4 ms·

Another one of those articles... Please tell us how you incentivise your staff to deprioritise their skill growth in favour of your business? I hope to hear th

Another one of those articles... Please tell us how you incentivise your staff to deprioritise their skill growth in favour of your business? I hope to hear things other than "salary, benefits and bonus" but they have to be monetary.

handrous 5y ago
Capitalists and the c-suite: Nepotism and self-dealing all day every day, constantly directing entire acquisitions to bail out a buddy's or a kid's failing business, or making companies they have control of rent buildings they personally own or whatever Software developers: Act in their own self interest in a minor way that's not perfectly in line with he company's interests Business bloggers: Hey now, cut it out developers! What a bunch of low-attention-span babies you are.
rocqua 5y ago
Why do they have to be monetary but not based on salary or bonuses?
- nodejs_rulez_1 5y ago
  Because you want people to care about business same way as the owners do, yet when the firing starts they will simply be let go. Another option is to openly state during hiring that new technologies and approaches are not welcome.
UncleEntity 5y ago
Because the business pays them to do a specific job which doesn’t include them training for their next job? Is it really that common that people expect their current employer to subsidize their “skill growth” when they know they are just going to hop to another company in the near term? Not judging —- just asking as an outsider looking in. —edit— Huh, just downvotes so I assume it is expected to be able to train yourself on company time…
- TeMPOraL 5y ago
  > Is it really that common that people expect their current employer to subsidize their “skill growth” Yes, that's common in professions. > when they know they are just going to hop to another company in the near term? That's a consequence of employers not willing to keep paying market rate over time. The only way to get back to that rate is to go somewhere else. Also, most employers are expecting to hire already competent proffesionals, and invest nothing into training people in-house. So for each person that jumps ship, when they hire a replacement, they enjoy a subsidy of said replacement having secretly trained themselves on previous employers' dime.

handrous 5y ago

Capitalists and the c-suite: Nepotism and self-dealing all day every day, constantly directing entire acquisitions to bail out a buddy's or a kid's failing business, or making companies they have control of rent buildings they personally own or whatever Software developers: Act in their own self interest in a minor way that's not perfectly in line with he company's interests Business bloggers: Hey now, cut it out developers! What a bunch of low-attention-span babies you are.

rocqua 5y ago

Why do they have to be monetary but not based on salary or bonuses?

nodejs_rulez_1 5y ago
Because you want people to care about business same way as the owners do, yet when the firing starts they will simply be let go. Another option is to openly state during hiring that new technologies and approaches are not welcome.

UncleEntity 5y ago

Because the business pays them to do a specific job which doesn’t include them training for their next job? Is it really that common that people expect their current employer to subsidize their “skill growth” when they know they are just going to hop to another company in the near term? Not judging —- just asking as an outsider looking in. —edit— Huh, just downvotes so I assume it is expected to be able to train yourself on company time…

TeMPOraL 5y ago
> Is it really that common that people expect their current employer to subsidize their “skill growth” Yes, that's common in professions. > when they know they are just going to hop to another company in the near term? That's a consequence of employers not willing to keep paying market rate over time. The only way to get back to that rate is to go somewhere else. Also, most employers are expecting to hire already competent proffesionals, and invest nothing into training people in-house. So for each person that jumps ship, when they hire a replacement, they enjoy a subsidy of said replacement having secretly trained themselves on previous employers' dime.