's your fault is be in the forefront of the fix. A simple "I
       | should have noticed this issue, but I did not. I am already
       | working on a fix, and have talked to X team on mitigation
       | strategy" is all you need. Most sane organizations recognize that
       | mistakes happen, I mean this is why QA exists to begin with. If
       | your response to a defect is to blame the PM for not having clear
       | direction, or the QA for not catching it...guess what, you just
       | made a PM and QA not trust you.
       | 
       | Discomfort is part of doing new things. The familiar feels safe.
       | If you made a blue widget, then it's easier to make a red one,
       | and if you make 10 widgets it's a walk in the park. However
       | making a widget today, a bicycle tomorrow, a house next month
       | will feel uncomfortable, however you will learn a lot. A counter
       | point to this is don't be a generalist, try to master your tools
       | a little bit. In other words don't always go for the new tech all
       | the time, you want to be acquiring skills not dabbling.
       | 
       | Force yourself to be extroverted. Most developers tend to be
       | introverts, I love machines, I find them fascinating, and
       | probably it's a lot easier for me to deal with input/outputs that
       | follow patterns than the chaos of human reactions. However it's
       | really really hard to be visible if you are an introvert and talk
       | to no one. There are some very talented devs that can be fully
       | introverted and are recognized. You have to be really spectacular
       | to be able to do that. It's much easier to be extroverted. If you
       | are actually an introvert you most likely have noticed that
       | extroverts tend to get a lot of undeserved cred.
       | 
       | For me it's a necessary skill. I am not suggesting you talk about
       | the weather and have benign talk that no one cares about. I mean,
       | say "hello", if someone mentioned they where going hiking this
       | weekend, and it's Monday, ask them how it went. So perhaps it's
       | more about being friendly. There is another aspect though, that
       | without it you miss out on a lot. That's being willing to make
       | presentations or sending emails to massive amounts of important
       | people. You know, the introvert nightmare.
       | 
       | Think about it, if you write good code and no one knows you did
       | it, how on earth are you going to be promoted / respected /
       | mentor others...whatever your drivers are. It's not really
       | possible.
       | 
       | Always be learning should be an obvious concept. If you are
       | following my advice and you are working on cutting edge projects,
       | being willing to fail, getting uncomfortable and even being more
       | extroverted...you are learning.
       | 
       | Finally, give something back. Don't be the person that does
       | things and never helps anyone else. Write that documentation.
       | Mentor other devs, pair program with others that seem to be
       | having a hard time. Ping the chat with a recent thing you
       | discovered.
       | 
       | In the end, if your fellow devs like working with you, most
       | likely your manager will sense it and that makes all the
       | difference. Just make sure you are not full of crap and actually
       | write some code.
        
       | emrah wrote:
       | Promotion does involve more than just technical chops so it is
       | harder for those who just want to put their heads down, code and
       | get things done without much funfair.
       | 
       | > You have to be performing at the next level
       | 
       | Apparently this happens more often than not, but I don't buy it.
       | First of all, the next level should involve activities that your
       | current level should not allow or leave enough time for you to
       | do. So, no you can't perform at the next level.
       | 
       | If you have been performing at the next level, and for a while,
       | then the company has been taking advantage of you. You should
       | have been paid at the next level too.
       | 
       | It's very unfortunate but it does often seem easier to jump ship
       | to get to the next level or skip a few.
        
       | adaml_623 wrote:
       | Good solid actionable items. Number 5 is something to bear in
       | mind, sometimes you need to look externally.
        
       | unnouinceput wrote:
       | Quuote: "I've had (cis, white, male) friends tell me that they
       | were basically promoted on potential ..."
       | 
       | What's this doing on top of HN? Flagged
        
         | benjaminjosephw wrote:
         | If you find it offensive that sometimes people are treated
         | differently (intentionally or not) because of their gender or
         | race you wouldn't be alone!
         | 
         | But, whether these concerns are real or just perceived, they
         | won't go away simply by preventing people from talking about
         | them. That just reinforces the perception of injustice.
        
         | txsoftwaredev wrote:
         | I stopped looking at this site (.dev) as it turned in to a big
         | SJW mess and less about technical and career growth.
        
           | city41 wrote:
           | Maybe you had a typo in your post, but .dev is a TLD.
        
         | drstewart wrote:
         | Racism and gender bias is rather en vogue these days, just
         | against one very specific group of people.
        
       | w0mbat wrote:
       | > You will never get a promotion or raise > if there's no formal
       | performance review > process and career ladder.
       | 
       | Well that's obviously not true. Chaotic rapidly growing startups
       | with little process, promote people at a vastly higher rate than
       | established big companies with a lot of process and less growth.
        
         | mypalmike wrote:
         | You have a good counterpoint. But I think the point is fair
         | when looking at more established companies. Even at places with
         | formal reviews, many companies don't have a real process for
         | career growth.
        
         | didymospl wrote:
         | That's exactly my story. I spent first few years of my career
         | in a large company with a formal performance review. Everyone
         | had to set some measurable KPIs with the manager at the
         | beginning of the year and then regularly review it on 1-on-1.
         | It was supposed to be the main factor in determining
         | promotions. I really liked that job and I wanted to get
         | promoted so I worked my a.. off by writing tons of code, tests,
         | fixing bugs that no one had time to look at, doing code
         | reviews, participating in architectural design meetings,
         | helping interns, giving presentations on new libraries etc.
         | 
         | Every year, around September-October when I was close to the
         | finishing line for A grade, either by resolving 200 Jira
         | tickets or increasing test coverage in my code to 85%, my boss
         | would congratulate me, say something about lacking "bigger
         | picture" and then simply add a totally unrealistic goal to my
         | list. One year it was to increase the profit of our department,
         | another to activate ten-person project which was started a
         | month ago in production before the end of Q3. Something that
         | suits a naive junior dev very well, you know. Then at the final
         | review by the end of year he would say that even though my
         | individual objectives were met, I'm not that much of a team
         | player because I failed to achieve goals that are team-
         | oriented.
         | 
         | I have to admit it was a strong team and I was far from being
         | the best developer there but in fact I was doing senior work
         | for junior's salary. When I found out new junior hires earn
         | much more than I do, I decided to hand in my notice. I was
         | offered promotion immediately but still said no and ended up
         | going from regular to a team lead in two years in a startup
         | with no performance review whatsoever.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-05-13 23:01 UTC)