Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
B. 26 is too young to be a manager, unless you're talking about a fast food burger joint. He's still wet behind the ears and possibly still lives at home with mommy & daddy. Being a manager is different from the rank and file duties, so "average" producer doesn't mean much. Life experiences matter to become a manager, and ability to work in and with a team. Person B has those things, clearly, since he has worked successfully on the team for 10years, and has some maturity and proven an ability to work with people. Which is what a manager does.
In a perfect world, Person B would also have been a top producer. But 26 is just too young.
B. 26 is too young to be a manager, unless you're talking about a fast food burger joint. He's still wet behind the ears and possibly still lives at home with mommy & daddy. Being a manager is different from the rank and file duties, so "average" producer doesn't mean much. Life experiences matter to become a manager, and ability to work in and with a team. Person B has those things, clearly, since he has worked successfully on the team for 10years, and has some maturity and proven an ability to work with people. Which is what a manager does.
In a perfect world, Person B would also have been a top producer. But 26 is just too young.
I'd pick B. He has stuck it out at the company ten years. Been loyal. As far as performance, if he's done all that's asked of him then that says something.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,585 posts, read 81,206,701 times
Reputation: 57821
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jessica2099
Criticizing person A's age is pointless. He has paid his dues as well, having 5 years with the company.
The choice is a no brainer. A, obviously.
I became a supervisor of 23 people at age 24, 4 years out of college, and was promoted twice after that before leaving to start my own business. I was supervising people from 19-60s. Age has nothing to do with it, if the person has potential for managing people and knows the work.
A is performing great in his current role.
In the new role he may not have same performance.
You need to promote whoever is displaying skills that are needed in the new position.
i know the answer is "it depends", so please don't ask a bunch of follow up questions. given info below, who would you promote?
assume both have been in company same amount of time, have been in the same role and team, and neither have any managerial experience.
person A - younger, pretend 26 years old (so 5 years out of college), only 5 years of experience in this current role that is looking to be promoted, #1 performing person in entire company in the role, has gained visibility as just being awesome cause he's an overachiever and just doing great things
person B - older, pretend 36 years old, has had 10+ years of experience in this current role that is looking to be promoted, just average, not doing poorly but not doing the best either, just an average contributor, but obviously a lot more experience
If he is the #1 Performing Person In The Company, then pick Person A for the intended promotion.
Perhaps Person B can be promoted to some other position?
Maybe Candidate B isn't putting in the effort because they have been manipulated, used and taken advantage of. It all depends on the environment. Some people just quit putting in the effort because they understand the work environment and know how the game is played, I'll take the experience. Some extra incentive chances are will motivate them. But how the corporate game is played today,that makes people less motivated.
And that attitude and performance is the reason not to promote B if he/she is like you say. B has proven not to be reliable.
Quote:
Whatever happened to getting rid of upper management that creates a LAZY, uninspired, under performing work environment? I guess that doesn't exist anymore. The changes somehow need to be done a lower level instead of making changes where it needs to happen at the above levels under the current perspective of things
Typical babel of so many young people today. When you have a lot of young people going into the work force that are not willing to put forth the effort, they cry it is the managers, the fact a big corporation is against them, and just are plain lazy and not worth having on the payroll. It is them vs. the company or bosses, not wanting to work as a team.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A:
