3 ms·
Promotions are not meritocratic. You get promoted if you are useful to the person promoting you; you'll play ball, follow orders, know a secret, can do a favor,
by throwawaaarrgh 3y ago
Promotions are not meritocratic. You get promoted if you are useful to the person promoting you; you'll play ball, follow orders, know a secret, can do a favor, are reliable, don't ruffle feathers, under promise and over deliver, make friends easy, etc. That's not merit, that's corruption.
This is true for one simple reason: Promotions are not weighed by an impartial algorithm, chosen by sorting, and doled out on a set schedule. They are submitted for consideration and approved by the powerful, when they feel like it, for whatever reasons they feel like.
The further up the hierarchy you go, the less exceptional people are. It's called the Peter Principle. Even if you used to be exceptional at your job, a promotion gives you a different job. And technical skill has almost nothing to do with ability to get promoted.
The only reason women might be promoted more is they're working twice as hard as the men. I'm sure if you asked them, they would rather have been men, when it comes to getting promotions. The bar would be a lot lower.
- Exoristos 3y ago> You get promoted if you are useful to the person promoting you ... That's not merit, that's corruption. I don't see how you arrive at that description. Usefulness is a form of merit -- a very useful one. > women might be promoted more [if] they're working twice s as hard Doesn't this contradict your first assertion?