3 ms·
If following the framework does not provide value to the company, the framework is obviously flawed.
by hiatus 2y ago
If following the framework does not provide value to the company, the framework is obviously flawed.
- throwaway98797 2y agothe frameworks are always flawed the best leaders know this
- alistairSH 2y agoSure, but does that mean the framework shouldn't exist? Something can be flawed and still provide some value. In the case of leveling, I'd suggest the levels are guidelines and not policy. As soon as they become policy, management cannot work around them adequately, and they begin to detract value. For example, at my employer, we have levels (within job families, I haven't seen a level grid that has engineers and personal assistants). But, I've never had to tick every single box to get an employee promoted. I have to make my case, and I do use the levels as a guideline, but I've never felt it necessary to absolutely follow every item.
- ketzo 2y agoWell, that's sort of the author's point -- every framework is focused on something other than simple salary numbers, which definitionally means it is focused on something other than the dollar value provided to the company. We recognize that they can still be a useful tool, because 1) assigning dollar values to employees is an inexact science that's hard to standardize over an organization and 2) ICs like at least some direction about what they need to do to be eligible for more money aside from just "provide more value"