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.
In my field, the tech field. I've always somewhat felt that job titles really didn't mean much. And as we evolve as an industry, there is a tendency to have more "hybrid roles" in an organization. Titles like Site Reliability Engineer feel they're more of an amalgamation of duties that can expand or contract depending on business need. Even some roles like "manager" have become less important, as organizations appear to be moving away from hierarchy and are becoming more flat overall.
I believe as we move further away from a more of a manufacturing job market and more to a service oriented job market. The old constructs of a more hierarchical system seems to be somewhat collapsing. As a tech professionals who has had a cop of coffee at many organizations, I have to say that companies that were less hierarchical tended to be the best to work for, and seemed to have amazing velocity and productivity. Where companies that were big on hierarchies and specific titles tended to be mired in bureaucracy and inefficiency.
To me, I've become convinced outside of an assembly line style of work, the need for strict hierarchy and job titles seem pretty pointless. I almost see a job as more of a "position" on a team. Meaning I feel like the hiring manager's main job is to highlight strengths of each individual contributor, and utilize them effectively. Instead of trying to some what mold and meld them into a strict set of duties and responsibilities. Now I say this as a tech person where innovation is the most important goal for any team or any company. I could be misspeaking about other types of roles. But I did want your opinions.
Yes, there's a huge emphasis on being able to "wear many hats." I'm like a Program Manager and Software Engineer and Support Engineer and Software Architect and sometimes acting Scum Master.
What you're paid and what responsibility you have matters. Outside of a few titles that carry legal weight in specific industries or functions, titles don't matter.
Yes, I also worked in IT. Titles at my jobs were mostly meaningless. They also differed very much at different companies, so more impressive titles sometimes meant less responsibility than more lowly ones.
What was more important to me was the money not the job title. Better a "Junior Programmer" with a big salary than "King of the World" with a low salary.
Titles in my line of work outside of management and entry level people basically just indicate how many years experience you have and which pay scale you are on.
There are 3 levels in the middle that all do the same work and have probably a 60k swing between the lowest paid person and the highest. It’s kind of absurd.
In my field, the tech field. I've always somewhat felt that job titles really didn't mean much. And as we evolve as an industry, there is a tendency to have more "hybrid roles" in an organization. Titles like Site Reliability Engineer feel they're more of an amalgamation of duties that can expand or contract depending on business need. Even some roles like "manager" have become less important, as organizations appear to be moving away from hierarchy and are becoming more flat overall.
I believe as we move further away from a more of a manufacturing job market and more to a service oriented job market. The old constructs of a more hierarchical system seems to be somewhat collapsing. As a tech professionals who has had a cop of coffee at many organizations, I have to say that companies that were less hierarchical tended to be the best to work for, and seemed to have amazing velocity and productivity. Where companies that were big on hierarchies and specific titles tended to be mired in bureaucracy and inefficiency.
To me, I've become convinced outside of an assembly line style of work, the need for strict hierarchy and job titles seem pretty pointless. I almost see a job as more of a "position" on a team. Meaning I feel like the hiring manager's main job is to highlight strengths of each individual contributor, and utilize them effectively. Instead of trying to some what mold and meld them into a strict set of duties and responsibilities. Now I say this as a tech person where innovation is the most important goal for any team or any company. I could be misspeaking about other types of roles. But I did want your opinions.
No matter where you work or what you do nothing can get done when there is all chiefs and no indians
There is a valid reason for structure in any endeavor.......assignment / management of labor task and resources to avoid........... chaos.
No matter where you work or what you do nothing can get done when there is all chiefs and no indians
...or one of the "chiefs" (used in the loosest possible way) can create a problem that causes a ripple effect across the whole organization ensuring temporary job security for all involved. Too many chiefs allows the corrupt ones to flourish. Right hand doesn't know what the left is doing.
No. I've seen that management down play the title and job duties as it is nothing. Over the years, I see that this increased that it is so degrading.
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.
Too many chiefs allows the corrupt ones to flourish. Right hand doesn't know what the left is doing.
