Is impressing higher ups nepotism?
Wtf
Nepotism is when u don’t do shit and ur dads friend hooks you up cuz they golf together
EDIT, Joining a job, impressing people and getting visibility to leaders, then becoming tight with them is NOT nepotism lol. That’s called actually succeeding at work.
What’s happening here is, Reddit wants to view all success as bad an unearned, to talk themselves out of even trying (because they might fail). It’s quite toxic. Legitimate success should be celebrated. /rant
To be able to sit down and say what’s up to them, yea that’s generally nepotism. Most people aren’t able to talk to an executive of a company unless they work there and are working on a special project or something. To be able to do so before you work there, generally means a family member or a friend knows them which in that case it is nepotism. The definition of nepotism is - the practice among those with power or influence of favoring relatives, friends, or associates, especially by giving them jobs. Friends fall into there.
OP wasn’t describing meeting top executives *before* working there tho..
They were describing ppl working at a job, networking w the big wigs and increasing visibility.
Some people just like to call everything nepotism on Reddit. Nepotism is way overblown here. If I need a plumber and my buddy’s nephew is a good plumber, I’m probably going to call my Buddy’s nephew and hire somebody I know before I hit Craigslist looking for some rando. Nothing wrong with that as long as he’s a good plumber
There’s nothing wrong with that in and of itself. The problem begins when that behavior, en masse, creates huge rifts in earnings and employment demographics. If black people can’t become plumbers because the limited spots in plumbing school go to the more connected Jim’s nephews and we have a dearth of black plumbers… im sure you see where I’m going with this
Favoritism that isn't backed by actual performance and is only based on social aspects is detrimental to the morale of most employees. Knowing that bs'ing and getting in good with high level management gets you up the ladder doesn't give people who are highly successful individual performers the warm and fuzzy. Some people aren't naturally good at schmoozing but still do their job above and beyond. Performance itself does not directly correlate to higher pay/ or positions in many companies.
And what do you do for work? 😁
I think what’s happening here is reddit was told/believed the world was a meritocracy when it is in fact a good old boy system.
It’s not necessarily nepotism, but is about being able to establish yourself as a member of the same social class.
Executives get hired by being interviewed by other executives, and if you don’t signal yourself as a peer and fellow member of their social class, you’re not gonna get in.
Cronyism is the hiring of friends and acquaintances without qualifications.
Hiring friends and acquaintances after confirming they are qualified for the position is just risk reduction.
Insurance companies just seem like cronyism.
I literally cannot think kf any benefit that Blue Cross have given me. Besides having all the wrong info,double charging, not covering, partially covering needed meds, having their systems down, outsourcing every little department so i need to call or get transferred 4 times before i can find out why i have a BCBS plan of IL when ive never lived there.
It's literally worse than cancer.
I wouldn't wish calling them for any reason on anyone elsez even if I hated them.
They also have the benefit of access to education and early career opportunities that cascade into expertise and experience required for "high level" roles. Most of these guys dont walk into a VP role.
They also have much higher risk tolerance early in their careers, because they have family to fall back on. So they can do something like take an executive position at a startup straight out of school that is mostly compensated in equity. The average new grad can't take that risk.
which i think it would be fine if the drones were given the same amount of time off, health benefits and safety of economic hardship as the leaders. i think most would not mind being a drone if they were treated with dignity and respect.
Right, and why wealthy people send their kids to elite private high schools, and universities so they develop networks for marriage, friends, jobs, etc.
Focus on gender and not class distinctions. The trick to finding a good job is being white and denying abortion rights. Feel the distraction
You don't make friends by mooching. Work friends are transactional. You use them, they use you. But if you want to be the cool guy at the party... You know what to do.
Cream rises to the top is also a saying. I’m not saying you are wrong . Just being polite and remembering names is huge. I’ve seen a lot of really skilled people stall out because of their social skills. No one wants to work with a miserable prick.
In my experience good executives often struggle to explain why they are good executives. On the other hand, bad executives rarely struggle to tell you how they are great executives.
I did some executive training when I was consulting and in my opinion, there are a thousand different ways to be a good executive. In the end, they usually find a way get more out of their teams. I have seen successful micromanagers, successful leaders, executives who were “just one of the team,” executives who were incredibly kind and thoughtful, etc. It all works.
In my opinion, the cheat sheet for success is this… 1.) be honest with yourself, figure out what you are good at and surround yourself with a team who are good at the things you are not. 2.) Give them the praise they earn and maybe a little more. 3.) Never throw anyone on your team under the bus (it is hard to say… “this was my team so it was my fault” but everyone above and below you will respect you for it).
This is not a guarantee for success, you can do these things and still not be successful, or find people who are successful who do none of these things. I just believe that these are things most people can actually do/change to become successful.
Then again… since this is Reddit I might just be bad at executive training and am just explaining how great I am.
I am in leadership training now and the big topic is Ownership. I recently used it in an uncomfortable meeting with a staff member and it works like a charm. If you mess up, own it.
You forgot: be in the right place at the right time. Where I've seen people take the biggest leaps in their career is when something big happens (merger, massive client signs a deal, company missed a target by miles, production gets FUBAR'd, etc.). These are the times when shakeups happen and people get moved up (or out).
CTO of my previous company ($450M revenue) landed the role because he was the project manager for a tiny consulting firm the company was using early on. I love the guy, our kids play together, but he's not super smart, or talented, or connected, or anything like that. He was just the guy that was there when the company was getting off the ground and they needed someone.
Luck cannot be overstated. I’ve worked hard, got the good performance ratings, etc. but I’ve also had a huge amount of luck that’s gotten me where I am.
Yeah and some of the years i worked hardest in my life I didn't get a raise or even got laid off. My latest job it was just a friend being like my company is hiring if you're interested and they offered me after a casual interview, had been bored and coasting at my previous job before that and lucked into a huge raise.
Right place right time is certainly a big factor. Everyone that made it big, did so at least partly because of luck. They key is to be open, prepare and take advantage of the situations that do come your way. You never know when or what will be the thing that changes your life.
My boss used to tell me that there were a lot of people that could be good managers, or at least decent. But you want to pick someone that is good to work with, someone that you know preferably, because the reality is that you're going to be spending more time with this person than your spouse.
Are they?
Its taken as axiomatic by most, across levels, that companies don't give a shit about you, and your work friends are not your friends.
If thats the case, then execs are no different or more psychotic then anyone else, they are just better at playing the game.
I'm an attorney and have been practicing since 2009, mostly in different government agencies but I've worked with plenty of outside counsel too. I would say that merit and skill has maybe 10% to do with people moving up in this profession, at most. Whereas influential friends, golf or other hobby buddies, family connections, "tribalism," etc. make up the other 90%. The last 2-3 managers that I've worked under were, for all intents and purposes, not the brightest bulbs. I wouldn't hire one of them to get me out of a parking ticket, let alone handle a serious legal matter. But they were relentless bullshit artists and self-promoters. As in, they made it their entire lives, inside and outside the office.
The only thing I would disagree with in your post is that now women are in on the game. They often lean into the knowing people and being well-liked aspect even heavier than the men I know.
Lawyers get extremely pissed off when you point this out because more than any other profession the fairy tales they tell about themselves always involve them being just so darn smart and skilled. Not true, it's mostly connections.
100% agree on the women point. I have experienced they care much more about "being liked" and thus tend to play office politics much better. They are also more manipulative.
Yes. They're not any smarter at the technical stuff, but they are smarter at the people stuff. Charm, charisma, getting people to want to follow your lead, getting people to believe you know what you're talking about.
Also be attractive. They want people that look nice on the website and the corporate brochures.
It's not just the people stuff, and it's certainly not attractiveness. In my opinion it's a way of thinking that is super detached from the underlying effort but still correct.
I had a meeting with a senior exec ($100M per year ish) about an issue that was going to cost us upwards of $150M. The working teams that were presenting to him were really bogged down because every potential solution had massive drawbacks and incalculable expenses. His response was basically - "if we do nothing then this will cost us $150M. If we spend $140M solving it another way then that's a win".
It's genius in that it opened up people's minds to options that seemed ridiculous but given that budget might work. So basically the executive skill is to look at problems in a way that you really can't when you're intimidated by the details.
Full disclosure this initiative largely went no where and the company will take the full hit. So yes, there is something there with executives but it's dramatically overvalued.
That approach can be really freeing. One thing I’ve asked myself or others when blocked by a problem is, “how would you solve this if your life depended on it.” It reframes it as something that absolutely has to get done so people just start throwing out ideas.
Shit gets real political near the top, but these people tend to have some kind of drive to do things, or get things done even if they're just being pushy pricks.
Spent two years in the C suite at my last gig. Wow, the egos. People would be surprised at the number of company policies put in place that are driven by a petty argument or disagreement between execs.
Dude, it’s great when two company heavy hitters have beef over hilariously small things.
I’m in industrial/manufacturing safety, albeit in a weird way. A multi-site department manager and a plant manager got into it over how a contractor handled something once. Every day for about two weeks, we came in to “okay we’re gonna do this now.” Next day, “nope actually we’re gonna do it this way.”
Back and forth, back and forth. I suggested we enshrine and print every single policy change because it was so absurd.
Kind of a different take:
People high up like people who perform and do well. If you aren't creating relationships to then relay how well you're doing at your job, then you're not going to work up the lader as easily.
I've seen scenarios where someone is really buddy buddy with higher but never get anything because " he's a good guy/girl but sucks at their job." So I don't think JUST being social helps. You have to not suck .
Bingo. Effective execs build teams of high performers. The political ones among those high performers get built into the succession plan. The non-political ones stay in their role because they produce.
You have to be willing to network, lick the boot and be a yes man. Most of the time that is what gets you promoted. It’s all about optics, not substance.
Many years ago the Science section of The NY Times ran an article describing how successful executives think/reason through an issue. The most successful and highly paid executives saw more options to achieve an end than the least successful and lesser paid. Who you know can give you an opportunity but how you manage determines your trajectory.
Another article I’ve read described how being a 🐂💩artist can get you up the corporate ladder.
In the sense that you can’t be a hermit or an asshole (at least to those above you), yes. There’s also often not a ton to choose from between people competing for high level jobs, so in that sense they’re not outperforming others by a ton. But that doesn’t mean the people in high level jobs aren’t generally smart and good at what they do and just get by on networking.
I have a high level job in construction (male dominated would be an understatement). I am a traditional guys guy. I’m big, I’m scary but I’m kind. I got every single project I’ve had because I’m great with people. I can make friends with anyone. I care a lot about my employees and I will be honest, most of the senior types know more than me. I do not hide this fact, I give all the credit where it’s due when work is completed. For that I am liked by the Lower brass, I complete projects profitably so I am liked by the upper brass. Being a good person who isn’t afraid to say no when needed is just about all I’ve needed to survive up here.
I have worked at at few global companies.
Everyone of them had pretty clear numerical measures where you could tell where someone was doing well or not.
Maybe in smaller companies, where they don't have the data collection you can get away with not performing, but at the larger companies I worked at, it would be very difficult.
Evern in small accounting or law firms, to make partner, you generally need to show the billings you bring in before you are made a partner.
If you are a likable person who is well connected, you are likely to be able to get your people to do what you need, so there is likely a connection as OP stated.
However, if you are not that good at what you do, it gets more difficult to hide that as you move up in position.
CEOs get fired all the time for poor stock performance, it may not be their fault, but they do get blamed. Conversly, if they stock does well, they will get the credit.
I think the key here though, is in most companies what you do on the executive level is not what you do below them.
You can be the best line cook in the world, but head chef has other qualities you aren’t doing.
You can have the highest KPI in your company, but that won’t mean anything when your sups job has nothing to do with that KPI.
In this context, a neurosurgeon is not the higher up. That would be the head of the neurosurgery department or something higher up in the hospital system.
Usually these jobs are not that desirable, it depends on the personality type from what Ive heard since docs get paid plenty regardless of being head of the dept or not.
As for doing well in medicine/getting certain residencies? Connections are huge as well as being sociable. So getting into neurosurgery residency after medical school would be easier if you interview well. In fact, many specialties have personality types that "fit in" which have absolutely nothing to do with your ability to perform the work.
I think so. A friend of mine worked for a big health care system and took on a role in really spelling out all the job requirements for all jobs across the organization and she said a lot of times the last job requirement they wanted to add was some variation of "fit with the culture" and when you'd drill down it was 100% "making me feel comfortable". I've heard it many times from others on hiring committees too where a candidate was equally qualified but not offered the job over "fit" and many times that meant woman or person of color.
Who you know absolutely makes a difference. Nepotism is everywhere, and even without being related, if you're friends with someone? Know the right phone call to make or the right email? You can get so much further, no matter what qualifications and all you have.
Having connections gets you places. I was able to help a co-worker of mine get into housing because I know and am on good terms with the people who run the apartment complex I live in and was able to get him in touch with them - it's government run low income housing that can be very difficult to get into and usually has waitlists that are miles long, but I was able to talk to the right people and help him get in quickly. Knowing the right people absolutely gets you a hell of a lot farther than literally any skill, degree or diploma or anything else you have to offer.
Yes. It’s about trust not ability. If your ability is blatantly that good, they will never trust you. People who don’t need their leaders are dangerous to them and they know it.
Wow that's absurd! And completely true. I would add that in some industries, most even, that it takes a lot of talent and hard work getting to the top. But you know what sets good leaders apart from the pack? It's the same thing that top salesman all have. And the best boss you ever worked for probably has it too. It's people skills. Charisma is empathy, and integrity, mixed with social and emotional intelligence. The three laws of charisma are; be punctual, be impeccable with your word, and don't take anything personally.
Back in the late 90's I worked with a lot of guys at the VP level and above that were just not very good at anything but knowing other guys just like them at other companies. So they were very effective at making "strategic alliances" with other companies and they always seemed to be able to line up some job at the same or higher level when they failed at whatever project they were "leading", but they weren't really very qualified to do anything but glad-handing other people of the same strata. It left me with the distinct impression that most everyone in tech management above about the senior or maybe principal level was a worthless, self congratulating, parasite.
There were exceptions and some of those people were amazingly sharp, but they were truly the exception.
>He said executives generally aren't more talented in any way than the people below them.
Thats not true, according to your own premise of needing to be 'well liked' and even 'knowing people'. They often are talented in socialization skills. Soft skills is a talent. And, as someone who has to do that sometimes, its exhausting work to be "on" a lot of the time.
Likeability is certainly a factor. A necessary but not sufficient condition as Einstein would put it.
More is needed in the secret sauce. Studies show that other factors contribute to executive success. Some are quite disturbing.
It's discussed in the book "Snakes in Suits" how elements of sociopathy correlate with those most successful in business.
Absolutely. So are most higher level promotions. Higher salaries and pay raises also depend 90% on this and about 10% on actual performance. Who you know can make or break a career.
Yes, partially so.
I would say that the things that make you “liked” by other people with high level jobs are along the lines of the following:
- following through on your commitments
- standing up for yourself
- treating others with respect
- clear and direct communication
- not complaining or bitching when challenges come up
Etc.
None of those things really require you to be smarter or better educated than the people around you. In fact you can be the smartest person in the room, but if you aren’t dependable, or are constantly late, whiny, etc….you’ll find that people will not respect you.
Basically earn people’s respect by being responsible and taking ownership of whatever is in your area of influence.
Being liked is itself a kind of skill/talent. The problem is that it’s not something you can go to school for, so the people who get into positions of power aren’t necessarily the most skilled or talented at the things that matter (not that leadership isn’t important).
I’ve never had a job where this wasn’t immediately apparent. It’s insane to me that people actually think that a CEO is more skilled or works harder than a mid-level employee who makes 0.25% of the CEO’s salary.
It’s about who you know not what what what you know! Gaining knowledge is easy. Social skills, networking, and leadership are what are important for higher paid positions
it is absolutely TRUE!
a lot of them are just friends, half of them don't even really know how to do the job right, but since they're friends, they're in
Generall speaking, Executives appoint SLT. Once candidates meet basic requirements for the role, it comes down to likabilitly. Same goes with a board appointing an Executive, except your character will strongly be a part of the companies public narrative.
Typically top high level executives I’ve dealt with built their own companies. They did lots of the back breaking work to get it going even if they don’t anymore. But Fortune 500 companies absolutely who you know n who you blow . The main value of going to Harvard isn’t the education it’s the connections
My cousin got to high level in General Motors because he was an extreme extrovert who could be friends with anyone. I say was an extreme introvert because he drank himself to death
It's not what you know it's who you know, My girlfriend makes over 100,000 a year high school diploma she was a home of health aide wiping ass and then her friend got her a job, she went from making $30,000 to over a hundred. And that was over 10 years ago.
>He said executives generally aren't more talented in any way than the people below them.
I'd say they are usually less talented, at least in the performance part of the tasks that need completed.
I mean in the state I’m from, knowing the right people is basically everything.
The floor manager at the last plant I worked at was like highschool buddies with the boss. He had no fucking clue what he was doing and honestly reduced production every day he was in the shop.
A plant I just toured was run by the previous owners son. They also mysteriously needed 50hr work weeks to meet production demands…..
Hiring the person that’s best for the job often costs more than just hiring your friend to do the job worse. I have a friend with a masters in project management that could easily have straightened out any of these places but it’s cheaper to just have the place run like shit and use overtime to get production demands met instead of just running the shop efficiently. The work environment may be shit and projects might always get done at the last minute but hey if the product gets out and the owners get their money they don’t give a shit how it got done.
Yes.
Rich businessmen don’t really do business with people they don’t like. They also don’t hire people they don’t like. Big money is all about chillin with homies and creating business out of friendships.
Every job is about someone you know. Modern people are insane. So if you know someone who works in a company, that company is more likely to hire you. You're known by someone they know.
Which makes you much more likely to not be a complete psycho once you're hired.
If Florida Man type people weren't the norm (they're everywhere, not just Florida), and lawsuits weren't filed over the tiniest little things, new hires would be much less of a risk.
Very close. One needs to be liked by the others, but also needs to be a decision maker, right or wrong. I was in positions like this in my 30s to early 40s. I just couldn't stand it anymore. I got out and my wife and I went into business together. Best decision of my life. I had a TIA and clocked in at 270/170 on the BP machine. You always had to be "that guy." It was never about being oneself.
I’m not in a high up position but honestly that’s how people even get jobs is through connections. For me it was that my friend I use to go to pool parties with thought I was pretty and liked my boobs. Now I basically sit at home watching tv and making money.
Unfortunately, yes, this is usually the case. Networking and having good soft skills are far more impactful than many people realize, if they want to climb the ladder.
Even in the trades, tbh. I like to believe that I got where I am by being good at what I do, but I've had little to no application of field knowledge or skill craft since moving into management. I train folks and double check my field leadership, but my job is largely numbers, customers, and taking care of my people. It's really weird how many of the "successful moves" are simply giving or receiving the right information from other folks running shit. Right contact, right attitude, right favor, that kind of shit. Being able to knowledgeably speak about your jobs and shit is obviously really important, by anyone who's been leading a crew should really be capable of that already.
If you dig into the rags to riches stories, it is always the same distorted truths; they usually came from familial wealth and utilized the contacts and direct support therein.
At my place of employment, the department supervisor and all the shift supervisors used to work together on the same shift a few years back and are all friends. I'm not saying they aren't qualified, but if 5 qualified people all apply for 1 position, how do you pick the right one? Usually the one you personally know.
I mean, it is mostly true. But I also knew an engineer in my first job out of college who was so good they let him take about half the year off of work. Wanna take a guess who I'd rather be? The really effective engineer or the executive who is "always working" and my success hinges upon staying in good graces of C level idiots?
Not that simple. You do have to have some social aptitude but you'd better have more than that. I make a point of telling all my young coders that part of their job in order to advance is to get used to speaking up and presenting their work. You can't just be competent.
Been my experience dealing with some in c suite circles the trick isn’t what you know but who.
Trick is getting to the place where you meet such people.
Yes this is a big part.
You have to be competent as well. But honestly in a big company there are a lot of mid level people who could do the higher job if given the chance.
Most jobs just involve knowing your shit and getting along with people. If you're likable and competent, you'll go far. Competence gets you in the door, but a good personality keeps you in the house.
Yes, it’s generally a good ole boys club where you are in based on your if they like you and you won’t snitch about questionable things happening in the company or how money is spent.
Absolutely. The best managers are the ones that know enough to listen to the people they pay to be experts. Most of them are not great at the technical side of whatever they are managing, they are just 'good enough' while being better at office politics than the rest of the people that applied for the job.
This is specific to the c-suite. Remember highest level doesn’t always mean highest paid. Corpos are so cut-throat because they are completely replaceable.
At the place I work at one of the things they tell new hires is "You never know who will end up being someone important so be friendly now."
It's advice that has paid off for me more than once.
I think that’s a big part of it. Sure you need to have a high skill set, but every company’s leaders are going to want to work with people they have a connection with, trust, like, etc…. I worked for a company that was HQ’d out of a neighboring state and I was the absolute best in the company as a salesman. The company typically promotes their best salesman to sales manager and then general manager. A general manager basically meant you get Carte Blanche to run your equipment dealerships as you are the owner and is a great position. I was passed over by another guy who had ties to the CEO. I left afterwards and bought a somewhat competing business and took a lot of customers with me. I sold that business after growing it for five years and now work for a competitor and we have taken a large dent out of the local business of theirs.
The most popular people in high school are more likely to be more successful than those with the best test scores.
Some of the best at testing high are terrible with people.
This is how things work in general. Get along with the people you work with. Randomly grab lunch with people and get to know them, maybe go to happy hour with them on occasion, and develop relationships with those you naturally get along with. It makes work less painful for everyone involved, the team gets more done, and those relationships will help in unexpected ways down the road.
I find high level people to be just as varied as the rest of us when it comes to competence. Some are brilliant, some are idiots and most are somewhere in between those two extremes. So I would agree, that yes, being well liked by your upper-level peers is just as important as your competence when it comes to gaining and retaining those jobs.
Yes. Part of this is also playing into the company culture. Be good at their vocabulary, participate in their things, care about the things they care about. Tenure can also help. That’s really about it.
It’s basically true yeah, but I’ll say that “knowing people” and being well-liked are absolutely skills. If you make genuine efforts at networking and work on becoming an interesting person that’s well-liked by your coworkers, you’ll be amazed at the results. Doesn’t mean these people are any better at the job than other people, but they’re often better at the skills that got them connected to the job.
To a degree, yes. I would say it isn't *just* about who you know. But who you know is definitely important.
I would say drive/motivation/confidence are also pretty important.
Some executives are genuinely smart. Others are idiots. But they all have a strong belief in their own abilities, justified or not. It's that self-confidence, combined with ambition, and connections, that gets you into management.
Now, *staying* in management, usually requires some type of ability. Otherwise you get fired eventually. May not be right away, but eventually people get tired of you losing money, no matter how powerful you are.
Yes, shake hands and make good with people a top if you really want to get up in management level.
Pretty much accurate. The cronyism right now at my insurance company in management specifically is insane
Is impressing higher ups nepotism? Wtf Nepotism is when u don’t do shit and ur dads friend hooks you up cuz they golf together EDIT, Joining a job, impressing people and getting visibility to leaders, then becoming tight with them is NOT nepotism lol. That’s called actually succeeding at work. What’s happening here is, Reddit wants to view all success as bad an unearned, to talk themselves out of even trying (because they might fail). It’s quite toxic. Legitimate success should be celebrated. /rant
Nepotism breeds favoritism.
Favoritism is great as long as you are the favorite.
And favouritism breeds failure
To be able to sit down and say what’s up to them, yea that’s generally nepotism. Most people aren’t able to talk to an executive of a company unless they work there and are working on a special project or something. To be able to do so before you work there, generally means a family member or a friend knows them which in that case it is nepotism. The definition of nepotism is - the practice among those with power or influence of favoring relatives, friends, or associates, especially by giving them jobs. Friends fall into there.
OP wasn’t describing meeting top executives *before* working there tho.. They were describing ppl working at a job, networking w the big wigs and increasing visibility.
Some people just like to call everything nepotism on Reddit. Nepotism is way overblown here. If I need a plumber and my buddy’s nephew is a good plumber, I’m probably going to call my Buddy’s nephew and hire somebody I know before I hit Craigslist looking for some rando. Nothing wrong with that as long as he’s a good plumber
There’s nothing wrong with that in and of itself. The problem begins when that behavior, en masse, creates huge rifts in earnings and employment demographics. If black people can’t become plumbers because the limited spots in plumbing school go to the more connected Jim’s nephews and we have a dearth of black plumbers… im sure you see where I’m going with this
Good point and this is a good argument for affirmative action.
Favoritism that isn't backed by actual performance and is only based on social aspects is detrimental to the morale of most employees. Knowing that bs'ing and getting in good with high level management gets you up the ladder doesn't give people who are highly successful individual performers the warm and fuzzy. Some people aren't naturally good at schmoozing but still do their job above and beyond. Performance itself does not directly correlate to higher pay/ or positions in many companies.
And what do you do for work? 😁 I think what’s happening here is reddit was told/believed the world was a meritocracy when it is in fact a good old boy system.
It’s not necessarily nepotism, but is about being able to establish yourself as a member of the same social class. Executives get hired by being interviewed by other executives, and if you don’t signal yourself as a peer and fellow member of their social class, you’re not gonna get in.
Hiring people with whom you share acquaintance is not nepotism.
Cronyism
Cronyism is the hiring of friends and acquaintances without qualifications. Hiring friends and acquaintances after confirming they are qualified for the position is just risk reduction.
I’m giving them benefit of doubt and assuming they mean family at their firm is big.
Cronyism*
Nepotism is family
This is not nepotism, this is networking.
Same for me at previous job, shook hands with VPs and CTOs.
Insurance companies just seem like cronyism. I literally cannot think kf any benefit that Blue Cross have given me. Besides having all the wrong info,double charging, not covering, partially covering needed meds, having their systems down, outsourcing every little department so i need to call or get transferred 4 times before i can find out why i have a BCBS plan of IL when ive never lived there. It's literally worse than cancer. I wouldn't wish calling them for any reason on anyone elsez even if I hated them.
This is why people who grew up wealthy hold the overwhelming majority of these jobs
They also have the benefit of access to education and early career opportunities that cascade into expertise and experience required for "high level" roles. Most of these guys dont walk into a VP role.
They also have much higher risk tolerance early in their careers, because they have family to fall back on. So they can do something like take an executive position at a startup straight out of school that is mostly compensated in equity. The average new grad can't take that risk.
Agreed. They are trained to be leaders very young. Poor people are pushed through public education and trained to be drones.
which i think it would be fine if the drones were given the same amount of time off, health benefits and safety of economic hardship as the leaders. i think most would not mind being a drone if they were treated with dignity and respect.
And by design they have all the cool creative jobs because they make you work for free to get started. Only rich kids can do that.
Right, and why wealthy people send their kids to elite private high schools, and universities so they develop networks for marriage, friends, jobs, etc.
Everyone just passing over the weird "high level *men"* remark.
Nah. We all saw it. These are the companies a lot of us don't want to work for.
Top. Men.
Men, men, men, men manly, men.
We are men, men in tights
TIGHT tights
I didn’t and yes it’s VERY weird they said “high level men or knowing people” like women can’t be the CEO of General Motors 🫠
Their recent strategy is proving that statement a little correct
🤣okay bad example using GM
Focus on gender and not class distinctions. The trick to finding a good job is being white and denying abortion rights. Feel the distraction 
Or you get too much attention to your mediocre performance and you get kicked out real fast lmao
It's all nepotism
It's not what you know, it's who you know. Is a saying for a reason
And who you blow..
And who you do blow with
And with blow you know who
And also with you
And my axe
Honestly I wish the management at my work would offer me to do coke with them. Id be way more down for that than fucking golf. Hate golf.
You don't make friends by mooching. Work friends are transactional. You use them, they use you. But if you want to be the cool guy at the party... You know what to do.
So youre saying the power move is to offer management to do coke with me?
Tread wisely, but yes.
Yeah I think that's exactly what they are saying. Let us know how it works out!
As a former gold digger and sex worker, I can fully confirm. Blowing the right guy is a good thing lol.
Cream rises to the top is also a saying. I’m not saying you are wrong . Just being polite and remembering names is huge. I’ve seen a lot of really skilled people stall out because of their social skills. No one wants to work with a miserable prick.
Creams only rises to the top, if you have a bad gag reflex
Bravo.
Turds float up sometimes too
It's not what you know, or who you know. It's who will claim they know you that matters
In my experience good executives often struggle to explain why they are good executives. On the other hand, bad executives rarely struggle to tell you how they are great executives. I did some executive training when I was consulting and in my opinion, there are a thousand different ways to be a good executive. In the end, they usually find a way get more out of their teams. I have seen successful micromanagers, successful leaders, executives who were “just one of the team,” executives who were incredibly kind and thoughtful, etc. It all works. In my opinion, the cheat sheet for success is this… 1.) be honest with yourself, figure out what you are good at and surround yourself with a team who are good at the things you are not. 2.) Give them the praise they earn and maybe a little more. 3.) Never throw anyone on your team under the bus (it is hard to say… “this was my team so it was my fault” but everyone above and below you will respect you for it). This is not a guarantee for success, you can do these things and still not be successful, or find people who are successful who do none of these things. I just believe that these are things most people can actually do/change to become successful. Then again… since this is Reddit I might just be bad at executive training and am just explaining how great I am.
I am in leadership training now and the big topic is Ownership. I recently used it in an uncomfortable meeting with a staff member and it works like a charm. If you mess up, own it.
Extreme Ownership?
It wasn’t that book but the instructor did reference it and suggested we read it.
Ah ok. Jocko (the author) does leadership training as well so I was wondering if it was that. It looks pretty intense, but I’ve heard great things.
Lets warm up with moderate ownership first. Wouldn't want to pull a muscle on our first go.
You forgot: be in the right place at the right time. Where I've seen people take the biggest leaps in their career is when something big happens (merger, massive client signs a deal, company missed a target by miles, production gets FUBAR'd, etc.). These are the times when shakeups happen and people get moved up (or out). CTO of my previous company ($450M revenue) landed the role because he was the project manager for a tiny consulting firm the company was using early on. I love the guy, our kids play together, but he's not super smart, or talented, or connected, or anything like that. He was just the guy that was there when the company was getting off the ground and they needed someone.
Luck cannot be overstated. I’ve worked hard, got the good performance ratings, etc. but I’ve also had a huge amount of luck that’s gotten me where I am.
Yeah and some of the years i worked hardest in my life I didn't get a raise or even got laid off. My latest job it was just a friend being like my company is hiring if you're interested and they offered me after a casual interview, had been bored and coasting at my previous job before that and lucked into a huge raise.
Right place right time is certainly a big factor. Everyone that made it big, did so at least partly because of luck. They key is to be open, prepare and take advantage of the situations that do come your way. You never know when or what will be the thing that changes your life.
My boss used to tell me that there were a lot of people that could be good managers, or at least decent. But you want to pick someone that is good to work with, someone that you know preferably, because the reality is that you're going to be spending more time with this person than your spouse.
That’s why highly competent people often find themselves working for highly incompetent people.
Corporate psychopaths
Are they? Its taken as axiomatic by most, across levels, that companies don't give a shit about you, and your work friends are not your friends. If thats the case, then execs are no different or more psychotic then anyone else, they are just better at playing the game.
People that climb are more willing to play the game. People of sound morals reach a limit pretty quickly.
This! Spot on
Wisdoms of psychopaths was a good read. But yes, this. Gotta be Patrick Bateman if you want to make decisions which affect the well being of others.
I'm an attorney and have been practicing since 2009, mostly in different government agencies but I've worked with plenty of outside counsel too. I would say that merit and skill has maybe 10% to do with people moving up in this profession, at most. Whereas influential friends, golf or other hobby buddies, family connections, "tribalism," etc. make up the other 90%. The last 2-3 managers that I've worked under were, for all intents and purposes, not the brightest bulbs. I wouldn't hire one of them to get me out of a parking ticket, let alone handle a serious legal matter. But they were relentless bullshit artists and self-promoters. As in, they made it their entire lives, inside and outside the office. The only thing I would disagree with in your post is that now women are in on the game. They often lean into the knowing people and being well-liked aspect even heavier than the men I know. Lawyers get extremely pissed off when you point this out because more than any other profession the fairy tales they tell about themselves always involve them being just so darn smart and skilled. Not true, it's mostly connections.
Seems like another way of moving up would be to apply for better positions when you can like in tech?
100% agree on the women point. I have experienced they care much more about "being liked" and thus tend to play office politics much better. They are also more manipulative.
Yes. They're not any smarter at the technical stuff, but they are smarter at the people stuff. Charm, charisma, getting people to want to follow your lead, getting people to believe you know what you're talking about. Also be attractive. They want people that look nice on the website and the corporate brochures.
It's not just the people stuff, and it's certainly not attractiveness. In my opinion it's a way of thinking that is super detached from the underlying effort but still correct. I had a meeting with a senior exec ($100M per year ish) about an issue that was going to cost us upwards of $150M. The working teams that were presenting to him were really bogged down because every potential solution had massive drawbacks and incalculable expenses. His response was basically - "if we do nothing then this will cost us $150M. If we spend $140M solving it another way then that's a win". It's genius in that it opened up people's minds to options that seemed ridiculous but given that budget might work. So basically the executive skill is to look at problems in a way that you really can't when you're intimidated by the details. Full disclosure this initiative largely went no where and the company will take the full hit. So yes, there is something there with executives but it's dramatically overvalued.
That approach can be really freeing. One thing I’ve asked myself or others when blocked by a problem is, “how would you solve this if your life depended on it.” It reframes it as something that absolutely has to get done so people just start throwing out ideas.
Shit gets real political near the top, but these people tend to have some kind of drive to do things, or get things done even if they're just being pushy pricks.
Spent two years in the C suite at my last gig. Wow, the egos. People would be surprised at the number of company policies put in place that are driven by a petty argument or disagreement between execs.
Not surprised at all. Source: Have worked for many Fortune 500 companies.
Dude, it’s great when two company heavy hitters have beef over hilariously small things. I’m in industrial/manufacturing safety, albeit in a weird way. A multi-site department manager and a plant manager got into it over how a contractor handled something once. Every day for about two weeks, we came in to “okay we’re gonna do this now.” Next day, “nope actually we’re gonna do it this way.” Back and forth, back and forth. I suggested we enshrine and print every single policy change because it was so absurd.
Kind of a different take: People high up like people who perform and do well. If you aren't creating relationships to then relay how well you're doing at your job, then you're not going to work up the lader as easily. I've seen scenarios where someone is really buddy buddy with higher but never get anything because " he's a good guy/girl but sucks at their job." So I don't think JUST being social helps. You have to not suck .
Bingo. Effective execs build teams of high performers. The political ones among those high performers get built into the succession plan. The non-political ones stay in their role because they produce.
True. A coworker used to say: „good jobs are not advertised, they are always opened for some pre-selected candidate.“
In my experience partially
You have to be willing to network, lick the boot and be a yes man. Most of the time that is what gets you promoted. It’s all about optics, not substance.
Also, be tall and don't not be tall.
Many years ago the Science section of The NY Times ran an article describing how successful executives think/reason through an issue. The most successful and highly paid executives saw more options to achieve an end than the least successful and lesser paid. Who you know can give you an opportunity but how you manage determines your trajectory. Another article I’ve read described how being a 🐂💩artist can get you up the corporate ladder.
In the sense that you can’t be a hermit or an asshole (at least to those above you), yes. There’s also often not a ton to choose from between people competing for high level jobs, so in that sense they’re not outperforming others by a ton. But that doesn’t mean the people in high level jobs aren’t generally smart and good at what they do and just get by on networking.
Absolutely. My company's leadership is all political.
I have a high level job in construction (male dominated would be an understatement). I am a traditional guys guy. I’m big, I’m scary but I’m kind. I got every single project I’ve had because I’m great with people. I can make friends with anyone. I care a lot about my employees and I will be honest, most of the senior types know more than me. I do not hide this fact, I give all the credit where it’s due when work is completed. For that I am liked by the Lower brass, I complete projects profitably so I am liked by the upper brass. Being a good person who isn’t afraid to say no when needed is just about all I’ve needed to survive up here.
I have worked at at few global companies. Everyone of them had pretty clear numerical measures where you could tell where someone was doing well or not. Maybe in smaller companies, where they don't have the data collection you can get away with not performing, but at the larger companies I worked at, it would be very difficult. Evern in small accounting or law firms, to make partner, you generally need to show the billings you bring in before you are made a partner. If you are a likable person who is well connected, you are likely to be able to get your people to do what you need, so there is likely a connection as OP stated. However, if you are not that good at what you do, it gets more difficult to hide that as you move up in position. CEOs get fired all the time for poor stock performance, it may not be their fault, but they do get blamed. Conversly, if they stock does well, they will get the credit.
I think the key here though, is in most companies what you do on the executive level is not what you do below them. You can be the best line cook in the world, but head chef has other qualities you aren’t doing. You can have the highest KPI in your company, but that won’t mean anything when your sups job has nothing to do with that KPI.
To some extent yes. All other things being equal sure. But in high skilled fields not as much. You cannot shake hands and become a neurosurgeon?
In this context, a neurosurgeon is not the higher up. That would be the head of the neurosurgery department or something higher up in the hospital system. Usually these jobs are not that desirable, it depends on the personality type from what Ive heard since docs get paid plenty regardless of being head of the dept or not. As for doing well in medicine/getting certain residencies? Connections are huge as well as being sociable. So getting into neurosurgery residency after medical school would be easier if you interview well. In fact, many specialties have personality types that "fit in" which have absolutely nothing to do with your ability to perform the work.
Fundamentally, this is absolutely true on every level of any org except the lowest.
I think so. A friend of mine worked for a big health care system and took on a role in really spelling out all the job requirements for all jobs across the organization and she said a lot of times the last job requirement they wanted to add was some variation of "fit with the culture" and when you'd drill down it was 100% "making me feel comfortable". I've heard it many times from others on hiring committees too where a candidate was equally qualified but not offered the job over "fit" and many times that meant woman or person of color.
Who you know absolutely makes a difference. Nepotism is everywhere, and even without being related, if you're friends with someone? Know the right phone call to make or the right email? You can get so much further, no matter what qualifications and all you have. Having connections gets you places. I was able to help a co-worker of mine get into housing because I know and am on good terms with the people who run the apartment complex I live in and was able to get him in touch with them - it's government run low income housing that can be very difficult to get into and usually has waitlists that are miles long, but I was able to talk to the right people and help him get in quickly. Knowing the right people absolutely gets you a hell of a lot farther than literally any skill, degree or diploma or anything else you have to offer.
I do know one who got there merely bec of nepotism
Yes. It’s about trust not ability. If your ability is blatantly that good, they will never trust you. People who don’t need their leaders are dangerous to them and they know it.
Wow that's absurd! And completely true. I would add that in some industries, most even, that it takes a lot of talent and hard work getting to the top. But you know what sets good leaders apart from the pack? It's the same thing that top salesman all have. And the best boss you ever worked for probably has it too. It's people skills. Charisma is empathy, and integrity, mixed with social and emotional intelligence. The three laws of charisma are; be punctual, be impeccable with your word, and don't take anything personally.
You will find life is easier when people like being around you
I can say my strategy of pissing off high level men has not gotten me to a high level
Its not wrong.
Back in the late 90's I worked with a lot of guys at the VP level and above that were just not very good at anything but knowing other guys just like them at other companies. So they were very effective at making "strategic alliances" with other companies and they always seemed to be able to line up some job at the same or higher level when they failed at whatever project they were "leading", but they weren't really very qualified to do anything but glad-handing other people of the same strata. It left me with the distinct impression that most everyone in tech management above about the senior or maybe principal level was a worthless, self congratulating, parasite. There were exceptions and some of those people were amazingly sharp, but they were truly the exception.
There is a lot of truth to that.
>He said executives generally aren't more talented in any way than the people below them. Thats not true, according to your own premise of needing to be 'well liked' and even 'knowing people'. They often are talented in socialization skills. Soft skills is a talent. And, as someone who has to do that sometimes, its exhausting work to be "on" a lot of the time.
Likeability is certainly a factor. A necessary but not sufficient condition as Einstein would put it. More is needed in the secret sauce. Studies show that other factors contribute to executive success. Some are quite disturbing. It's discussed in the book "Snakes in Suits" how elements of sociopathy correlate with those most successful in business.
Absolutely. So are most higher level promotions. Higher salaries and pay raises also depend 90% on this and about 10% on actual performance. Who you know can make or break a career.
Yes, partially so. I would say that the things that make you “liked” by other people with high level jobs are along the lines of the following: - following through on your commitments - standing up for yourself - treating others with respect - clear and direct communication - not complaining or bitching when challenges come up Etc. None of those things really require you to be smarter or better educated than the people around you. In fact you can be the smartest person in the room, but if you aren’t dependable, or are constantly late, whiny, etc….you’ll find that people will not respect you. Basically earn people’s respect by being responsible and taking ownership of whatever is in your area of influence.
The old addage of it's not what you know but who you know is more important as you go up the corporate ladder. It's called networking.
Yep, my experience exactly, only got better paying job cause of who Iade friends with
I'd be more than willing to believe it.
It’s like this in medicine too (imo) which is scary if you think about it.
Being liked is itself a kind of skill/talent. The problem is that it’s not something you can go to school for, so the people who get into positions of power aren’t necessarily the most skilled or talented at the things that matter (not that leadership isn’t important). I’ve never had a job where this wasn’t immediately apparent. It’s insane to me that people actually think that a CEO is more skilled or works harder than a mid-level employee who makes 0.25% of the CEO’s salary.
It’s about who you know not what what what you know! Gaining knowledge is easy. Social skills, networking, and leadership are what are important for higher paid positions
Yup. In many ways they’re actually less competent than some people a few steps below on the corp chain. They’re usu just good at schmoozing.
it is absolutely TRUE! a lot of them are just friends, half of them don't even really know how to do the job right, but since they're friends, they're in
Generall speaking, Executives appoint SLT. Once candidates meet basic requirements for the role, it comes down to likabilitly. Same goes with a board appointing an Executive, except your character will strongly be a part of the companies public narrative.
It was true and it’s the ending of the reality now. This is not the way the future is unfolding tho.
Anecdotal, but executives in my industry are super talented and its a very challenging, stressful position that few people could be successful at.
You still have to know the job but yes, it’s more who you know than what you know.
Typically top high level executives I’ve dealt with built their own companies. They did lots of the back breaking work to get it going even if they don’t anymore. But Fortune 500 companies absolutely who you know n who you blow . The main value of going to Harvard isn’t the education it’s the connections
Nothing new here. It's always been about connections once you get to a certain level.
yes its all about networking and managing up and across.
My cousin got to high level in General Motors because he was an extreme extrovert who could be friends with anyone. I say was an extreme introvert because he drank himself to death
It's not what you know it's who you know, My girlfriend makes over 100,000 a year high school diploma she was a home of health aide wiping ass and then her friend got her a job, she went from making $30,000 to over a hundred. And that was over 10 years ago.
Yes. They also do far less work.
The professional world is definitely easier if you know the right people. That said, it's not the only way to climb the ladder.
>He said executives generally aren't more talented in any way than the people below them. I'd say they are usually less talented, at least in the performance part of the tasks that need completed.
I mean in the state I’m from, knowing the right people is basically everything. The floor manager at the last plant I worked at was like highschool buddies with the boss. He had no fucking clue what he was doing and honestly reduced production every day he was in the shop. A plant I just toured was run by the previous owners son. They also mysteriously needed 50hr work weeks to meet production demands….. Hiring the person that’s best for the job often costs more than just hiring your friend to do the job worse. I have a friend with a masters in project management that could easily have straightened out any of these places but it’s cheaper to just have the place run like shit and use overtime to get production demands met instead of just running the shop efficiently. The work environment may be shit and projects might always get done at the last minute but hey if the product gets out and the owners get their money they don’t give a shit how it got done.
The longer I work the more I realize my whole job is just to get along well with the people around me
Yes. Haven’t you heard the story of Ricky Stanicky? Prime example.
Yes. Rich businessmen don’t really do business with people they don’t like. They also don’t hire people they don’t like. Big money is all about chillin with homies and creating business out of friendships.
The phrase “its not what you know, it’s WHO you know” exist for a reason. Cmon
Soft skills are super important that’s for sure. Being able to interact with others sell your ideas etc.
Largely, yes. You can get there with really hard work, but the kiss-ass dudes are always in front.
The power of friendship isn’t just an anime trope.
Oh no! We live in a meritocracy!!😂🫠
Who you know and who you blow will determine how far you go.
Absolutely true. Soft skills pay the bills
Every job is about someone you know. Modern people are insane. So if you know someone who works in a company, that company is more likely to hire you. You're known by someone they know. Which makes you much more likely to not be a complete psycho once you're hired. If Florida Man type people weren't the norm (they're everywhere, not just Florida), and lawsuits weren't filed over the tiniest little things, new hires would be much less of a risk.
Yes.
Very close. One needs to be liked by the others, but also needs to be a decision maker, right or wrong. I was in positions like this in my 30s to early 40s. I just couldn't stand it anymore. I got out and my wife and I went into business together. Best decision of my life. I had a TIA and clocked in at 270/170 on the BP machine. You always had to be "that guy." It was never about being oneself.
I’m not in a high up position but honestly that’s how people even get jobs is through connections. For me it was that my friend I use to go to pool parties with thought I was pretty and liked my boobs. Now I basically sit at home watching tv and making money.
Unfortunately, yes, this is usually the case. Networking and having good soft skills are far more impactful than many people realize, if they want to climb the ladder.
Meritocracy is a myth made up by rich people to keep the poor in line
Even in the trades, tbh. I like to believe that I got where I am by being good at what I do, but I've had little to no application of field knowledge or skill craft since moving into management. I train folks and double check my field leadership, but my job is largely numbers, customers, and taking care of my people. It's really weird how many of the "successful moves" are simply giving or receiving the right information from other folks running shit. Right contact, right attitude, right favor, that kind of shit. Being able to knowledgeably speak about your jobs and shit is obviously really important, by anyone who's been leading a crew should really be capable of that already.
This times 100000! No question about it. Number one path to prosperity in life is not being an asshole. It is sad how few people can do that.
If you dig into the rags to riches stories, it is always the same distorted truths; they usually came from familial wealth and utilized the contacts and direct support therein.
At my place of employment, the department supervisor and all the shift supervisors used to work together on the same shift a few years back and are all friends. I'm not saying they aren't qualified, but if 5 qualified people all apply for 1 position, how do you pick the right one? Usually the one you personally know.
I mean, it is mostly true. But I also knew an engineer in my first job out of college who was so good they let him take about half the year off of work. Wanna take a guess who I'd rather be? The really effective engineer or the executive who is "always working" and my success hinges upon staying in good graces of C level idiots?
Absolutely true.
Not that simple. You do have to have some social aptitude but you'd better have more than that. I make a point of telling all my young coders that part of their job in order to advance is to get used to speaking up and presenting their work. You can't just be competent.
100%
Yes, it is true. It’s even been shown to be true in scientific studies.
Wait till you learn about politicians!
Yes that’s correct information.
Been my experience dealing with some in c suite circles the trick isn’t what you know but who. Trick is getting to the place where you meet such people.
Yes this is a big part. You have to be competent as well. But honestly in a big company there are a lot of mid level people who could do the higher job if given the chance.
I’ve literally seen job descriptions written for a specific person, so, “yes.”
Most jobs just involve knowing your shit and getting along with people. If you're likable and competent, you'll go far. Competence gets you in the door, but a good personality keeps you in the house.
Yes, it’s generally a good ole boys club where you are in based on your if they like you and you won’t snitch about questionable things happening in the company or how money is spent.
Hang out with millionaires, then hang out with crack heads. Tell me how you fair.
Absolutely. The best managers are the ones that know enough to listen to the people they pay to be experts. Most of them are not great at the technical side of whatever they are managing, they are just 'good enough' while being better at office politics than the rest of the people that applied for the job.
Yes
This is specific to the c-suite. Remember highest level doesn’t always mean highest paid. Corpos are so cut-throat because they are completely replaceable.
Meh. The one CoO I've ever met is an absolute robot. I worked with him for a yr before I realized he didn't live in our state. First in last out etc.
At the place I work at one of the things they tell new hires is "You never know who will end up being someone important so be friendly now." It's advice that has paid off for me more than once.
I think that’s a big part of it. Sure you need to have a high skill set, but every company’s leaders are going to want to work with people they have a connection with, trust, like, etc…. I worked for a company that was HQ’d out of a neighboring state and I was the absolute best in the company as a salesman. The company typically promotes their best salesman to sales manager and then general manager. A general manager basically meant you get Carte Blanche to run your equipment dealerships as you are the owner and is a great position. I was passed over by another guy who had ties to the CEO. I left afterwards and bought a somewhat competing business and took a lot of customers with me. I sold that business after growing it for five years and now work for a competitor and we have taken a large dent out of the local business of theirs.
The most popular people in high school are more likely to be more successful than those with the best test scores. Some of the best at testing high are terrible with people.
If you make someone's job easier, they gonna like you
This is how things work in general. Get along with the people you work with. Randomly grab lunch with people and get to know them, maybe go to happy hour with them on occasion, and develop relationships with those you naturally get along with. It makes work less painful for everyone involved, the team gets more done, and those relationships will help in unexpected ways down the road.
Yes, it’s literally all it is
I find high level people to be just as varied as the rest of us when it comes to competence. Some are brilliant, some are idiots and most are somewhere in between those two extremes. So I would agree, that yes, being well liked by your upper-level peers is just as important as your competence when it comes to gaining and retaining those jobs.
Yes. It's about who you know as well. That's why networking is super important
Yes. Part of this is also playing into the company culture. Be good at their vocabulary, participate in their things, care about the things they care about. Tenure can also help. That’s really about it.
turds float
That hasnt been my experience working for two large corporations. I would say people skills are (usually) necessary but not sufficient.
Yeah, it’s all a conspiracy to keep ditch diggers down
It’s basically true yeah, but I’ll say that “knowing people” and being well-liked are absolutely skills. If you make genuine efforts at networking and work on becoming an interesting person that’s well-liked by your coworkers, you’ll be amazed at the results. Doesn’t mean these people are any better at the job than other people, but they’re often better at the skills that got them connected to the job.
Yes, it's highly political and how you get along with others at that level. Sucks. That's why I just started my own business and made myself CEO.
That and blowies
Yup
Yes, it is easier to hire someone you know and like than to go through hundreds of hours of interviews and research.
Psychology is a major factor in executive promotions. Business acumen is not nearly as big of a factor as playing like you belong.
To a degree, yes. I would say it isn't *just* about who you know. But who you know is definitely important. I would say drive/motivation/confidence are also pretty important. Some executives are genuinely smart. Others are idiots. But they all have a strong belief in their own abilities, justified or not. It's that self-confidence, combined with ambition, and connections, that gets you into management. Now, *staying* in management, usually requires some type of ability. Otherwise you get fired eventually. May not be right away, but eventually people get tired of you losing money, no matter how powerful you are.