Unpopular Opinions

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

webboo said:

rick_chasey said:

I think in all instances, beards look sh!t and scruffy.

Well I have beard with a nice handlebar moustache and I’m also old and retired. I wonder what else I can do to wind Rick up. It’s a pity I’m not nearer Cambridge as I could go out and give him a kicking out on the bike to really p!ss on his chips.

You should make the effort. I've quite enjoyed riding with people from the forum in the past.

Didn't you struggle to keep up with some people from the forum in the past?

Mixture. Some were faster, some were slower. Had quite a lot of good races with the commuter lot on the commute.

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

webboo said:

rick_chasey said:

I think in all instances, beards look sh!t and scruffy.

Well I have beard with a nice handlebar moustache and I’m also old and retired. I wonder what else I can do to wind Rick up. It’s a pity I’m not nearer Cambridge as I could go out and give him a kicking out on the bike to really p!ss on his chips.

You should make the effort. I've quite enjoyed riding with people from the forum in the past.

Didn't you struggle to keep up with some people from the forum in the past?

Mixture. Some were faster, some were slower. Had quite a lot of good races with the commuter lot on the commute.

I was referring to Mr Dash.

rick_chasey

Yeah. I'd put money he'd beat pretty much anyone on this forum over any distance longer than 5km tbh.

ddraver

I was deffo slower uphill. On the cobbles I reckon I could take him

Dash looked like he could give a lot of pros a good race tbf...

rick_chasey

So much (unqualified) career advice is people saying "being good at your job doesn't get you promoted - it's about networking, sucking up to the right bosses" blah blah.

Nonsense. It's both. Being actually good at your job enables the rest. If people get annoyed that people who they think are rubbish and bad at their job are getting promoted above them, it's probably because those people are good at the things senior management care about, not what you care about.

First.Aspect

rick_chasey said:

So much (unqualified) career advice is people saying "being good at your job doesn't get you promoted - it's about networking, sucking up to the right bosses" blah blah.

Nonsense. It's both. Being actually good at your job enables the rest. If people get annoyed that people who they think are rubbish and bad at their job are getting promoted above them, it's probably because those people are good at the things senior management care about, not what you care about.

Isn't it more the sad realisation that the skillset people want in the promotion position aren't the same necessarily as what you need to demonstrate to be in the conversation? Which can mean that people who are demonstrably less able at the job that two given candidates are doing are the ones who get promoted.

pblakeney

rick_chasey said:

So much (unqualified) career advice is people saying "being good at your job doesn't get you promoted - it's about networking, sucking up to the right bosses" blah blah.

Nonsense. It's both. Being actually good at your job enables the rest. If people get annoyed that people who they think are rubbish and bad at their job are getting promoted above them, it's probably because those people are good at the things senior management care about, not what you care about.

Not necessarily. I can't be the only one familiar with the phrase "Being promoted to their level of incompetence."?

Then there is the reverse. I knew of one guy who was so good at his Job that management refused to promote him. They wanted to maintain the skillset and retained him by giving him unusually high wage increases.

morstar

Directors in family owned businesses are definitely a spectrum of competence.

morstar

Yes my sibling is a total f@kwit, yes they are the director of something about which they have zero idea. Yes, they will promote sycophants over capable people.
Yes, if you are better at your job than them, you should be worried about your position.

surrey_commuter

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

So much (unqualified) career advice is people saying "being good at your job doesn't get you promoted - it's about networking, sucking up to the right bosses" blah blah.

Nonsense. It's both. Being actually good at your job enables the rest. If people get annoyed that people who they think are rubbish and bad at their job are getting promoted above them, it's probably because those people are good at the things senior management care about, not what you care about.

Not necessarily. I can't be the only one familiar with the phrase "Being promoted to their level of incompetence."?

Then there is the reverse. I knew of one guy who was so good at his Job that management refused to promote him. They wanted to maintain the skillset and retained him by giving him unusually high wage increases.

Now that is clever and more companies should have the flexibility to do exactly that

First.Aspect

morstar said:

Yes my sibling is a total f@kwit, yes they are the director of something about which they have zero idea. Yes, they will promote sycophants over capable people.
Yes, if you are better at your job than them, you should be worried about your position.

Whist you don't necessarily want rampantly ambitious people around you, I always think hiring people who are smarter than you actually makes you look better in the end.

I've experienced having to supervise both and I prefer the smarter ones.

First.Aspect

surrey_commuter said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

So much (unqualified) career advice is people saying "being good at your job doesn't get you promoted - it's about networking, sucking up to the right bosses" blah blah.

Nonsense. It's both. Being actually good at your job enables the rest. If people get annoyed that people who they think are rubbish and bad at their job are getting promoted above them, it's probably because those people are good at the things senior management care about, not what you care about.

Not necessarily. I can't be the only one familiar with the phrase "Being promoted to their level of incompetence."?

Then there is the reverse. I knew of one guy who was so good at his Job that management refused to promote him. They wanted to maintain the skillset and retained him by giving him unusually high wage increases.

Now that is clever and more companies should have the flexibility to do exactly that

A lot do, but it doesn't solve the problem of having to take instructions from and be formally subservient to an idiot.

TheBigBean

First.Aspect said:

surrey_commuter said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

So much (unqualified) career advice is people saying "being good at your job doesn't get you promoted - it's about networking, sucking up to the right bosses" blah blah.

Nonsense. It's both. Being actually good at your job enables the rest. If people get annoyed that people who they think are rubbish and bad at their job are getting promoted above them, it's probably because those people are good at the things senior management care about, not what you care about.

Not necessarily. I can't be the only one familiar with the phrase "Being promoted to their level of incompetence."?

Then there is the reverse. I knew of one guy who was so good at his Job that management refused to promote him. They wanted to maintain the skillset and retained him by giving him unusually high wage increases.

Now that is clever and more companies should have the flexibility to do exactly that

A lot do, but it doesn't solve the problem of having to take instructions from and be formally subservient to an idiot.

Depends whether the relationship becomes more like that with a PA where the one with the skills tells the boss to go do x, y and z.

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

So much (unqualified) career advice is people saying "being good at your job doesn't get you promoted - it's about networking, sucking up to the right bosses" blah blah.

Nonsense. It's both. Being actually good at your job enables the rest. If people get annoyed that people who they think are rubbish and bad at their job are getting promoted above them, it's probably because those people are good at the things senior management care about, not what you care about.

I see it the other way. You can get promoted either by being good at your job or by bluffing that you are good at your job. Long term having some actual skills usually works out better.

First.Aspect

TheBigBean said:

First.Aspect said:

surrey_commuter said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

So much (unqualified) career advice is people saying "being good at your job doesn't get you promoted - it's about networking, sucking up to the right bosses" blah blah.

Nonsense. It's both. Being actually good at your job enables the rest. If people get annoyed that people who they think are rubbish and bad at their job are getting promoted above them, it's probably because those people are good at the things senior management care about, not what you care about.

Not necessarily. I can't be the only one familiar with the phrase "Being promoted to their level of incompetence."?

Then there is the reverse. I knew of one guy who was so good at his Job that management refused to promote him. They wanted to maintain the skillset and retained him by giving him unusually high wage increases.

Now that is clever and more companies should have the flexibility to do exactly that

A lot do, but it doesn't solve the problem of having to take instructions from and be formally subservient to an idiot.

Depends whether the relationship becomes more like that with a PA where the one with the skills tells the boss to go do x, y and z.

True. We've got a very experienced and competent person who actively doesn't want the hassle of being promoted. It is only not an issue long term because we all know how good she is and act accordingly. At another firm, or to be honest in another team, I would guess there would be some friction.

pblakeney

First.Aspect said:

surrey_commuter said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

So much (unqualified) career advice is people saying "being good at your job doesn't get you promoted - it's about networking, sucking up to the right bosses" blah blah.

Nonsense. It's both. Being actually good at your job enables the rest. If people get annoyed that people who they think are rubbish and bad at their job are getting promoted above them, it's probably because those people are good at the things senior management care about, not what you care about.

Not necessarily. I can't be the only one familiar with the phrase "Being promoted to their level of incompetence."?

Then there is the reverse. I knew of one guy who was so good at his Job that management refused to promote him. They wanted to maintain the skillset and retained him by giving him unusually high wage increases.

Now that is clever and more companies should have the flexibility to do exactly that

A lot do, but it doesn't solve the problem of having to take instructions from and be formally subservient to an idiot.

True, but the people making that decision must have something about them in the first place. Incompetent managers wouldn't want a minion earning more than them.

Jezyboy

surrey_commuter said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

So much (unqualified) career advice is people saying "being good at your job doesn't get you promoted - it's about networking, sucking up to the right bosses" blah blah.

Nonsense. It's both. Being actually good at your job enables the rest. If people get annoyed that people who they think are rubbish and bad at their job are getting promoted above them, it's probably because those people are good at the things senior management care about, not what you care about.

Not necessarily. I can't be the only one familiar with the phrase "Being promoted to their level of incompetence."?

Then there is the reverse. I knew of one guy who was so good at his Job that management refused to promote him. They wanted to maintain the skillset and retained him by giving him unusually high wage increases.

Now that is clever and more companies should have the flexibility to do exactly that

Meh, this seems to be a continual issue with many engineering companies in the UK. My extremely small sample size of working with 1 US based company suggests they do it better.

Pross

I used to work with someone who refused to get promoted above technician level but was paid higher than Principal Engineers. Lots of people who moved company tried to recruit him and his wages kept going up as a result. I couldn't really understand it as while he was quite decent and had a lot of experience I have met many others with far better CAD and modelling software skills. Fair play to him for managing to get so well paid whilst avoiding the hassles of management and dealing with clients though. I wish I'd gone down that route as it was only after chasing the promotions I felt were needed to earn more money that I eventually realised I was doing less of the technical work I enjoyed and more of the generic managing people and business processes. Working in small companies helps keep the balance sensible though and I'm back pretty much fully hands on now.

kingstongraham

A football team doesn't take someone out of the team and make them manager just because they are good.

TheBigBean

kingstongraham said:

A football team doesn't take someone out of the team and make them manager just because they are good.

Plenty of really good footballers become not so good managers though.

morstar

I’d think the correlation between most skill and ability to coach/lead is at best flimsy.

I think a player with less natural talent probably appreciates and understands coaching and leadership better than the most naturally gifted.

kingstongraham

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

A football team doesn't take someone out of the team and make them manager just because they are good.

Plenty of really good footballers become not so good managers though.

Normally only once they are not able to be good footballers any more.

TheBigBean

kingstongraham said:

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

A football team doesn't take someone out of the team and make them manager just because they are good.

Plenty of really good footballers become not so good managers though.

Normally only once they are not able to be good footballers any more.

Yes, but it is assumed that good footballers make good managers despite ample evidence to the contrary. Once they've failed at management they then become terrible pundits.

pblakeney

kingstongraham said:

A football team doesn't take someone out of the team and make them manager just because they are good.

Frank Lampard?
#justkidding

pblakeney

Ha!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/63610629