Workplace Nepotism

[90FC]

.

[Supe]

As someone coming from a large corporation with over a decade of combo technical/PM type work, here's my observations:

1) Yes, nepotism is common.
2) Bob is a sweet talker.  Managers want sweet talkers who can effectively communicate with 99% of the workforce. 
3) Bob is perceived by management as a hard worker.  Lengthy tenure, minimal time off, extended hours.
4) You may have shot yourself in the foot with your management.  They relayed the expectations that you were to learn to get along, and you essentially thumbed your nose at it.  This is especially bad, as their last impression of you was an interview that went poorly, and makes you look like a complainer. 

My $.02, if you're happy where you are in a technical role, enjoy it.  If advancement is your target, it may be time to look elsewhere once your degree is paid for.  I will say this - 4 years is a HUGE commitment period for an education clause.  12-24 months is industry norm.  They can use that to effectively hold your wages hostage for four years.  It may be better off getting out while you're not too deep. 

[digitalsolo]

So, I work in a pretty large (Fortune 500) company.    I will say, without any doubt, that nepotism is everywhere.   It's very commonly more about who you know than what you know.    I would say around 50-75% of the people in positions of equal/higher rank than myself are either barely competent, or wholly incompetent at their jobs and I spend my day saving their asses on a very regular basis.   They got their positions because they knew people, or lied their way in (or other incompetents hired them in, because they didn't know better).   This has been the case in every company I've worked at, from 10 employees up to 20k+ staff.

So why do it?  I like what I do, and they pay me fairly well for it (considering cost of living where I'm located).   If you like what you're doing, stay. If you don't want to deal with it, go, but remember, everywhere you go is going to be pretty much the same schtick.  Also, as noted above, a 4 year contract for schooling is insanity.   Wow.

[jwvand02]

Not to beat a dead horse, but this is so run of the mill that I would hesitate to even really call this nepotism.

I also work for a very large fortune 50 type company that actually does a pretty solid job IME of hiring the right people (and I say this as someone who has lost out on a role in this manner before...). I've been working in technical/quality type roles for 9 years and during the bulk of that I was responsible for hiring and mentoring young engineers.

I don't mean this to be patronizing, or worse, condescending, but this is a tough thing to talk about and I find that I can't really be anything but blunt about it. This is a hard lesson about the working world that I find just about every bright technical person has to come to terms with at some point - being the smartest/most competent rarely lands you a promotion. As you climb the ladder, being super technically knowledgeable becomes less and less critical at a very rapid rate. Most mid-level managers haven't directly worked on something in so long that even if they were competent at one point, they aren't anymore.

You're doing the things that make you a better version of the you in the role you're currently in. The peter principle is REAL. If you're developing yourself in a way that makes you the best fucking CNC operator they've ever seen, they'd be dumb to make you anything but a CNC operator.

This is the key - and the part that's sort of hard especially if you've never done it before - put yourself in the shoes of the guy hiring. When he's hiring a supervisor, he doesn't need someone who can run every machine in the shop because that's not the supervisor's job. He wants a guy that can keep the peace on the floor, deal with everyone's bullshit, and because he probably has to spend a lot of facetime with the guy, someone he likes seeing on a day to day basis. He's imagining what it's gonna be like to sit with you in meetings for a dozen hours a week. Why the hell would he hire someone he doesn't really like?

It's total bullshit, but being friendly and likable is important, and the more you get to supervisory roles the more it becomes an actual job qualification. Resisting it is shooting yourself in the foot, and that's exactly what you did by complaining on the back end. Again, think about it from the bossman's perspective; even if you were the most persuasive person in the world and he agreed with you 100%, what exactly was he gonna do? Nothing - he could do literally zero about it without creating a much much bigger headache. You had zero to gain from that, besides to let him know you were mad, which long term maybe hurt you a lot.

So - the decision was probably made before you walked into the interview, so stop beating yourself up over it. It's not your fault, that's just the way the chips fall sometime. However - you've gotta embrace the social aspect of work, or be okay with missing out sometimes because of it. There are companies out there where the most competent guy gets promoted every time, but they are also CUT THROAT and that's a completely different environment with it's own set of problems (mainly people stabbing your ass in the back for credit).

[largeorangefont]

Not to beat a dead horse, but this is so run of the mill that I would hesitate to even really call this nepotism.

I also work for a very large fortune 50 type company that actually does a pretty solid job IME of hiring the right people (and I say this as someone who has lost out on a role in this manner before...). I've been working in technical/quality type roles for 9 years and during the bulk of that I was responsible for hiring and mentoring young engineers.

I don't mean this to be patronizing, or worse, condescending, but this is a tough thing to talk about and I find that I can't really be anything but blunt about it. This is a hard lesson about the working world that I find just about every bright technical person has to come to terms with at some point - being the smartest/most competent rarely lands you a promotion. As you climb the ladder, being super technically knowledgeable becomes less and less critical at a very rapid rate. Most mid-level managers haven't directly worked on something in so long that even if they were competent at one point, they aren't anymore.

You're doing the things that make you a better version of the you in the role you're currently in. The peter principle is REAL. If you're developing yourself in a way that makes you the best fucking CNC operator they've ever seen, they'd be dumb to make you anything but a CNC operator.

This is the key - and the part that's sort of hard especially if you've never done it before - put yourself in the shoes of the guy hiring. When he's hiring a supervisor, he doesn't need someone who can run every machine in the shop because that's not the supervisor's job. He wants a guy that can keep the peace on the floor, deal with everyone's bullshit, and because he probably has to spend a lot of facetime with the guy, someone he likes seeing on a day to day basis. He's imagining what it's gonna be like to sit with you in meetings for a dozen hours a week. Why the hell would he hire someone he doesn't really like?

It's total bullshit, but being friendly and likable is important, and the more you get to supervisory roles the more it becomes an actual job qualification. Resisting it is shooting yourself in the foot, and that's exactly what you did by complaining on the back end. Again, think about it from the bossman's perspective; even if you were the most persuasive person in the world and he agreed with you 100%, what exactly was he gonna do? Nothing - he could do literally zero about it without creating a much much bigger headache. You had zero to gain from that, besides to let him know you were mad, which long term maybe hurt you a lot.

So - the decision was probably made before you walked into the interview, so stop beating yourself up over it. It's not your fault, that's just the way the chips fall sometime. However - you've gotta embrace the social aspect of work, or be okay with missing out sometimes because of it. There are companies out there where the most competent guy gets promoted every time, but they are also CUT THROAT and that's a completely different environment with it's own set of problems (mainly people stabbing your ass in the back for credit).

I was gonna respond, but this is 100% spot on, so I don’t have to. This isn’t nepotism, it is just how business and hiring works. As you climb the ladder, demeanor and communication become more important than technical skill.

[90FC]

.

[freeskier7791]

Not to beat a dead horse, but this is so run of the mill that I would hesitate to even really call this nepotism.

I also work for a very large fortune 50 type company that actually does a pretty solid job IME of hiring the right people (and I say this as someone who has lost out on a role in this manner before...). I've been working in technical/quality type roles for 9 years and during the bulk of that I was responsible for hiring and mentoring young engineers.

I don't mean this to be patronizing, or worse, condescending, but this is a tough thing to talk about and I find that I can't really be anything but blunt about it. This is a hard lesson about the working world that I find just about every bright technical person has to come to terms with at some point - being the smartest/most competent rarely lands you a promotion. As you climb the ladder, being super technically knowledgeable becomes less and less critical at a very rapid rate. Most mid-level managers haven't directly worked on something in so long that even if they were competent at one point, they aren't anymore.

You're doing the things that make you a better version of the you in the role you're currently in. The peter principle is REAL. If you're developing yourself in a way that makes you the best fucking CNC operator they've ever seen, they'd be dumb to make you anything but a CNC operator.

This is the key - and the part that's sort of hard especially if you've never done it before - put yourself in the shoes of the guy hiring. When he's hiring a supervisor, he doesn't need someone who can run every machine in the shop because that's not the supervisor's job. He wants a guy that can keep the peace on the floor, deal with everyone's bullshit, and because he probably has to spend a lot of facetime with the guy, someone he likes seeing on a day to day basis. He's imagining what it's gonna be like to sit with you in meetings for a dozen hours a week. Why the hell would he hire someone he doesn't really like?

It's total bullshit, but being friendly and likable is important, and the more you get to supervisory roles the more it becomes an actual job qualification. Resisting it is shooting yourself in the foot, and that's exactly what you did by complaining on the back end. Again, think about it from the bossman's perspective; even if you were the most persuasive person in the world and he agreed with you 100%, what exactly was he gonna do? Nothing - he could do literally zero about it without creating a much much bigger headache. You had zero to gain from that, besides to let him know you were mad, which long term maybe hurt you a lot.

So - the decision was probably made before you walked into the interview, so stop beating yourself up over it. It's not your fault, that's just the way the chips fall sometime. However - you've gotta embrace the social aspect of work, or be okay with missing out sometimes because of it. There are companies out there where the most competent guy gets promoted every time, but they are also CUT THROAT and that's a completely different environment with it's own set of problems (mainly people stabbing your ass in the back for credit).

I was gonna respond, but this is 100% spot on, so I don’t have to. This isn’t nepotism, it is just how business and hiring works. As you climb the ladder, demeanor and communication become more important than technical skill.

Yes this +1, also don't see talking to your supervisor about non work related things as kissing ass.  Being social and friendly is as much being a team player as doing your work well.  One thing I love about my new job is that there are a bunch of car guys, and I can talk shop with them.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[wickedrx7]

I 100% agree with what everyone has said.  Nepotism definitely takes place in almost every profession.  No matter how much you want your promotion to be based on your performance, there is always the human element.  One other thing to consider though is that they could be looking at this as an opportunity for Bob to get re-motivated and start putting out quality work.  Not sure if that will happen, but it could part of their motivation. 

What I would suggest, instead of going to your boss and voicing your displeasure with the situation, take a slightly different approach.  Let him know that you were disappointing that you didn't get the position.  Ask him what you can work on and if he will help you grow professionally so the next time a position opens up, you will be 100% qualified for it.  Don't make this about Bob and attack Bob, all that does is make your manager defensive because you are calling him out for "making the wrong position".  Make this about you and challenge yourself to grow as an employee. 

I don't think you need to kiss ass and try to hang out with the guy, trying to find things you have in common or showing interest in him, those things help too.  Maybe you'll find out you both like to knit blankets at night...This isn't kissing ass, it is finding things to build a relationship, even if it is just a casual "hey, how is that blanket coming along".  Check out this book, it might sound cheesy but more people should read it as then they would be more fun to be around - https://www.amazon.com/How-Win-Friends-Influence-People/dp/0671027034 

[cholmes]

That "How to win friends and influence people" book by Dale Carnegie has been around since the 1930's, and it is every bit as relevant today as it ever was. I was definitely the shy, introverted engineer when I was younger. I read the book, applied the principles in just a casual way -- didn't work hard at it -- and it really helped me both professionally and personally.

I agree with wickedrx7, the title sounds cheesy, but the book is definitely worth reading. 90FC, your car proves you're smart and hard working; a little polishing in your interactions with people could make your career really take off.

[jwvand02]

One of the first bosses I ever had made me read "How to Win Friends and Influence People" and it totally changed the way I look at work. I almost recommended it in my post above, I couldn't agree more.

[90FC]

.

[frijolee]

A few tidbits to add on the communication part that everyone is already discussing: I once had a cohort tell me that performance in a job takes three parts:

-There's your actual performance (what you did)
-The perception of your performance (how other's saw it)
-The visibility of your performance (did other's see it? how high in the chain of command is your work visible?)

I'd suggest you might try to be more intentional "managing up" the chain of command since the second two are at least as critical as the first.  Try stopping by to chat with your boss about a challenge and your ideas to solve it.  When things are going wrong management needs to know that you're on top of it and making the best choices available.  I'm a firm believe that there's always a best path forward no matter how messy the scenario you find yourself in.  Sure it's worth doing some post processing to note lessons learned, but that doesn't help you in the moment.  What are you going to do now? The flip side is also true, when things are going right there's still a best path forward. 

Note, if you can be an influencer before you have formal authority you've already set yourself up for success when the next opportunity arises.  As such, the more you can just seek and assume responsibility (find the holes and what needs doing) the better off you'll be.  Yes some decisions happen based on relationships and perceptions that might be only part true (or even false) but the more overwhelming the evidence the more perceptions and visibility will rise along with your actual performance.

At the end of the day in any interview there are actually only three questions being asked:
-Can they do the job needed?
-Will they bring more value than they cost?  (that can be $$ or can be headache)
-Is this someone I want to work with?

Given that framework, how would you rank yourself?  Supervisory roles are at least as much cheerleader and counselor as they are visionary and planner.  They don't have to be the technical experts if they're capable of relating well and guiding those who are.  Based on what you told us I can't tell if Bob will be a good supervisor or not.  Bob seems to have to have answered the first two questions satisfactorily and had a relationship that sealed the third.  Added tenure helps since he's "paid his dues". 

It hurts, of course it hurts.  What management will be paying attention to now is whether you can pick yourself back up and get back to work.  Stating your intent to do just that with your boss (hell, with Bob) is a conversation worth considering.  From there start thinking about how to build better relationships, but build real ones.  Engaging others in leadership when you get a chance is always a good thing.  Ask how a business review is going.  Telling them a quick story about something interesting you worked on.  Pose a question about "why do we do XXXX this way."  You don't have to kiss ass to get known, but getting known for the right things is damn important.

Last but not least: sometimes, starting over isn't a bad thing.  Don't be a quitter, don't run from your problems, but seeking another opportunity where your motivation and drive would be better used is a viable option.  The biggest raises tend to be from job switching, but the story has to be about what you can offer that new employer.  If your answer to why you're looking for a job is a sob story about being passed over, that's not much of a value proposition.  However, spinning the take to say you're seeking a more dynamic environment might be a great deal more desirable.

Good luck!
-Joel

[90FC]

.

[90FC]

.

[jwvand02]

Joel,

Thank you for your insight. I think you hit the head on the nail. Unfortunately, good management has been nonexistent for at least the 4 years I've been here. This place often does not inspire me to be the best that I can be. Many opportunities to show that I can think outside the box are shot down. Too many times I’ve brought issues with legitimate solutions to the light of management only to be met with a resounding “No” or “we’ll look into it” only to never receive a response. On top of that, my direct supervisors have done little to nothing to build an environment of inclusiveness. There would be days I'd work a 12hr shift without one word from my supervisors said to me.

When I started, one of the night shift supervisors, who's responsibility is more or less to make sure people are working and quality standards are upheld, would act moody when he'd come around to check your part. Sometimes he’d be talkative (as long as it was something about him and what he was doing. As soon as I would bring up something about myself that was his que to leave). Other times he would literally not say a word to you. When you'd try to strike up a conversation he'd stand there unresponsive till he was done and then he'd walk away. This would really irk me. It went on for years until I finally had enough and asked if we could talk in his office. I said to him that don’t know what he has to go through as supervisor, but when he approaches me and doesn’t say anything it puts me in a bad mood which then makes me be cold and untalkative later on, which then leads to him thinking what’s his problem? Then he treats me like crap some more. And round and round and round we go in circles. After that talk he started treating me with more respect, but I’ve heard from other people that that’s also how he treats them too. He is also best friends with Bob and I’m sure advocated him getting this supervisor role.

I’ve received the same type of vibe from Bob. In the past I have made efforts to get to know Bob, but those efforts were never reciprocated. He would not talk to me unless I talked to him first. He would not say hi to me in passing unless I said hi first. Being that Bob was not my supervisor and I wouldn’t need to interact with him on a daily basis, I gave up trying to be his friend. I’m not the only one that experienced this; many other coworkers unprovoked have described the same type of attitude from him. It’s almost as if Bob put himself above the rest of us since he was friends with the supervisors. This is why I do not think Bob will be engaging or a cheerleader as a supervisor. I think he will just maintain the status quo.

It’s quite frustrating after years of trying to prove that you’re worthy of more responsibility only to have it placed in the hands of someone as incompetent as the last. I will try to keep an open mind, but this is why I have no confidence in management’s ability to choose supervisors that will encourage more efficiency out of people.

By the way, I just started my Dept. Lead position this week. I’m able to move around and help wherever people need me and so far I’ve been enjoying the opportunity to get more facetime with the rest of my coworkers. We’ve shared lots of laughs and are forming closer bonds. I also bought that book and have started reading it. I’m through the first chapter, so far it’s been great. Thank you, wickedrx7, cholmes, and jwvand02.

-Nathaniel

Kudos to you dude for being both thoughtful about it and proactive. A lot of people would just complain and ignore advice. Those traits alone are what I think are the most important, even if you maybe got dealt a bad hand this time.