Respectfully: should someone be in the same role for 5-10-15 years ?

[anonymous]

(Please - this is not about any person or any specific role)

While many roles in a large company are not necessarily deemed growth/development, there are some that are.
Being in the sales and marketing side most of my career, I wonder:

Should roles such as DBM, RBD, Marketing Director/Sr. Director or VP (in any functional area) have ‘term limits’. There definitely are situations where a position is held (5-10-15 years) it it literally puts a cap on other people’s career development.

Thoughts ?

And please - let’s not talk about any one person in particular, it’s just not relevant to the question.

Thanks for your well thought out comments.

 

[anonymous]

(Please - this is not about any person or any specific role)

While many roles in a large company are not necessarily deemed growth/development, there are some that are.
Being in the sales and marketing side most of my career, I wonder:

Should roles such as DBM, RBD, Marketing Director/Sr. Director or VP (in any functional area) have ‘term limits’. There definitely are situations where a position is held (5-10-15 years) it it literally puts a cap on other people’s career development.

Thoughts ?

And please - let’s not talk about any one person in particular, it’s just not relevant to the question.

Thanks for your well thought out comments.

I don't think so. I can def see how it would cap development for others but if they are good at what they do and are seen as a positive influence within the company, I'm not sure why you would want a limit on that. Likewise in the field sales roles, I know many who have been in their role for 15-20 years now and are still making an impact.
That being said, in my region there has been a lot of movement with DBMs, RBDs and the like over the last 5-10 years so I might have a different perspective on this.

 

[anonymous]

I think the more relevant question is should someone that has been a Senior for years continue to be denied a deserved promotion to Exec by an RBD due to invalid reasons. There is an RBD that has been in their role for far too long and stunted the growth and development of their region for years. So yes, some people need to move on from their current role.

 

[anonymous]

I think the more relevant question is should someone that has been a Senior for years continue to be denied a deserved promotion to Exec by an RBD due to invalid reasons. There is an RBD that has been in their role for far too long and stunted the growth and development of their region for years. So yes, some people need to move on from their current role.

It only took 2 posts for someone to start bitching about an individual. Just go start another thread, man.

But, in any job, if the person is still good and making a positive impact, I don’t see why you’d want to move them on. We have some tenured people in the organization that are still fully engaged and still doing a great job. Not sure why we’d want to push them out.

 

[anonymous]

It only took 2 posts for someone to start bitching about an individual. Just go start another thread, man.

But, in any job, if the person is still good and making a positive impact, I don’t see why you’d want to move them on. We have some tenured people in the organization that are still fully engaged and still doing a great job. Not sure why we’d want to push them out.

Because that is what Novo does —out with the old and in with the new.

 

[anonymous]

Besides the fact that something like this would never happen… if it ever were to… all you would see is an acceleration of the Peter Principle. The fact novo does keep certain people in roles/positions as long as they do is probably a reflection of the fact that the company has enough real talent to draw on now that they don’t need to just move someone on. Contrast that with how novo looked 15-20 years ago when it was far smaller - many of the people who got promoted during that era and are still here now are some of our least effective reps/leaders.

 

[anonymous]

Besides the fact that something like this would never happen… if it ever were to… all you would see is an acceleration of the Peter Principle. The fact novo does keep certain people in roles/positions as long as they do is probably a reflection of the fact that the company has enough real talent to draw on now that they don’t need to just move someone on. Contrast that with how novo looked 15-20 years ago when it was far smaller - many of the people who got promoted during that era and are still here now are some of our least effective reps/leaders.

Agree. Why shuffle I someone new when you have someone in place that’s good. Some people find a job at a level that’s as high as they ever need to be, and they are good at that job. Let them keep it forever if they are still meeting/exceeding the expectations of the job.

 

[anonymous]

Agree. Why shuffle I someone new when you have someone in place that’s good. Some people find a job at a level that’s as high as they ever need to be, and they are good at that job. Let them keep it forever if they are still meeting/exceeding the expectations of the job.

OP here.
It’s good to hear these perspectives and thanks for leading it focused (except that one b*tching post)

 

[anonymous]

I can see this several ways, good and bad. Ive had managers that were incredible leaders who have no desire to go to Jersey or a hub city. And Ive had managers who were a waste of good air and just riding the wave. Same with RBD’s. The worst is an RBD who is terrible. They aren’t being promoted anywhere because higher ups recognize it but don’t do anything about it. So ultimately that region is stuck with poor leadership that just runs down hill.