Stop playing the, "who's the most popular, political favorite game" and start promoting the most senior based on time in position.
If the ones applying aren't successful, polices would have pushed them out long ago.
A tenured person in position should not be beat out by a less tendered person going for the same promotion. It's a travesty
Nonsense. Your points seem logical but are ridiculous. Director and above? Really?
Then consider when you vote to elect the next president of the United States.
Don't you elect based on experience? Tenure? Qualifications? Qualifications based on what? Tenure and experience of course. Who would vote for the younger with less tenure and thus less experience?
The problem is, you don't like change. You don't want change. You want to hire someone who fits your mold and then train them mimick your cultural ideals. Biased and unfair as they are they mimick the efforts of thw company since conception.
But the new president doesn't need training. He creates change based on his/her new ideas. People adjust to the new culture they promote.
Same here. Hire on the most tenured in position. Let their lengthy learned experiences change the culture. Let them be the president of that position. You trying to mold and control doesn't allow for change and growth. It only allows for employees to be stuck in their position for years and years because you fear the change they would bring. Because you judged them to be not able to take the next step. What an incredible waste of time.
HR.. make the change. Tenured direct subordinate employees get the promotion first.
Obviously, I don't know the specifics of the OPs situation, but there's more than qualifications, which the OP is comparing to tenure. Companies need to promote people that can backfill leadership positions over time. By that I mean, execs/hiring managers may think of every promotion as a potential Dir and above. If you're 55 and a tech or analyst, they could promote you every other year and you'll be retired before you get to where they need you to be (and they'll have wasted money developing you whereas they could have been developing someone else)... and that's the reason younger/less tenured candidates are being promoted before you.
To further clarify, to be CEO of a large corporation, you probably need to be a Director by ~30, VP by ~37-45, SVP by ~45-52 and EVP by ~55. And I'd say if you're not Dir by ~55, you won't be one. So, as an example, if the OP is 50 and the less tenured candidate is 33 and they both have potential for Dir, the less tenured candidate should get the job because they have a longer potential runway for advancement and would be more valuable (higher Present Value) to the company.
All that said, the real issue we have is primarily older, more tenured/experienced/qualified candidates (or oversees resources) taking entry and mid-level US jobs from recent grads and younger people (and thereby forcing them into service jobs) simply because the older person (and ideal candidate) was RIFed and is now willing to work for less money/title.
As a hiring manager, I'm always going to hire the most qualified candidate. I recognize that seems like a contradiction from my initial statement, but it's not because companies, execs and hiring managers constantly balance short and long term goals, but they're not necessarily sharing the strategy with everyone, which is why it can be a bit confusing/frustrating.
And now for a piece of advice - don't mention tenure in an interview. Highlight specific examples of what qualifies you for the job, have a solid career plan beyond getting the immediate job, have a vision of what you personally could bring to the team and be passionate. Tenure is like saying you know how to fix a VCR - who cares.
Its simple. And anyone knows this. Union kick em. You have family... kick em... You have kids kick em. Your Male...kick em. Its not about time anymore...that c-ap stopped 3 years ago its about cost
and company image. They are into race justice and cost cutting ...so those with familys and white were cut...mostly. Look at the range its 50 to 1 yes some of color were cut...but really
The Peter principal says font hire anyone who you think may be more competent than yourself.. makes no sense. Jobs did just the opposite.
As far as promotion to customer - if I go, you're next big girl.
Stagnate in a position? Since when is doing a job well being stagnant? This is the type of backwards thinking that is hurting Verizon's culture.
Let's go HR.. make the change. Promote longest in position first. There is no reason not to. Any other reason is a biased judgment call that goes against the Verizon Credo.
Your promotion to customer is pending big guy. We all wish you luck.
My first question is....
"Why did you stagnate in that role for?"
You are in favor of the Peter Principle?
I agree.. and past results mean tenure. The more results the better. The longer the better.
I went through the ups and downs of the economy in that position.. not the lesser tenured. I endured the stress and readjusted my outcomes months in and months out.. not the newcomer.
When that shark bit.. I took the bite. When your boss pressed you for more.. I gave more.
If I took on Go 90 and it failed.. so did you.. you were the leader. When that shark bit.. I took the bite. One failed project doesn't make you a bad leader.
One run of bad months doesn't mean you can't get the promotion.
Not everything is equal.. thats the problem. What hand were you dealt and how did you overcome it? Did you survive time and time again?
Stopping wasting my time. I'm stuck in a position. Give the most senior the promotion you J/A.
HR .. make the change!!
Did you give stickers out? No? Well, there’s your problem.
What’s Ken Dixon up to these days ?
Marni's former team are very loyal to her today because she treated them extremely well. However, Marni was not qualified to be the leader of this company after the GO-90 and Yahoo failures. Also, neither was John Stratton after he drove Verizon Business into the ground. The jury is still out on Hans who has yet to deliver the growth he promised Wall St. His greatest claim to fame has been to slash and burn the employee base while building out the 5G promise land. The most qualified person for the job includes past results.
Who cares about Marni's programs. She was liked and respected and had time in at VZ.
I dont think we could be doing any worse with her as lead. And I may have gotten a sticker from her to boot.
Looks like your still in the 12th grade. Age should enhance your qualifications not trash it.
Rip down that old culture. If you want to have change, you have to change.
Your two of thinking will only tear down VZ .
Valuing new culture and ideas learned with time in position is king.
Put the rookie in the old position.. let them earn the next step like the tenured OP did.
F— that. How about the people doing the f—ing work. There's enough people getting carried into fat paychecks in this company.
Age based promotion should stop at 12th grade. You're probably miserable to spend time with, nobody wants to promote you if it means they have to see you more.
Marni's claim to fame was the job well done sticker advent program. I knew right then and there Marni would make a great elementary school principal and should pass on her CEO aspirations.
The most qualified person should get the job. If there are several top notch candidates, then the minority gets the nod followed by a female if the team does not meet diversity spread of the geographic region where the job is located.
How does being in your current role 10 years not add to your qualifications? That's the dumbest thing I've heard.
Your GM / DM have to like you? Also dumb and speaks to biased opinions.
I thought we valued culture and differences?
If anyone knows the job well and can take the next step it's the successful candidate that's done the role for 10 years. Not the 1 year candidate that is liked by the GM / DM.
Hey my culture and beliefs are the same as yours.. that makes me more promotable. Bull- SH!
Tenure only adds to qualification. Give the promotions to the most senior in the closest subordinate role.
Otherwise.. why keep them around? You think they want to be in that role forever?
Give me break leadership. Pull your heads out of where the sun doesn't shine.
OP sounds very unioney. So you have an old dead wood that managed to hang out for 20 years and that entitles them to a promotion? Get lost ROFL...
In retail, choosing to remain tenured in a role can actually work against you. You will need to be liked by your GM and DM. Not to mention interview really well.
If someone with a growth mindset comes in after you and climbs the ladder before you, take notes. Being bitter will get you nowhere.
Do people really think this way??? Just because you've been in your current role for 10 years (tenured - a term only used in retail, lol) does not make you more or less qualified than anyone else for a role you are seeking. And about policies pushing out others?? Laughable. The only way to get fired at Vz is by violating the COC, doing something illegal or having your job eliminated. The entitlement displayed in this post is amazing. Let the down votes begin.
You right about that. Look at Marni W. Lowell retires and they choose someone who was supposedly more qualified - Hans from Erickson.
Marni quits and we are left with this mess.
Marni was the more tenured at Verizon. She should have gotten the position. Hans could have taken Marni's role to see if he could have performed as well as she did.
I agree. Makes a lot of sense.. especially if you are in a direct subordinate position to the one you are applying for
Umm if you're more qualified, I'll take the promotion and you take my old role. Let's see if you can do as well as I did for as long as I did.
I dont see how qualified and tenure are any different. Or am I wrong in saying that the years more worth of experience I have in my current role are worth less than .. what? Your degrees? Your motivation? Your experience? If I helped give birth to 20 babies.. you don't think I've learned a thing or 2 along the way?
Time in position wins evertime.. hands down
Why should you get promoted? Your skills, time in position, career success, and any education you have mean nothing.
You are very marketable though. Other companies would live to have you work for them. Just not Verizon.
There's nothing to be learned from the second kick of a mule. But after 4,5,6 or even 15 kicks - you just begin to feel defeated.
Ummm, what about who is most qualified? Ever think of that?