Is this career progression or nah?

[thestaggy]

The current situation sounds more management-oriented, i.e. can you juggle the different competencies and so on. Are you interested in pursuing management further or would you like to become a specialist in one of those fields?

I'm honestly not too keen on taking a step back from management to focus on one of the other areas. I have no problem with being asked to do more while in my current position, but not take a step back to focus on a specific area. I specialised in production before moving in to management, doesn't make sense to move backwards.

In terms of payscale, title and overall responsibility is the new position higher or lower than your current one in the organisational hierarchy?

This is where it gets a little grey. During my meeting I was told that payscale and title will come in to effect in the next financial year starting in July. At the moment it has been a promise of an increase in remuneration and change in title, BUT no figures have been mentioned. I cannot sign on for something that is not set in stone. For all I know I could be spun a nonsense story 3 months from now about pay and title and I've gone and set myself back.

This isn't a mickey-mouse company either, so I'm actually quite disappointed by the way this has been handled. It is too vague.

Right now organisational hierarchy is as follows: Operations Manager > Area Managers > Site Managers. Due to the size of our contract though there has been a 4th level of management added, a ''Contract Manager'' that slots in between our Area Manager and us (Site Managers). Most of our sites have managers that can carry out functional software support themselves (such as myself) while the larger sites have dedicated support technicians on site, but they are subordinate to the Site Managers. This new position will place me at the core site, subordinate to the existing Site and Contract Manager as well as subordinate to the person who is currently in charge of the software side.

What industry is this in, btw?

Managed Print Services, or in simple terms, digital printing on a large scale.

The OP is being offered another position and he isn't sure if he's getting a raw deal or if it actually qualifies as a progression. My response to that would be that he should only consider it as progress if the company also does - meaning, he can either leverage the move to get a higher salary, or he will immediately get a higher salary. Anything else is just a pretext to get him to work on harder or less desirable areas.

This is increasingly a concern of mine as I continue to think about it. They have not yet committed to a figure and I have to wait until the new financial year. I don't like this at all.

Career progression means more money.

Fair enough, there are some truths there.

 

[Ancalagon]

Right now organisational hierarchy is as follows: Operations Manager > Area Managers > Site Managers. Due to the size of our contract though there has been a 4th level of management added, a ''Contract Manager'' that slots in between our Area Manager and us (Site Managers). Most of our sites have managers that can carry out functional software support themselves (such as myself) while the larger sites have dedicated support technicians on site, but they are subordinate to the Site Managers. This new position will place me at the core site, subordinate to the existing Site and Contract Manager as well as subordinate to the person who is currently in charge of the software side.

So you would go from being a site manager yourself to being under another site manager?

Absolutely no ways I would accept this. In fact, the offer would make me seriously doubt management.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

Hmm, tough one. But it does seem like a step back. Perhaps they just need someone to fill that role and know you're quite good at it. Doesn't benefit you from what I can see, though.

Can you refuse or do you think that might sour your chances of progress going forward?

 

[Maverick Jester]

Don't see any benefit to you in all of this. Definitely looks like a demotion, placing you further down along the organisational hierarchy. That they are non-committal about remuneration is very fishy, too. I'd see what the options are in keeping your old position post-project if I were you, but I'd be interested to understand the reasoning as to why this structural change is necessary to the company.

 

[thestaggy]

Hmm, tough one. But it does seem like a step back. Perhaps they just need someone to fill that role and know you're quite good at it. Doesn't benefit you from what I can see, though.

Can you refuse or do you think that might sour your chances of progress going forward?

I have raised my long-term concerns with them but I am not sure if I can refuse though. I'm not even sure if refusal would be in my best interest. My contract with the company only lasts for the duration of the contract with our client, and that expires at the end of next year before it goes to tender.

A good few sleepless nights have been had.

Don't see any benefit to you in all of this. Definitely looks like a demotion, placing you further down along the organisational hierarchy. That they are non-committal about remuneration is very fishy, too. I'd see what the options are in keeping your old position post-project if I were you, but I'd be interested to understand the reasoning as to why this structural change is necessary to the company.

There are leadership issues as well as deficiencies among staff (due to poor leadership, in my humble opinion) in key areas and especially so at our core site. Staff changes were made early last year to try and address the problems but it did not work out as planned as it was just basically spreading the problems around. It has now been determined that a more focused approach needs to be taken, however, the contract manager, understandably, does not have the time to give the project the attention it deserves and the existing site manager simply cannot cope with everything (why he remains there I've no idea). I have thus been cited as the person best equipped to implement the necessary changes as I have obviously proven myself capable. It is a challenge I welcome as it is acknowledgement of my abilities.

Why will I continue to remain at the core site long-term? Probably because they doubt most of the key personnel. It is a cynical view but I'm starting to believe that my ''new roll'' with the company is nothing more than keeping me close by in case things head south again.

I'm trying to counter their offer. Let me see this project out, take on a little more responsibility post-project and continue to maintain my position.

 

[cerebus]

This article will help:
http://www.ribbonfarm.com/the-gervais-principle/

 

[thestaggy]

This article will help:
http://www.ribbonfarm.com/the-gervais-principle/

Hah.

So am I the over-performing Loser heading in to Cluelessness or the Loser that may be guilty of a bad economic bargain?

 

[cerebus]

Hah.

So am I the over-performing Loser heading in to Cluelessness or the Loser that may be guilty of a bad economic bargain?

Definitely the clear-eyed loser heading into a bad economic bargain. Your response may be to check out, emotionally speaking. But whatever the case, I'm feeling the sociopathic upper management vibe here big time.

 

[thestaggy]

Definitely the clear-eyed loser heading into a bad economic bargain. Your response may be to check out, emotionally speaking. But whatever the case, I'm feeling the sociopathic upper management vibe here big time.

So basically take the money, even though there are no concrete offers at present and the offer down the line could be derisory? I'm by nature a risk averse person and will only take on a gamble if my chances of being suitably rewarded are good. I'd hate to be spun one of management's famous "tough year for us, not much money for increases'' stories after they've gotten what they want out of me.

I've resolved to ask for a written offer with concrete figures and will try and maintain my management roll and negotiate for some enrichment.

 

[MrGray]

The fact that they are deploying you to a weak point in the company and giving you a responsibility that encompasses more sites suggests that the company has a lot of confidence in you and sounds more like they are transitioning you into a more responsible role than demoting you. Just my 2c.

 

[thestaggy]

The fact that they are deploying you to a weak point in the company and giving you a responsibility that encompasses more sites suggests that the company has a lot of confidence in you and sounds more like they are transitioning you into a more responsible role than demoting you. Just my 2c.

It is after the project that bothers me. Customer service is a problem area that needs to be fixed, not the software side. I have my reservations about being moved in to a support roll on the software side while I have proved myself as a manager and after I have - hopefully - successfully completed a sensitive project. Also the fact that there are known management issues at the core site leads me to believe that I may be kept on as a security blanket as well, stepping in when the person who should be running the site can't cope or screws up. The fact that no concrete financial offers have been made is concerning as well.

The cynic in me feels that there is a bigger picture here that senior management is deliberately obfuscating. Customer service is in a shambles, the core site has weak management, get thestaggy in to fix both but we won't commit to a title or pay rise until he has probably achieved what we need done.