2 ms·
Pretty much half the people who work at any given bank have some sort of "VP" title. "Middle-level" would be overestimating the standing of many with that title
by justin66 3y ago
Pretty much half the people who work at any given bank have some sort of "VP" title. "Middle-level" would be overestimating the standing of many with that title.
- utopcell 3y agoWhat a truly arbitrary comment. This is a conversation that is clearly about Google. What possible value did you think you added with what you wrote here.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- justin66 3y agoBad example, I guess. You wrote Since when is a VP middle-level management ? in reply to the parent commenter's observation It's one thing to legitimately trash Sundar Pichai; another to name some middle-level manager like that. A VP is very much middle-level management. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_title#Middle_management https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_title#Middle_managem... (a quick look at a Google org chart makes it look like, well, VPs are middle management there too)
- DannyBee 3y agoI'm not sure what org chart you looked at, but VP's make up less than 0.5% of the company.
- justin66 3y agoTo be clear, since I guess we're really drilling down on this: VP denotes senior management at Google? So Hixie's blog post wasn't really dumping on a random middle manager as cmdrporcupine (an ex-Googler, I think) suggested, which was the point of all this, but rather picking on a potential C-suite executive or something?
- DannyBee 3y agoYes, VP is senior management at Google. Statistically, middle management is L6 or L7 manager. VP is at least L10. It's not quite picking on a potential c-suite executive, but it's close. She's two steps away from c-suite, in a company of >180k people.
- justin66 3y agoThanks for the context. That’s a lot of layers of management you’ve got there.