3 ms·
I think that's said because your immediate manager is whom is responsible for you, your growth, your performance, clearly a path for you, etc. Chances are good
by chiefalchemist 4y ago
I think that's said because your immediate manager is whom is responsible for you, your growth, your performance, clearly a path for you, etc. Chances are good they participated in the decision to hire you.
That is, pretty much everything you mentioned - in the context of a team / company - traces back to your manager (directly or indirectly).
Perhaps some of your managers weren't as completely good as you think? That's not a knock, just a question.
- sokoloff 4y agoWhile it’s not 100.00% true, I’ve found it a helpful lens to take the line of thinking that I am responsible for me, for my growth, for my performance, and for parts of [clearing] a path for me. Putting the primary onus on someone else is an error that sub-optimizes your results. If your manager won’t do their minor part while you do your major part, you need to leave, but taking this lens makes that apparent much sooner than waiting for them to “grow you”. No one is more interested in your career than you.
- edent 4y agoNah. When a company says "The training budget this year is zero" - it doesn't matter how good my immediate manager is. They can't fix that for me. That's not me leaving a manager. That's the job abandoning me.
- chiefalchemist 4y agoNot so. Your manage could say, "I don't have hard dollars for you, but I can free up some of your time if you're willing to do some self-training." Or, "I'm told the training budget is zero. What else can I / we do to work on your skills and/or career?" But a manager that simply says, "No budget. Oh well. Sucks being you." IS failing to fulfill the role of an average manager.