I’m having more and more conversations where people say, “I don’t want to climb the career ladder, but when I express that at work, I’m seen as someone who lacks ambition. My colleagues and boss are surprised, they don’t even understand what I mean when I say I’m happy in my role and want to grow and develop within it.”
This mindset is a major issue, driving turnover and fueling the endless cycle of poor managers and leaders. Why? Because if people want to earn more money and gain recognition, they have no other options that to chase job titles without any desire to manage or lead others. As a result, organisations pour billions into management and leadership development programs with little to no impact.
But let’s pause for a moment; what does ambition actually mean? Why do we label people who are happy in their roles as not ambitious?
Ambition: “A strong desire to do or achieve something.”
So, ambition is about desire and achievement, right? Then why do we dismiss those who want to grow within their roles, excel at what they do, and develop their skills to an expert level as not ambitious? Are we really saying they’re not achieving anything? That they have no desire to accomplish something meaningful? Are we implying that being great—even exceptional—at one’s job is insignificant or nothing?
I think we need to re-think not only how we understand ambition but also how we structure talent management and development so people are not pushed to do something they don’t want. Also, does it mean that there is only ONE ladder to climb?
Here's the reality: we often find ourselves climbing different ladders simultaneously or one at the time. Sometimes, we have the title but not sufficient skills or money yet. Other times, we have the skills but lack the corresponding title. And that's okay! That’s achievement. That’s desire. That’s ambition! AND, we haven’t even looked at ladders that we climb in our personal lives.
Shouldn't we approach career development this way? Considering these various elements, we can address some crucial factors contributing to our retention and poor leadership problems.
The current approach just keep promoting the wrong people
"We've known about the dangers of over promotion for at least thirty years (The Peter Principle, which described how most people are promoted to their level of incompetence, was published in 1960), so why do we keep doing it? Is it because we want to give people the chance to grow? Because we don't want people to stagnate in their roles? Because we want to offer them a career? Do we want to reward them for work well done? No doubt all these sensible intentions influence us. Yet, none of them necessarily entails promoting the person. People can grow their careers and receive praise for good work without promotion. So, the question remains: When it comes to development, career growth, or praise, why do we often resort to moving the person up the ladder? Unless we can get to the heart of this problem, thirty years from now, the Peter Principle will be as deeply ingrained in organisations as it is today. Millions of employees will feel miscast, and organisations everywhere will be weaker.”
This was written in 2000. And here we are today with five decades of data telling us about our wrongdoing, yet we keep marching ahead. Why? Because we understand that people crave prestige. But we make a big mistake thinking everyone craves the same prestige. We leave people with no choice but to take on higher and higher roles despite being unsuitable.
A Strengths-Based organisation for example avoids this by focusing on three areas:
· Building different ladders, each with three rungs: Good, Great, and Superb. Superb is Lionel Messi superb, the pinnacle of performance that comes with great prestige upon achievement. Not promotion, but recognition of talent, strengths, performance, you call it as you want. This can only be achieved if you invest in developing individuals' strengths.
· Encouraging people to climb and achieve superb performance without promotion requires creativity. Remember you are aiming for recognition of performance that everybody can see all the time. Why do you think Concierge guys are so proud wearing their crossed golden key? It showcases their level of knowledge and expertise. And guess what! They don't want a promotion or do anything else. You can do that simply by adding something like an expert or exceptional award without the responsibilities of the next role. And of course, make sure they are compensated differently.
· Change your pay structure to recognise the different levels of performance. The biggest reason people want promotion is pay; the second is prestige. So, if we offer more money based on performance, we can solve that problem.
There are many ways of making people feel that they are growing, appreciated, and recognised, but we must look at organisations differently. Otherwise, somebody will write the same article using eight decades of data about the “nonsense of promotion” in thirty years.
In the meantime, if you have no choice but to climb, be careful not to reach the top of the career ladder only to burn out. Watch the video below on career altitude sickness.
What I do?
I win HR awards for my clients - Most Innovative HR Solution & Best Talent Management Initiative.
Most importantly, I address the gap this article highlights. What on earth is HR up to? Are their initiatives effective?
Our standards provide HR with an easy-to-follow roadmap, removing uncertainty and delivering measurable results. This structured cycle ensures that organizations remain proactive, agile, and committed to delivering a world-class employee experience.
Contact me and let’s transform your HR. HR doesn't have to be difficult but you must fire fighting and be strategic.
This is insightful. Many people often believe that promotion is the only way to achieve job growth and higher pay. This belief can lead to a common problem: the promotion of individuals who may not be suitable for the new role. Organisations need to educate people on the true meaning of promotion and job growth and the differences between the two.