For decades, corporate advancement followed a predictable script: demonstrate competence, manage a team, climb the hierarchy. Success was measured by the number of direct reports and the size of one’s empire. But a fundamental question is now disrupting this orthodoxy: must career progression inevitably lead to people management?
A growing cohort of millennials and Gen Z professionals are answering with a resounding “no.” They want growth, recognition, and higher salaries—but without the burden of managing teams, navigating office politics, or enduring endless meetings about meetings.
“Growth isn’t always about managing people,” argues Jaikrishna B, group president – HR at Amara Raja Group. “It can also be about deepening one’s expertise, solving meaningful problems, or creating lasting impact across the organisation.” His observation reflects a seismic shift in how companies define leadership and reward excellence.
The management trap
The traditional model creates perverse incentives. Talented engineers become mediocre managers. Brilliant analysts find themselves drowning in administrative duties rather than generating insights. The corporate world has long assumed that technical expertise naturally evolves into people leadership—a fallacy that wastes talent and frustrates employees.
“Growth isn’t always about managing people. It can also be about deepening one’s expertise, solving meaningful problems, or creating lasting impact across the organisation.”Jaikrishna B, group president – HR at Amara Raja Group
R Venkattesh, former president, DCB Bank, identifies the core tension: “While traditional promotions have long been tied to leadership roles, a growing number of employees are questioning that path. They want growth, visibility and recognition, but without the pressures of team oversight.”
This resistance isn’t about avoiding responsibility. Rather, it reflects a more sophisticated understanding of where individual strengths lie and how value is created in modern organisations.
New paths emerge
Progressive companies are responding by creating alternative advancement routes. Titles such as “principal engineer,” “technical fellow,” and “lead analyst” now carry the same prestige—and compensation—as traditional managerial roles. These positions offer vertical growth without requiring people management.
“While traditional promotions have long been tied to leadership roles, a growing number of employees are questioning that path. They want growth, visibility and recognition, but without the pressures of team oversight.”R Venkattesh, former president, DCB Bank
“Sectors such as technology and engineering are moving toward creating career paths where one can grow through deep expertise and contribution without managing people,” explains Jaikrishna. The shift acknowledges that in knowledge-intensive industries, individual contributors often create more value than their managerial counterparts.
Consider someone designing an AI-powered customer journey. They may have no direct reports, yet their decisions influence product innovation across an entire organisation. Or take the specialist leading a critical transformation project—their impact may affect hundreds of colleagues despite having no formal authority over them.
Structural challenges
However, implementing dual career tracks isn’t straightforward. Traditional pyramid structures create mathematical constraints. “Organisations have limitations in structure that need people to move into team-leader roles, else the span of control will be terribly skewed,” notes Venkattesh.
Cultural barriers prove equally stubborn. Some employees feel undervalued unless their titles reflect formal leadership authority, even when their compensation and influence match managerial peers. This title sensitivity reveals deeper anxieties about status and recognition in professional hierarchies.
The solution requires more than policy changes—it demands structural reimagining. “Structure should be an enabler,” argues Venkattesh. “Organisational structures must be created to align with the needs of people rather than rigid aspirational frameworks.”
Measuring impact without headcount
If promotion no longer requires managing people, how should companies evaluate and reward individual contributors? The answer lies in expanding definitions of performance and influence.
“Some individuals can grow in their areas without needing to manage a team, and it all depends on their circle of impact or area of influence,” explains Venkattesh. This impact-based assessment recognises that influence flows through expertise, innovation, and strategic thinking—not just formal authority.
Compensation must reflect this reality. “Nothing should change in the pay structure,” insists Venkattesh. “In some cases, these specialists get paid higher compensation as their roles become more specialised.” When rare skills command premium salaries, technical expertise can become more lucrative than people management.
The coaching imperative
Creating genuinely flexible career paths requires more than structural changes—it demands cultural transformation. Here, coaching plays a crucial role.
“This is where coaching becomes pivotal,” observes Jaikrishna. “Coaching empowers individuals to reflect on their own aspirations. Not everyone dreams of leading people, but everyone desires to lead something meaningful—a project, a transformation.”
Coaching also helps senior leaders recognise excellence beyond traditional metrics. Managers must learn to value those who lead through insight, creativity, or innovation rather than hierarchical position.
The sports analogy
Venkattesh draws parallels with sports leadership: “Some are natural team managers, and some struggle after being given captaincy roles.” The goal shouldn’t be forcing everyone into the same mould, but rather unlocking each individual’s potential along their preferred path.
This personalised approach to career development acknowledges that organisations need both types of leaders: those who excel at managing people and those who lead through expertise and innovation.
Beyond the managerial badge
The implications extend beyond individual career satisfaction. Companies that embrace dual tracks can retain technical talent that might otherwise leave for better opportunities. They avoid the Peter Principle—promoting people to their level of incompetence—whilst maximising each employee’s contribution.
“We must create organisations where contribution is valued as much as control,” concludes Jaikrishna. “Recognition should be earned through excellence, not just reporting lines.”
This represents more than a policy adjustment—it’s a fundamental reimagining of professional success. In an economy increasingly driven by knowledge and innovation, the most valuable employees may be those who never manage anyone at all. It’s time to move beyond the belief that success only wears a manager’s badge.
1 Comment
A refreshing perspective! Career growth isn’t just about titles anymore—it’s about skills, impact, and flexibility. Insightful read!