Hi Everyone,

I fully agree with Ashish on "USE AND THROW" of his skill topic, this is not only in IT industry but in other big units also. I have seen one company of repute picking up experts in their field of engineering and after not giving same treatment as of their own executive trainees. The company has recognized this as a practice, Level I- ETs; Level II- Non ETs during promotions. They are regularly termed as Non-ETs as if they are not performing.

It is wrong to make use of expertise of an experienced employee not to recognize their efforts to improve or train their juniors (ETs). But the person relies this only after few years and has no option either to continue service or to quit.

In a large pool of executives (ETs) selected regularly such skilled persons are very few and have no say among them. Though employee satisfaction is very much necessary and it is proved only, when you make the employee feel that he is being treated as a family member and not just "USE AND THROW" of his skill, but who cares when such cases are in minority.....

When the subject has come in this forum, executives in Human Recourse field must look into such cases and try to improve such practice in their organization and feel proud of removing such practice.

Thanks & regards,

AK Mathur

From India, Delhi
Since we are discussing the longevity of a talent at a job, here's an article on Twitter founders, who are moving to start new products and services.
Twitter founders

From India, Mumbai
Hello Dineshji,
sir, i am thinking that if any companies HR Department is thinking like same as your opinion than i have to change my Job frequently rather than provide my full service to any management.......right??
Because If i serve any company more than 10+ years than my end will be same as other experienced persons have as per your opinion, so thats not good thinking as per my view..
Regards,
Ashish Thakkar

From India, Pune
Dear Ashish,

In spite of my long reply why your came up with this conclusion is incomprehensible to me. I never told that the employees should change the job frequently. All that I have told that one's growth is in one's hand. There are good times and there are bad times. You should have providence for the bad times too.

To tide over the bad situation, learning newer and newer skills is always important. The person who does this will never get sidelined. To learn new skills, one need not change the job. Employee should not depend on the company to develop. Some self-development is necessary. But many people are stingy when it comes to spending on some amount on learning.

Leadership lies in understanding distinction between investment and expenditure. yes, learning new skills requires expenditure but it is investment.

I have seen cases where one time dish washer in star hotel became chef. One time courier became manager in the courier company. One time receptionist became operations manager in logistics company. Why these people could grow? It is because of their learning attitude.

"Uddharet Atma-atmanam" said lord Krishna about 5,000 years ago in Bhagwat Gita. Its loose meaning is "one has to develop oneself. No one else can develop you".

Yes job change is important tool of personal development as well. You meet newer people in new job. Your horizons are widened. However, much depends on the company also. Company like Toyota has strict rule of job rotation. No employee can work in same department for more than three years. This policy on job rotation brings tremendous flexibility in moving a person from one department to another. The person becomes less change resistant because this is what he/she sees day in day out.

Secondly, rather than throwing out employees, HR has great responsibility in career planning and career development also. Well-laid career plan guides an employee how to grow. Another way of developing employees is by instituting Mentoring in the company.

This mass lay off is American culture. It has trickled down everywhere. Americans are crazy about laying off the employees. Jack Welch brought down employee strength of GE to 299,000 at the end of 1985 from 411,000 in 1980.

Yahoo has witnessed bouts of lay off when Jerry Yang its co-founder took over as CEO. He left and came Carol Bartz. Again she laid off thousand of employees.

In fact these mass lay off erode the company's knowledge capital in a big way. From the "Knowledge Management" point of view, these lay off are sheer nonsense. But who can tell this to CEO?

Lastly, I recommend you reading my previous post once again. What prompted you to misconstrue my last post that god only knows!

Ok...

Dinesh V Divekar

From India, Bangalore
Dear Ashvan,
Once upon a time in Japan, Toyota, news of industrial robots spread like a plague, demoralizing tens of thousands of manual car assemblers. An assembler by the name "Kenshi" embraced it like a gift from heaven, attended only-god-knows-how-he-self-financed robot-operation courses and informed to his boss that he was doing so...while others simply complained. When redundancies commenced, every manual assembler lost his job except...
I think you get the picture.
Regards,
Aung Ko Ko

From Singapore
Dear Ashish,
Related to the discussion above, I came across with the following article:
The Tech Industry’s Darkest Secret: It’s All About Age | LinkedIn
Article says more or less same thing what I had written in my post.
Ok...
Dinesh V Divekar

From India, Bangalore

This discussion thread is closed. If you want to continue this discussion or have a follow up question, please post it on the network.
Add the url of this thread if you want to cite this discussion.






About Us Advertise Contact Us
Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service



All rights reserved @ 2021 Cite.Co™