Opinions wanted on career-limiting moves (<g>)
in [Embedded]
|
From: -jg on 15 Apr 2010 01:32 On Apr 15, 2:45 am, Grant Edwards > But will it be something _good_ on his resume? Will it help or hurt > if he decides he wants to get back into design? That's where more than one job title can be useful, it can give the illusion of two resume's ;) -jg
From: larwe on 15 Apr 2010 08:58 On Apr 15, 1:30 am, -jg <jim.granvi...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Sounds good to me, I'd just reality check the offer and make sure > it's not a hospital pass ;) Depends what kind of hospital you mean :) The job will be extremely high-stress, with the added bonus of travel requirements. A mental hospital - either the hard kind with iron bars, or the soft kind with a wooden bar and many stools - is certainly not out of the question. > ie have you dealt with this department from the other side of the > fence already ? I've been dealing with the department ever since I started working here. I know most if not all of the people in the department, many of them quite well on a first-name basis, and I have several friends at various levels, and no active enemies there (though I'm sure some people will not approve of choosing me). > What are the intra department politics like - marketing can pay > better, but can also be full of over-inflated egos, so you need a > higher tolerance level.... Chuckle. There are plenty of egos on all sides of every fence around here. However, the workforce here is so static (there are people around here who've been in their current job for 10-15-20 years) that I would say pretty much everybody knows everybody else's foibles and hot-button topics. Certainly anyone who has worked as an engineering project lead for any length of time knows the major personalities on the other side of the fence, and how best to interact with them. As for pay, I suspect I'll be taking a cut to do this move, so I'd be happy just to keep things where they are. Even if there is a higher payscale, though, company policy prevents me from getting a significant increase - internal transfers have a cap on the salary delta. The structure over there is different, though - engineers don't get any kind of bonus, whereas everyone in marketing does (in years where there is a bonus offered, anyway).
From: Andrew Jackson on 15 Apr 2010 09:22 > As for pay, I suspect I'll be taking a cut to do this move, so I'd be > happy just to keep things where they are. Even if there is a higher > payscale, though, company policy prevents me from getting a > significant increase - internal transfers have a cap on the salary > delta. The structure over there is different, though - engineers don't > get any kind of bonus, whereas everyone in marketing does (in years > where there is a bonus offered, anyway). When I worked for various firms, that sort of bonus structure always used to irk me. The commonly related justification was that the sales (or marketing) people "needed it". This always seemed insulting to engineers who surely also "need it", particularly if they have to clear up after the said sales or marketing folk! Andrew
From: Frnak McKenney on 16 Apr 2010 09:21 On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 14:22:28 +0100, Andrew Jackson <alj(a)nospam.com> wrote: [...] >> ... The structure over there is different, though - engineers don't >> get any kind of bonus, whereas everyone in marketing does (in years >> where there is a bonus offered, anyway). > > When I worked for various firms, that sort of bonus structure always > used to irk me. The commonly related justification was that the sales > (or marketing) people "needed it". This always seemed insulting to > engineers who surely also "need it", particularly if they have to clear > up after the said sales or marketing folk! A bonus or commission is, as far as I know, intended as a way of reinforcing Good Behavior ("That was very helpful. Do more of it!"). If one believes that generating revenue is Good Behavior, and an employee is in a position to directly affect a company's income in an easily measurable way, then doesn't it make sense to base that bonus or commission on the revenue that employee "generates"? For persons in a clerical or technical area the effect on company revenue is usually much more indirect; often they can cause losses without being able to directly cause gains (other than by finding ways to cut costs). That doesn't mean that they don't contribute to the company's well-being, and it doesn't mean that they are not essential to the company, but it's much easier to reward someone in Sales (or even Marketing) based on how much of Product X they sold than it is to reward even the V.P. of Accounting or Product Design on the same basis. And, once you accept that you want your Sales guys Selling, then you both want to encourage them to Sell More, and you go looking for guys who will respond well to your incentive program. I'm not sure if it's a _completely_ self-fulfilling prophecy, but I do think that there is a loop and some feedback in it. <grin> Or did I miss your point? Feedback... er, "comments" welcomed. Frank McKenney -- "Nothing is a waste of time, if you use the experience wisely." -- Rodin -- Frank McKenney, McKenney Associates Richmond, Virginia / (804) 320-4887 Munged E-mail: frank uscore mckenney ayut mined spring dawt cahm (y'all)
From: Tim Wescott on 16 Apr 2010 13:48
Frnak McKenney wrote: > On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 14:22:28 +0100, Andrew Jackson <alj(a)nospam.com> wrote: > > [...] > >>> ... The structure over there is different, though - engineers don't >>> get any kind of bonus, whereas everyone in marketing does (in years >>> where there is a bonus offered, anyway). >> When I worked for various firms, that sort of bonus structure always >> used to irk me. The commonly related justification was that the sales >> (or marketing) people "needed it". This always seemed insulting to >> engineers who surely also "need it", particularly if they have to clear >> up after the said sales or marketing folk! > > A bonus or commission is, as far as I know, intended as a way of > reinforcing Good Behavior ("That was very helpful. Do more of it!"). > > If one believes that generating revenue is Good Behavior, and an > employee is in a position to directly affect a company's income in > an easily measurable way, then doesn't it make sense to base that > bonus or commission on the revenue that employee "generates"? > > For persons in a clerical or technical area the effect on company > revenue is usually much more indirect; often they can cause losses > without being able to directly cause gains (other than by finding > ways to cut costs). That doesn't mean that they don't contribute > to the company's well-being, and it doesn't mean that they are not > essential to the company, but it's much easier to reward someone > in Sales (or even Marketing) based on how much of Product X they > sold than it is to reward even the V.P. of Accounting or Product > Design on the same basis. > > And, once you accept that you want your Sales guys Selling, then > you both want to encourage them to Sell More, and you go looking > for guys who will respond well to your incentive program. I'm > not sure if it's a _completely_ self-fulfilling prophecy, but I > do think that there is a loop and some feedback in it. <grin> > > Or did I miss your point? Feedback... er, "comments" welcomed. OTOH, bonuses based on revenue, without looking at the long term effects of the sales methods used, can be very self defeating. Bonuses will encourage the sales guy to sell the customer more stuff, and more expensive stuff, than the customer way want. With a smart customer, this will lead to resentment and fewer sales later. Bonuses based on the gross price of the sale, yet that require expensive modifications to the product, will encourage sales folks to "sell anything", possibly leading to the company going into a "we lose money on each sale, but we'll make up for it in volume" death spiral. At one point, my dad decided that he would give his piece-part production employees bonuses on a per-part basis. Production shot up! Woo-hoo! Rejects and customer returns shot up! Oops. He sorted it out (to everyone's benefit) by giving bonuses for parts _after_ they passed QA. The point is that folks will follow the money, and giving bonuses can easily backfire. While they are a good tool to have in the box, you've got to be careful about what you use them on. -- Tim Wescott Control system and signal processing consulting www.wescottdesign.com |