The Promotion Predicament

Global Innovations Inc., a renowned technology company (fictitious), was known for its rigorous performance-driven culture. However, a recent situation threw its performance appraisal and promotion system into turmoil.

Every year, Global Innovations Inc. used to conduct a comprehensive performance review to determine promotions. It was a transparent process and a point-based system. Only employees who scored above a certain threshold were eligible for promotions.

The candidates

Two employees, X and Y, emerged as strong contenders for promotion.

Candidate X was a highly productive software engineer, who consistently delivered projects ahead of schedule and with fewer errors. He was known to be a workhorse, putting in long hours and even working weekends when necessary. However, he often clashed with team members due to his uncompromising work style.

Candidate Y was an equally skilled software engineer, who exhibited impressive leadership and teamwork. She consistently met deadlines and maintained a harmonious work environment. However, she occasionally missed project milestones due to her focus on team dynamics.

The dilemma

Sarah, the HR director, faced a dilemma. Both candidates were exceptional in their own right, but their strengths lay in different areas. Candidate X was a solitary powerhouse, while Candidate Y excelled at collaboration and leadership.

Vivek Tripathi

VP-HR, Newgen Software

Both candidates are software engineers, and therefore, the nature of the specific position they are being promoted to is crucial here to make a decision. That is, whether the role is that of a senior software engineer or team leader.

Promotions should not solely be based on current performance but must consider suitability for the intended role. If the role requires team management or collaboration, the person with superior team skills should be promoted. Conversely, if technical proficiency is the primary requirement, the individual consistently meeting technical tasks should be chosen.

In the given context, it makes sense to promote the person whose strengths align with the expectations of the role. For a senior software engineer position, the emphasis is on consistent delivery, making it necessary to address the occasional deadline misses of the second candidate. Additionally, the possibility of promoting both candidates can also be considered provided constructive feedback is given to the one with room for improvement in meeting deadlines at a senior level.

Satyajit Mohanty

VP-HR, Dabur India

Ideally, each individual brings a unique set of skills to the table, and in an ideal scenario, both individuals would be considered valuable. However, if the insistence is to choose only one, I will delve into the collaborative aspect.

Author Adam Grant emphasises in his book that the best teams don’t necessarily consist of the most brilliant talents. Instead, they thrive on collaborative abilities. Drawing parallels with football teams such as ESG Eindhoven and Argentina, it becomes evident that even though ESG had multiple star players, Argentina’s success came from effective collaboration.

Numerous studies have corroborated the idea that teams with high collaboration tend to be more successful than groups of individually brilliant contributors who struggle to collaborate. This holds true in various organisational roles, with collaboration being crucial for success.

Furthermore, as individuals progress to senior roles, collaboration becomes even more pivotal. While certain roles may demand a more independent approach, no role within an organisation operates in isolation. Every role requires a degree of collaboration, although the extent varies based on the level and nature of the role.

No organisation is entirely made up of geniuses. Therefore, while considering the promotion of individuals within a company, collaboration is key, contributing to the organisation’s intellectual wealth.

Manish Majumdar

head-HR, Centum Electronics

I  would recommend promoting the individual with stronger people skills. It is true that  the person is experiencing challenges with meeting deadlines due to certain factors. However, it’s essential to consider additional aspects beyond this initial analysis. For instance, if we were to promote a person with superior interpersonal abilities, the specific areas they need to improve on can be looked into. In this case, the focus would be on enhancing their planning skills, which can be addressed through coaching and training.

Conversely, if a decision is made to promote someone lacking in people skills, there may be a potential increase in aggression and a negative impact on the overall organisational culture. This sends a message that prioritises business over people, potentially spoiling the work environment.

The choice depends on the organisation’s size, scale and culture. In a scenario where attracting talent is not an issue, such as in a company like Google, the emphasis on business may not be as detrimental. However, in organisations facing challenges in hiring, promoting someone with a stronger focus on people may be more beneficial.

For effective management, it’s crucial to strike a balance between being people focused and ensuring completion of tasks. While the individual in question may struggle with planning, the key is that they are still achieving their objectives and have a supportive team. Coaching can be employed to enhance their planning skills and emphasise the importance of meeting deadlines.

This article was first published in HRKatha Print Magazine