3 ms·

Isn't that the wrong direction to think in? If one employee in a team of 10 gets promoted to be their leader (because the former one retired or got promoted the

Isn't that the wrong direction to think in? If one employee in a team of 10 gets promoted to be their leader (because the former one retired or got promoted themselves) then the other 9/10 don't get promoted. And those people won't ever have reasonable chance to be promoted because the same problem exists one layer up where their team leader only has a 1/10 chance to get promoted over their own colleagues

missedthecue 5y ago
Well yes, every industry has an organizational pyramid. There are just simply more fryer and cashier positions available than regional manager positions. But the fact that 9 out of every 10 operators started out at the fryer seems to indicate that there is clearly upward mobility.
- scarecrowbob 5y ago
  But it doesn't, though. If 9/10 of every fry cooks ended up owning a restaurant, you'd be correct in your claim about upward mobility. But what you're claiming is that 9/10 owners started out as fry cooks. Those are wildly different claims. It could be the case that only 0.002 of frycooks end up owning a restaurant and there is only an infinitesimal amount of mobility, and your claim could still be totally true.
  - californical 5y ago
    It means that upward mobility is possible for those who are the best (generally, obviously it’s not always purely skill). Not everyone can be hugely successful in any given field. And you’re arguing a silly point. Do 80% of accountants become CFOs? Upwards mobility doesn’t mean that everyone rises up — it means that those who are highly skilled do though.
    - scarecrowbob 5y ago
      I appreciate the feedback, even if I don't agree.
    - fragmede 5y ago
      That's assuming that people are promoted based on merit, and not something else, like the Peter Principle, or being a tall man who socializes well (aka drinks alcohol and does drugs with his boss). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle
- bmicraft 5y ago
  But that goes completely against the point that those jobs are supposedly only a bridge to a better one, when for most people (like you said) that simply can't be true

missedthecue 5y ago

Well yes, every industry has an organizational pyramid. There are just simply more fryer and cashier positions available than regional manager positions. But the fact that 9 out of every 10 operators started out at the fryer seems to indicate that there is clearly upward mobility.

scarecrowbob 5y ago
But it doesn't, though. If 9/10 of every fry cooks ended up owning a restaurant, you'd be correct in your claim about upward mobility. But what you're claiming is that 9/10 owners started out as fry cooks. Those are wildly different claims. It could be the case that only 0.002 of frycooks end up owning a restaurant and there is only an infinitesimal amount of mobility, and your claim could still be totally true.
- californical 5y ago
  It means that upward mobility is possible for those who are the best (generally, obviously it’s not always purely skill). Not everyone can be hugely successful in any given field. And you’re arguing a silly point. Do 80% of accountants become CFOs? Upwards mobility doesn’t mean that everyone rises up — it means that those who are highly skilled do though.
  - scarecrowbob 5y ago
    I appreciate the feedback, even if I don't agree.
  - fragmede 5y ago
    That's assuming that people are promoted based on merit, and not something else, like the Peter Principle, or being a tall man who socializes well (aka drinks alcohol and does drugs with his boss). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle
bmicraft 5y ago
But that goes completely against the point that those jobs are supposedly only a bridge to a better one, when for most people (like you said) that simply can't be true