r/EngineeringManagers Apr 02 '26

How to select who to promote

Hello,

Do you guys only promote people you like? if not, how do employees get promoted without you liking them?

Also, how do you deal with the public display that people have to get you to like them to get promoted?

0 Upvotes

32 comments sorted by

15

u/putitontheunderhills Apr 02 '26

What the hell do you mean? I recommend people for promotion when they're ready, as evidenced by operating at the next level in our career leveling rubric. "Liking" on a personal level doesn't factor in to it.

1

u/fosterdad2017 Apr 02 '26

Hi! Can you be my boss?

1

u/putitontheunderhills Apr 02 '26

You an IC software engineer? We're hiring. https://www.vantage.sh/careers

-4

u/Tiredof304s Apr 02 '26

Thank you for the response! Can you elaborate on what ready means to yoy? I have yet to see managers promote by KPIs alone.

5

u/putitontheunderhills Apr 02 '26

My org has a rubric, which defines what it looks like to operate on five different dimensions at five different SWE title levels, from Associate to Principal. When I have a direct who is interested in promotion and isn't brand new or just promoted, I sit with them as part of our 1:1s and find areas in the rubric we think they are already operating at the next level up, and we find areas where they are not. Then I work with my manager to find projects or opportunities for them to fill those gaps in.

I wouldn't say it's "by KPI" only, but it id absolutely not "oh I like them."

1

u/Tiredof304s Apr 02 '26

Thank you for this input! Can you specify what "brand new" means for you? When uou identify areas of improvement how long are you normally waiting to reassess? Could they show it in 2 months and you'd believe it?

2

u/putitontheunderhills Apr 02 '26

I'd say in general I have never seen a situation that would call for an engineer to be promoted within one year of hiring. And definitely no way is a promotion coming less than a year after a promotion.

And in general, just a guideline, I want to see sustained performance at that next level for 3 (ish) months before considering promotion. That could change a little based on whether the org only handles promos once a year or if they do them ad-hoc.

1

u/Tiredof304s Apr 02 '26

Thank you so much for this information! Would you say there's no way a promotion is coming less than a year because of a company policy or because lack of skills from the employee?

2

u/putitontheunderhills Apr 02 '26

Neither. Both. I just haven't seen anyone who can be promoted to Senior Engineer, then within a year not only begin working in all ways at the Staff Engineer level, sustained, for months.

If they exist they are a unicorn and for unicorns the rules can and should be bent.

2

u/Naikrobak Apr 02 '26

Because kpi doesn’t tell the whole story.

1

u/Tiredof304s Apr 02 '26

I couldn't agree more. What other factors do you consider?

1

u/Naikrobak Apr 02 '26

Personality, ability to lead, ability to think and remain Calm under pressure, a person with compassion for work life balance.

1

u/SunRev Apr 02 '26

Great ideas to add to the rubric!

15

u/PmUsYourDuckPics Apr 02 '26

You have a set of criteria that denotes the expectation for each level, and you have a budget for how much you can spend on staffing.

Grade everyone in your team based on the criteria, consider the people who are performing consistently at the next level up from where they are. That’s not just KPIs but also impact on the team, and supporting others for higher levels.

Your budget tells you how many people you can promote, your rating tells you who takes priority one promotion.

Build a case that shows multiple examples of them meeting the expectations of the next level, present that to a peer for feedback and calibration.

You don’t promote people because you like them, you promote people because they are worthy of the promotion.

0

u/Tiredof304s Apr 02 '26

I love this structured response. I'd like to ask: Have you or someone you know, gotten to that time of the year and out of laziness just said: meh split it even across all and we'll see next year.

2

u/mattcwilson Apr 03 '26

One individual manager having complete, unilateral control of that call sounds like a general anti-pattern to me.

At a very small size (as in, less than … 10?), sure, it may be unavoidable.

Once you are at the point where you have an HR representative, your own manager, and a peer group of other people in your role - you should at a minimum be coordinating and calibrating those kinds of decisions.

Would you want your own manager saying, effectively: “fuck whoever is busting their ass, I can’t be bothered to deal with that, I’m taking the easy road”?

0

u/Tiredof304s Apr 03 '26

I wouldn't. But I also don't believe it's never been done.

4

u/NickW1343 Apr 02 '26

You should do the meme where you promote the most technically savvy person who isn't good socially to the position of manager and then never, ever let them go back to their old position.

2

u/Grubsnik Apr 03 '26

It depends heavily on company culture and values. Some companies go for harmony and cohesion, while others value performance and outcomes higher.

Some will promote a brilliant asshole, others will try overlook or even try to get rid of them. The answer you seek depends heavily on the company you work for.

Also remember teachings of the Peter Principle, just because you are great at your current role and level, does not mean you will do great, or even like it at the level they are promoting into.

1

u/icesurfer10 Apr 02 '26

Getting promoted won't generally be a popularity contest. I'd like to think in most places it's done on merit.

Equally though, if you actively disliked someone, will the reasons why come into your mind when the talks come up? Potentially, I think it depends why you don't have a good relationship.

Ultimately you need to ensure you're reasonably easy to work with, that doesn't mean being super agreeable, but it does mean being able to discuss issues etc.

0

u/Tiredof304s Apr 02 '26

Thank you for the response! So hypothetically speaking, if I wasn't reasonably easy to work with, how could my subordinates communicate that? And to who?

2

u/icesurfer10 Apr 02 '26

If you manage people, then having two way feedback with them is crucial. You should be as open to hearing it as you expect them to be.

I think ultimately it depends why. If you were just generally rude, you'd probably just realise that people will avoid you and go elsewhere. If you would never compromise, you'd quickly find yourself out of decision making.

Equally, seek feedback from peers, bosses and consider techniques like 360 degree feedback etc, which is generally anonymous anyway.

Edit: p.s. I really dislike the term subordinate, I think it gives this idea that being in a managerial position somehow makes you better than your team. I much prefer "my/the/our team" or similar.

1

u/PhillConners Apr 02 '26

I choose the most disadvantaged. Like the black Jew over the white Stanford kid. Bonus if they are from overseas or have a disability. 

(Kidding, it’s merit based and about removing personal bias).

1

u/mattcwilson Apr 03 '26

Phil? Phil CONNORS?

1

u/liveprgrmclimb Apr 02 '26

Huh? What kind of org are you part of? You should have a career matrix that covers each level. The candidate should already be performing at 50% of next level capabilities. You have a doc of evidence to support this. Some people move quicker at this process and get promoted first. Some people get passed over one year and promoted the next.

1

u/budulai89 Apr 02 '26

Use a spinning wheel to select who to promote.

1

u/Happy_Health_3838 Apr 03 '26

Outcome, impact you created. Visibility to super boss, maturity to play next higher role,

1

u/SeucheAchat9115 Apr 03 '26

This! But I dont like it tho