some people don’t want to climb the corporate ladder, even if they used to.

some people don’t want to go “above and beyond.”

some people want less responsibility, not more.

some people want to do the job they were hired to do and be done.

there is *nothing* wrong with this.

we need to normalize language like this. you don’t have to work 90 hours a week to be “dedicated.” you don’t have to love your job. you CAN be in it just for the paycheck. that’s literally what a job is: payment for services.

this rhetoric of “what success looks like” is a falsity we have been tricked into believing to maximize corporate profits. success looks different depending on who and when you ask… sometimes success is getting up in the morning, and sometimes it’s getting promoted. it’s all relative, and we need to remember that.

#Friday #Thoughts #Work #Life #BeKind #Success

@triciakickssaas the two megacorps I've worked for both formally have growth as an expectation for lower career levels. That means if you aren't growing, you aren't meeting expectations and should be managed either into growth or out of the company.

I agree it shouldn't be that way. If I'm good at L4 or L5 and have no ambition to reach L6, I should be able to keep being great at my job.

@ajorg yeah, it's such bs. i'd like to make it more normal to not have these as formal reqs.

not because people should "remain stagnant" or whatever nonsense people want to spout. because growth looks different to different people. a megacorp's idea of growth is narrow and not necessarily what the employee views as growth. ex: going to therapy is growth for a person, but a company would probably not consider it.

There's nothing wrong with understanding that someone wants to stay at a certain level and letting them do so. Moreover, It doesn't make them less of an employee for making that decision, in fact I'd argue it makes them stronger since they're self-aware enough to admit that.