Quote:
Originally posted by DeltAlum
Noted, and now, I hope you will allow me to share my opinions without branding them as nonsense as someone -- not you -- did earlier in this thread.
|
My use of the word 'nonsense' wasn't meant to be dismissive of your opinions in general, but rather to point out that your conclusions did not follow what I thought your argument laid out - I think this was clear, and sorry if it was not.
Quote:
Originally posted by DeltAlum
One of the buzzwords in hiring or promoting management level people for the past few years has been "progressive responsibility." I think that means that as you gain experience, perhaps manage more people, bigger projects or a bigger budget, you also gain the skills and understanding to keep on progressing into more and bigger responsibilities.
In most businesses and the military -- which is part of what this thread talked about earlier -- more responsibility comes with age and experience.
Sorry, but how many thirty year old Fortune 500 CEO's do you know of? There may be a couple, but I can't name them.
|
These are cute concepts, but they contain some inherent contradictions that make it slightly difficult to use them as proof of your overall concept.
For instance, can't we explain almost all of these points by saying "opportunity comes with age"?
Rather than "progressive responsibility" I'll posit that these 'brilliant' HR people are simply promoting "progressive opportunity" - this is a slow, semi-efficient method of testing an individual at discrete points to ensure they succeed before offering increased opportunity to prove it at the next, higher levels.
It's a brilliant way of accounting for a slow, moderately effective method that also, not coincidently, prevents catastrophic mistakes in advancement at the low, low cost of efficiency (which can't really be measured) and a few who are underemployed and left behind. Think about it - this is just as plausible as the concept of "progressive responsibility" and passes the 'sniff test' (and Occam's Razor) perhaps more effectively.
Quote:
Originally posted by DeltAlum
That's not to say that older people are smarter. Some people are naturally more gifted than others. Brother John Elway wasn't a Hall of Fame Quarterback when he graduated from Stanford, though -- although the basic skills were there to hone. Nor could Colin Powell have understood how to be Chairman of the Joint Chiefs when he graduated from West Point. (I think he went to USMA -- if not, change "West Point" to "college").
|
I agree with the Powell example - that's a great example, albeit extremely limited by the fact that his current job carries infinitely more responsibility than anyone is generally afforded. I hate the Elway analogy - Elway was certainly not playing at his HOF-caliber highest level when he retired, either. Age diminishes some skills, as well - stress levels, outisde interferences, ability to rebound from long work weeks, etc . . . since we can't quantify these things, it seems like more wishcasting, or perhaps more specifically, shifting the examples to fit the desired outcome.
Quote:
Originally posted by DeltAlum
In school, you learn theory and basics. In business you learn how things really work. Isn't that why there are internships -- to learn how to turn theories into reality?
|
Some internships accomplish this - I think you might be somewhat skewed by the fact that your field (specifically TV) seems like it would have one of the steepest learning curves in this regard. However, I'm not 100% sure that applies to anything else - for instance, if a friend interns at Goldman Sachs, his 'theoretical' use probably shouldn't be different from actual implementation, and if it is then the utility of that implementation can certainly be argued.
I guess my point is that this can be true to varying degrees; however, again, I think most of this is learning, which is somewhat unrelated to what spawned this discussion if we remove your assumptions from above in this post - which I think are somewhat dubious, as laid out.
Quote:
Originally posted by DeltAlum
To rankle at the suggestion that greater responsibility comes with age and experience would assume that a person pretty knows all there is to know and is ready to tackle anything life or business has to offer coming out of school.
I just can't agree with that. I think it works that way in our personal lives as well.
Of course many of us have/had responsibility (and stress) early in life, but most of us continue to gain knowledge, experience and responsibility for many years.
|
I agree with these points completely - but I don't think this is what most people (and specifically
ksigkid) are doing. No one is trying to claim that wisdom is not achieved with age and experience - but more likely that this connection isn't all that applicable to the other points being raised.
