Early promo committees at Uber involved managers verbally advocating for reports in large, unprepared meetings. This was highly unfair because an employee's promotion depended heavily on their manager's ability to present a compelling case, not solely on their performance.
Related Insights
Dysfunctional leadership creates a self-sustaining cycle where employees vying for promotion mimic the toxic behaviors of their boss. They do this to endear themselves to the decision-maker, believing that demonstrating a better leadership style would disqualify them from the role.
Promoting top individual contributors into management often backfires. Their competitive nature, which drove individual success, makes it hard to share tips, empathize with struggling team members, or handle interpersonal issues, turning a perceived win-win into a lose-lose situation.
The belief that simply 'hiring the best person' ensures fairness is flawed because human bias is unavoidable. A true merit-based system requires actively engineering bias out of processes through structured interviews, clear job descriptions, and intentionally sourcing from diverse talent pools.
Research highlights a significant bias in promotion decisions. Men are often judged on their perceived capabilities two years in the future, allowing for deficits. In contrast, women are typically evaluated strictly against their current skill set, penalizing them for not already possessing every requirement of the role.
To assess an internal candidate's readiness for promotion, give them the responsibilities of the higher-level role first. If they can succeed with minimal coaching, they're ready. This approach treats promotion as an acknowledgment of proven performance rather than a speculative bet on future potential.
To ensure the "triumph of ideas, not the triumph of seniority," Sequoia uses anonymized inputs for strategic planning and initial investment votes. This forces the team to debate the merits of an idea without being influenced by who proposed it, leveling the playing field.
Traditional big tech ladders often promote based on scope and cross-team influence, encouraging politics. A better system focuses on skill gradients like "truth-seeking." It rewards being right about foundational decisions, not just being loud or well-positioned, which fosters a healthier engineering culture.
A company’s true values aren't in its mission statement, but in its operational systems. Good intentions are meaningless without supporting structures. What an organization truly values is revealed by its compensation systems, promotion decisions, and which behaviors are publicly celebrated and honored.
Instead of asking managers for a checklist to get promoted, focus on delivering significant impact. This approach is more effective and viewed more favorably by leadership. Genuine impact is what gets recognized and rewarded, while simply 'checking boxes' can backfire.
A Meta engineer was denied a promotion despite a "Greatly Exceeds" rating due to a behavioral gap in cross-functional collaboration. This shows that lagging promotions hinge on consistently demonstrating the behaviors of the next level, not just delivering high impact at the current level.
