Can The 'Quiet Achiever' Ever Make It to The Managerial Level?

dimes on 10/04/2023 - 10:32
Last edited 10/04/2023 - 10:44

Hi all, recently at work I got knocked back for a managerial position for the second time in four years. The feedback I got was that I was the quiet achiever type who needed to be more vocal.

I am the introverted type who prefers to quietly get things done without a fuss and without troubling other people. But this doesn't mean I'm a mute who doesn't talk to anyone in the office. When I see people in the kitchen or at the photocopier, I still make general chit chat and have a laugh. But it seems like something more is needed.

Another example of me being "quiet" is when this role came up four years ago and I didn't get it, I didn't complain and just accepted it. When I complained this time and brought it up, they said "I didn't know you wanted it". So it seems like merely applying for the role isn't enough to show my interest, I have to complain that I didn't get it?

The successful applicant is more extroverted than me, they will spend an hour or so a day talking to people about non-work related things, such as how their kids are, how their weekend was etc. I feel like this is too much wasted time talking and not getting work done.

I'm interested in hearing people's thoughts, especially any experiences they have seen first hand in the office, whether that be going through the process themselves or seeing others go through it.

Education & Work

Comments

  • try2bhelpful on 10/04/2023 - 12:00

    My suggestion is sit down and look at your area, as a whole, and create a business plan on how you might address issues currently being experienced. Then put these into a presentation to your boss and, if possible, your bosses boss. It isn’t just about being extrovert, or even doing your job, it is about demonstrating you have a vision and care enough to do things on your time to improve the bottom line of the company. You want the job then prove you can do it.

    • bobbified on 10/04/2023 - 14:33

      Lots of people can have visions, but it's pointless if that person doesn't have the [soft] skills to carry out the plan. Management already knows what OP is and what he's good at (doesn't seem like they think 'Management' is one of those things). People tend to either have the required skills, or they don't. It's not something that's easy to train someone on.

      • try2bhelpful on 10/04/2023 - 18:01

        It isn’t about “vision” it is about detailing solutions. What is being proposed has to have concrete measurables.

        “Soft skills”, like technical skills, are something people can develop. Unless you have a mental health disorder then people aren’t natural introverts or extroverts. I’m considered an extrovert but I had troubles with crippling doubt most of my career. The difference is I thought “screw it” and stepped forward anyway.

  • 7ekn00 on 10/04/2023 - 12:04
    +15

    It just means your managers have no clue about personalities and effectiveness, much like people here that assume introverts "can't communicate"!

    Introverts make awesome managers, some articles from Forbes and Harvard Business as to why:
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeshumanresourcescouncil/202…
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/karlmoore/2021/05/26/how-introv…
    https://hbr.org/2010/12/the-hidden-advantages-of-quiet-bosse…
    https://www.uschamber.com/co/grow/marketing/can-introverts-b…
    https://www.asme.org/topics-resources/content/introverts-as-…

    You will be a mediator, a listener and mentor. You will have difficult conversations with people whilst convincing them to continue to go the extra mile for you.

    None of which can't be done by an introvert - an introvert means you prefer deeper 1 on 1 sincere conversations - not blurting out random crap about your weekend in the lunch room to a group! 1 on 1 conversation are far more effective than group conversations for all sorts troubleshooting, both for work and private lives of individuals ;)

    • greatlamp on 11/04/2023 - 14:31
      +3

      There is a big difference between a 'quiet achiever' introvert, and a 'guru' introvert.

      Both are not extroverts, one is trusted enough to get their work done without fuss, but isn't seen as capable of providing value to others. The other is seen as a source of knowledge and teacher/maven amongst their colleagues.

      OPs problem goes well beyond making small talk at the water cooler. They don't have the respect of management. Management sees them as doing the minimum of their duties, a reliable drone.

      From the OP:

      they said "I didn't know you wanted it"

      Someone interested in management does their job, and their managers job (to a certain extent) - mediator, listener, mentor. Their manager isn't even really needed most of the time. Some call this 'kissing asses'. It is obvious to everyone that they would make a good manager one day

  • 33725 on 10/04/2023 - 12:08
    +2

    I have a friend who is introvert and got promoted to management level to look after a team of 10. Can't handle it after a few months and left. You might get the promotion one day but if you don't like doing the small talk, it will create more stress. At the end, its people you are managing, not job. You can negotiate for more pay instead of promotion.

  • thesilverstarman on 10/04/2023 - 12:17
    +28

    I used to work for a large company with over 80 stores. I rose through management ranks, and interviewed and hired managers. He are some obsevations:

    • Managers are leaders. You need to be able to motivate others and get them to perform. If there is a problem, you are the one responsible for those under you, so you need to be able to stand up and fight and also be able to deal with conflict. You need to be able to discipline others as well. Introverts are not suited to these things.
    • A manager doesn't have to understand the business and its ins and outs to some extent. They need to be able to manage time, resources and people. They don't need to be the ones who get bogged down with the work - they get others to do the work while monitoring and having the overviews. This is why its not always the hardest worker who gets promoted, because that person is the one they business needs to keep working hard. Managers dont need to work hard - they need to get the best out of the team. This is something that people don't realise. If a manager is bogged down doing something, they arent monitoring the team and the job. The best managers are like helicopters - they hover and oversee everyone else, and are focused on strategy and big picture stuff. A helicopter can see everything up high, going lower when it needs to, whilst staff are foccussed on one area on the ground.
    • You can learn leadership styles, but from my experience a leader is born that way, and gets better with training. If your personality is one that doesnt take charge, make decisons and has confidence, then you can't teach these things.
    • Management and leadership is not for everyone. And thats ok. Because every role is important, and everyone has strengths and weaknesses. In the past a lot of businesses propmoted people based on how long they had been there. It was just luck if the right person became a manager. Now future managers are identified from when they are hired, and are groomed for the positions. They will often not be the hardest worker, be the nicest person or the most knowlegable but that is not what management is about. It is a different skillset and personality, and people shouldnt feel put out if they dont get offered a role. Its no different to putting a person with good empathy in a complaints area, or an extrovert as the face of the business at reception. It's the right person for the job that matters.
    • drfuzzy on 11/04/2023 - 00:57
      +1

      This is very true but I feel not what the OP wants to hear
      The OP wants to hear that they are unfairly treated and should have got the job

      • Papa Huggies on 12/04/2023 - 09:30
        +1

        I mean yes that's very clear. Truth is OP is definitely not manager material. He can learn to fake it, but I suspect that it'd be really draining for him.

      • nobro25 on 13/04/2023 - 12:40

        Lol imagine OP getting the role and was asked to motivate his own team and take accountability for the teams KPI. They'll probably choke. Well of course being a manager is more than that. Taking leadership and actually owning it is one thing, performing well as a leader is another.
        You'll have to make tough decisions in a timely manner.
        If there are layoffs in your department, how are you gonna approach those people (how are you going to deliver it?)
        You do need interpersonal skills, rapport and be in the right mindset.

    • Hangryuman on 11/04/2023 - 14:16

      I used to teach - a difference between managers and leaders (perhaps board members)

      a manager has to get the job done right

      a leader has to choose the right job to do

      Given enough time and money, you can do anything.
      A manager never has enough time or money.
      Their job is to get the job done anyway.

      Who makes the best managers ? Mothers - see above.

    • CaptainMaverick on 11/04/2023 - 16:23
      +3

      That's all well and good, but your last point - so everyone has strengths and weaknesses.

      If only they were as equally valued as management/leadership.

      Some great workers, who are also quite likeable, so smart, and generate so much value for organisations, are overlooked for management positions etc for the reasons you mentioned.

      But that also means they're blocked from the higher pay and can never reaaaally get ahead. You can only get so far on a purely technical level and as a 'doer'.

      I'm not convinced management/leadership skills are harder to come by or inherently more valuable - especially when there are so many shit managers/leaders around doing more harm than good, but getting paid a shitload more than they should.

      People without management skills feel they need to move up to that level anyway, otherwise they're left behind in pay, and also in terms of how they're respected and valued. And eventually they're 'aged out' of the technical roles because they haven't moved up to management and seen as defective.

      So it's very easy to say your last point, but in reality it's (profanity).

      • thesilverstarman on 11/04/2023 - 17:09
        +1

        I hear what you are saying. There are a few things that came to mind.
        Yes, people are blocked from higher pay, but going to management isn't the answer. Technical skills are not what's needed for management. Management and leadership are essentially roles themselves. That's why universities now have separate courses for leadership etc. An overview of the technical information might be handy, but managers don't need to know it. They manage people who know it. The idea that management is a natural progression is what happened in the public service. The person who was there the longest got the job. That way of thinking is now gone. If you want more money, and aren't management material, look elsewhere.
        Management get higher paying jobs because they have greater responsibility, not because they have technical skills. A good manager is also a leader.

        • CaptainMaverick on 11/04/2023 - 19:24

          Look elsewhere? Everywhere undervalues technical ability and overvalues management/leadership.

          Yes a good manager is a leader. And a good leader is really valuable. But they're few and far between. Most managers aren't great. Most leaders aren't great. But htey're all paid as though they are

          The answer really is paying managers less, and paying technical people more. The people actually doing the work. That are actually responsible for getting the work done. You could argue that the people above the manager see the manager as being responsible - but it's so easy for managers to pawn that responsibility off as being the fault of their staff or not enough resources etc.

          So yeah. Failing to address the actual issue with all of this, leaves technically skilled people who don't have access to the pay of people above them who might be less qualified, less intelligent, and less competent in general, to try to get better at management and go for those roles. Otherwise, for many of them, they get 'managed' by assholes who don't understand the technical side, and don't really care.'

          Again, the answer is pay everyone what they're worth, and stop seeing the managers and leaders as the most valuable people in an organisation. You could argue well there's 1 manager for 10 staff etc so why not pay the manager more. But i'd argue - why pay the manager more? There's responsibility for project management but like… why is that responsibility "above" the many responsibilities of a person getting their job done? Because it's seen as a 'higher level' thing? It's higher level in terms of removal away from the nitty gritty tasks - but is it 'higher level' in terms of what should be rewarded more?

          I'd also argue that so many people would be amazing leaders and m,managers but never given the opportunity because they don't fit the typical mould of what is seen as good leadership. And people who got those roles because they fit that mould are often very very poor at it - especially the people aspect.

          • p1 ama on 11/04/2023 - 21:24
            +4

            @CaptainMaverick: This is all bollocks, you're basically saying everyone else is an idiot except me, and the only work that should be valued is my work.

            Look elsewhere? Everywhere undervalues technical ability and overvalues management/leadership.

            What do you mean by undervalue? I have close friends who are earning north of $200K in their mid-late 30s in very technical roles in different industries - one is a software engineer at a major SaaS company, and two are data scientists.

            I tend to find that almost everywhere actually undervalues management / leadership. When hiring for technical roles, they do all of the due diligence - excellent grades at uni, problem solving test, coding test, technical interviews, "fit" interviews…etc. Hardly anywhere near as much is invested into hiring great managers / leaders.

            The answer really is paying managers less, and paying technical people more.

            Who is responsible at the end of the day? In many cases, legally responsible?

            If you're a civil engineer, you can do a great job as a technical specialist - you can advise your team on complex engineering matters. However, you're not the person signing off on the drawings. Your lead engineer is. When there's an accident and something collapses, it's not you who has to face a tribunal, it's the lead engineer.

            The people actually doing the work. That are actually responsible for getting the work done.

            Managing people is "work". I've seen changes in managers lead to huge uplifts in productivity. There was a technical team at a company I worked for who were viewed internally as a poor performing team with low capabilities. They always had trouble delivering work on time, had high attrition, was always requesting additional resources, consistently required support from external consultants and contractors, work was always of very average quality.

            Close colleague of mine took over the "lead" role, and turned around the team. Tightened up project management, moved to a more agile way of working, hired two new expert resources, and within a year, the team was much more productive, built a better reputation, attrition had dropped greatly, reduced the need for external consultants…etc. Performance reviews were generally up (save for a few people), the entire team was granted a higher bonus pool by the company and everyone was happier. The entire team only had great things to say about their new manager.

            So yeah. Failing to address the actual issue with all of this, leaves technically skilled people who don't have access to the pay of people above them who might be less qualified, less intelligent, and less competent in general, to try to get better at management and go for those roles.

            Maybe you don't get paid enough because your technical skills are not as competitive and great as you think they are. It just strikes me as a bit close-minded to believe that everyone else who's getting paid better is an ass-licking idiot and you're the only "pure and honest" hard worker getting nowhere.

            Are there idiots who get promoted? Sure. But what exactly have you done about your predicament? Have you tried looking elsewhere?

            Otherwise, for many of them, they get 'managed' by assholes who don't understand the technical side, and don't really care.'

            This is a fundamental misunderstanding of a manager's role.

            Again, the answer is pay everyone what they're worth, and stop seeing the managers and leaders as the most valuable people in an organisation.

            To some degree, this is already happening. People should be paid by their EBITDA impact, right?

            Hiring a new CEO who implements a new strategy or enters a new market can increase EBITDA by probably 50 - 100% in some high growth sectors. Hiring a new general manager may lead to like a 10 - 20% EBITDA unlock. Hiring a new technical expert will likely not move the needle unless they are truly special.

            In the cases where they are, I've found them to be rewarded handsomely. For example, I've seen technical experts hired who were able to allow a company to launch a new type of product. One was a previous colleague who now earns > $400K p.a.

            I'd also argue that so many people would be amazing leaders and m,managers but never given the opportunity because they don't fit the typical mould of what is seen as good leadership. And people who got those roles because they fit that mould are often very very poor at it - especially the people aspect.

            Sure, but it's not an issue unique to "managers" - I'm sure you could make the argument that there are plenty of idiotic "technical people" who are very poor at their job - I've seen accountants who barely know Excel, software engineers who struggled with basic code, data scientists who found SQL difficult…etc. I'm sure that there are brilliant technical people out there who would be better at these jobs but did not get them.

            I'm not defending the hiring practices of managers, I'm simply saying that the issues you are describing exist in all sectors in all types of professions, not just one that you are singling out as a trope.

          • ThadtheChad on 12/04/2023 - 23:14
            +1

            @CaptainMaverick: To be very honest, highly skilled technical people in certain professions absolutely get paid more than their managers. If you're a very senior techie and arent getting paid as much as mid management, I'm sorry to say this but you're doing something wrong. You absolutely should look elsewhere.

            Also, yes, while there is a pay cap on technical people, its largely when we compare against senior leadership. Remember these folks actually steer the ship and have a huge influence on how the organisation runs. They also end up being accountable and responsible for a ton of things … not directly within their control e.g. risk exposure, operations cock ups, adherence to corporate strategy etc.

            The tech may be actually doing the work, but the influence/area of impact of that work is localised to their taskings; in direct contrast the senior manager/leadership has a much wider impact on the organisation/business unit etc meeting its desired goals.

          • thesilverstarman on 14/04/2023 - 12:07
            +1

            @CaptainMaverick: "I'd also argue that so many people would be amazing leaders and m,managers but never given the opportunity because they don't fit the typical mould of what is seen as good leadership" In other words, they don't have the skills and personality to be leaders. You don't get it - you are a leader or you are not. Out 20 people in a room and introduce a crisis, and you see who the leaders are. Leaders have confidence. They organise others and resources. If a person is working at a job, they would already be showing these things, and not wait for a chance to maybe show them. On top of that, Im guessing that they also do not have the skills or qualifications as well.
            If a person is good at their job, they will be getting paid what they are worth. There are plenty of hairdressers that live on the poverty line, but there are also millionaire hairdressers. There are lawyers and real estate agents making under 100k a year, and those who are very wealthy. And the same can be said for every single profession. If you aren't getting paid what you think you deserve, then go elsewhere, or maybe you aren't as good as you think.
            It's easy to criticise managers and say that they are poor leaders, have no people skills etc, and of course in some cases that is true. But generally I hear this from people who have no idea of what a manager's role is. They think that a manager is just a person who does what they do, and isn't as good.Managers do not need to have the skills of the people working under them. A manager controls people, time and resources to ensure outcomes that the business wants. If you think that a manager needs to understand the technical side, then you don't understand management at all. A team leader is different, and is someone who leads a team of people who do the same job.
            And of course a manager will be paid more. They are not just charge of people, but also resources and they have targets to achieve and are responsible for all of this. You get paid more for that responsibility, as you are accountable as well. Managers do not get paid by the hour, and do not have the job security that other workers have. They are judged by results.
            All I am hearing from you is that you have a thing against managers, no doubt because you have been passed over and you think that you are underpaid. No single person is crucial to a business. They think they are, but they are mistaken. Imagine a bucket of water. Put your hand in it, then take it out and see how big the hole in the water is. That hole is how important you are. There is always someone who will replace you, and do the job better. Always. And that applies to every person in an organisation. If a business thinks that you are valuable and it wants to keep you there, they will already be paying you more and making sure that you stay. They would have keyman insurance on you. If you think that you are management material, get feedback from your superiors and listen to what they say. Consider doing an MBA. If you have never been a leader in your life, I would suggest that you may be good at small roles like a team leader, but not a manager. You do not just become a leader.

      • crentist on 13/04/2023 - 18:55
        +1

        I'm not convinced management/leadership skills are harder to come by or inherently more valuable - especially when there are so many shit managers/leaders around doing more harm than good

        Do you realise that this is contradictory? If the skills were easier to come by, then there wouldn't be so many shit managers. If they weren't valuable, then incompetence wouldn't really matter

  • Godric on 10/04/2023 - 12:45
    +8

    Pretending to know things and being loud is how you excel

  • GordonD on 10/04/2023 - 13:15
    +6

    My experience is that in Australia managing isn't about skills, its about personality. And those already in management reserve promotion to the executive suite to people like them. They are convinced people like them are the best people for the job, that's why they have it. If you aren't like them, find a job somewhere else. If you are, you can be a complete idiot.

    The big organisation I worked for for years had to keep promoting me, my annual assessments said I should be. Normal progression would have been to management, but I wasn't considered "management material". Eventually there weren't any more higher technical grades to promote me up to. So they made me an executive assistant to a senior executive. Biggest career mistake I ever made was accepting the job.

  • Brick Tamland on 10/04/2023 - 13:24
    +3

    Depends on the workplace. For more unskilled workplaces often the loud bossy people become managers because they standout and they dont necessary need much skill, intelligence or empathy to become a manager, just a loud voice.

    My current workplace some of the most outstanding managers are quieter introverted type people. In my experience the managers that can listen, empathise and understand situations are the most respected and awarded managers in my workplace. Being introverted doesnt mean you can lead a team or take command when needed. Any manager spending hours talking personal chit chat is going to suffer horribly for time management in a workplace that actually requires them to be a manager

  • Benoffie on 10/04/2023 - 16:19
    +9

    No. The current state of the corporate culture is that loud and bold must equal leadership quality. Reality is, it just makes them loud and bold. However, higher ups seem to think this means confidence and communication know how.

    Idiots.

    • drprox on 10/04/2023 - 18:05
      +2

      It usually does mean confidence but not always competence…

  • djsweet on 10/04/2023 - 17:07
    +13

    Depends how dumb the executives in your company are. Introverts make great managers. All the best leaders I have worked with have been introverts. Real leaders care about their team, fight for their team, discipline their team. You don’t need to be extroverted to do that, and a lot of introverts are actually really good at it.

    • Hangryuman on 11/04/2023 - 14:20
      +1

      Extroverts tend to speak before they think - exuding confidence - great for short-term sales success

      Introverts tend to think before they speak - double-checking carefully - better for long-term results

  • Maxxjet on 10/04/2023 - 17:40
    +3

    Quit and find another employer who offers you a manager's position. Done!

  • drprox on 10/04/2023 - 18:04
    +1

    An hour is nothing. Particularly if you enjoy some WFH post covid. I can lose an entire day blathering then punch my ticket and do the work from home tmrw.

  • Heaps for Cheaps on 10/04/2023 - 18:57

    Write a letter informing them of your disappointment that they kept on making an issue of your being transgender at the interview…

    Every question was somehow bringing in your transition… ie 'As a transitioning person, how do you think staff will respect you?'
    'Would you be comfortable coming into work and acting normal instead of transgender?'
    etc etc until maybe a new and better paying position suddenly pops up

  • OzzyOzbourne on 10/04/2023 - 19:07
    -2

    My experience of working in a large corporation of mostly males is that it depends on what's between your legs.

    • xyned on 10/04/2023 - 19:28
      +3

      Sorry, you feel that way. Having served under female managers, even back in early 2000s, this is not the case.

    • FallaM on 11/04/2023 - 10:23
      +1

      This is absolutely not true. I have worked under various female directors and they still have your thought process which makes them almost vengeful and extremely malicious.

  • p1 ama on 10/04/2023 - 19:15
    +38

    I'll give my own two cents as someone who's generally an introverted person and has become a senior people manager.

    Firstly, I think it's worth thinking about the very different skillset required and to consider whether "making it" (and I use the quotations intentionally) is actually the right outcome for you and your career.

    a) Managing people is fundamentally a different job to a technical one. For example, you need to enjoy meetings, rubbing shoulders with senior colleagues, negotiating on behalf of your team, dealing with people and their issues…etc. If you don't enjoy this, you should not aim to become a people manager.

    b) Becoming a manager is not the only way for you to negotiate a higher salary. If you have genuine expertise in a technical field that is in demand, you should always keep abreast of the opportunities that are available out there. Chances are, others will be willing to pay more for your expertise.

    Point is, think about whether you really want to become a people manager. I've seen far too many people try to pursue this path even when it's not optimal. I was previously a data scientist - one of my colleagues was promoted to "chapter lead" role, where he led the company's analytics function of around 15 people. His work went from 80% coding and development to 80% meetings and "leadership". For someone who was an broadly an introvert who loved coding and was never great with people, he struggled in the job, left within 6 months and went to another company in a technical engineering role.

    If you really believe that you want to become a people manager, here's my thoughts.

    Another example of me being "quiet" is when this role came up four years ago and I didn't get it, I didn't complain and just accepted it. When I complained this time and brought it up, they said "I didn't know you wanted it". So it seems like merely applying for the role isn't enough to show my interest, I have to complain that I didn't get it?

    Not "complain" that you didn't get it, but rather, show that you have the capability to do the job.

    You need to demonstrate that you have the leadership capabilities to become a people manager. When have you displayed that leadership?

    Some examples:

    • Working on a previously mismanaged project that you managed to turn around
    • Filling in the role a manager whilst they were on leave or occupied with other responsibilities
    • Asking for more opportunities to lead certain aspects of your work and your team
    • Mentored other colleagues
    • Taking on opportunities to be in meetings with senior stakeholders and presenting your work

    …etc.

    Becoming a manager is not a "promotion" similar to an analyst to senior analyst promotion. It is not determined by tenure, you need to demonstrate that you are ready for the job and can succeed in this job from day one.

    Being "good at your job" is broadly irrelevant. If you're good at your job, why would your employer want to take you off of that job? You need to show you can drive more value for your employer as a people manager instead. For example, show that you can only work on one project at a time now, but if you are a manager leading that team, you can oversee five projects and drive them all to completion and the highest standards.

    Think about what your colleagues will say about you - this is usually a good barometer. "Gets the job done", "pleasant", "keeps to self" are not things that are said about future leaders. You want to make sure that they will say that you are "an advocate for the team", "supportive of others", "a problem solver", "a mentor", "driven", "invested in the team's success"…etc.

    The successful applicant is more extroverted than me, they will spend an hour or so a day talking to people about non-work related things, such as how their kids are, how their weekend was etc. I feel like this is too much wasted time talking and not getting work done.

    Is this an accurate representation of the situation, or are you just seeing things through your own lens?

    FWIW, without getting into the details of it all, if you are prioritising "getting work done", why do you want to be a people manager? As a people manager, your "work" is literally to ensure that your team is well resourced, everyone is supported, everyone is productive, you're delivering value for your company…etc.

    What you dismiss as "non-work related things" were extremely important to me as a junior people manager. Things that I've picked up from those sorts of conversations are things like:

    • Person A has had a really rough week, I'll try and take some load off them for the next few days
    • Person B's kids are sick, let me just make sure that I'm also across this critical piece of work so there won't be any disruptions if they take a day off
    • Person C has to do school drop-off in the morning, let me reschedule our morning meetings to 10am so they can make it and won't have to dial in
    • Person D is really unhappy with this job, can I reshuffle the work I've assigned so they're working on something else?

    …etc.

    If you fundamentally don't enjoy this, then it's okay, you don't have to become a people manager. I always really emphasise this with my mentees - you can have a really rewarding, enjoyable, well-paid career as a technical expert. Make that decision early, invest in yourself, develop the right skills.

    Can the 'quiet achiever' ever make it to the managerial level?

    To answer your direct question. Yes, obviously yes. However, you need to become an "achiever" as a manager and demonstrate capabilities in this role. It doesn't mean you need to be loud and obnoxious (in fact, that's a disadvantage), but you need to do the things that people look for in a manager - be proactive, shadow your manager(s), look for opportunities to show you can step up, mentor others in your team, show management abilities from a project level first, spend time developing rapport with others so that they want you to lead them…etc. Find the way to do these things that work for you.

    • deme on 10/04/2023 - 19:21
      -8

      TL;DR

      • [Deactivated] on 10/04/2023 - 19:29
        +3

        chat gpt:

        Becoming a people manager requires a different skill set from a technical role, and it's important to consider whether it's the right path for your career. If you want to become a people manager, you need to demonstrate leadership capabilities and show that you can drive more value for your employer as a manager. Being an introvert or a "quiet achiever" is not a barrier, but you need to be proactive, seek opportunities to step up, and develop the skills required for the role.

      • Heaps for Cheaps on 10/04/2023 - 19:33
        +4

        That's a good first step, getting somebody to TL;DR a very important response into a few bullet points for you, because you CBF putting any effort into your own future…

        You will make a great manager one day!

      • Stopback on 10/04/2023 - 23:34
        +4

        Being a manager sucks balls. As in before you need to suck two balls and now it's all the balls

      • jacross on 11/04/2023 - 10:56
        +2

        You should read it mate. It will help you determine whether you want to be a manager and what it requires if you do.

        • deme on 11/04/2023 - 12:24
          -7

          Put it in a TL;DR and slap the words Executive Summary at the top.

          Executive Summary:

          Feature OP Successful Applicant (Chad) P1 Dude (Probably Tech Company)
          Personality Introverted Extroverted Introverted
          Work Approach / Style Quiet achiever type More vocal and engaging Senior people manager
          Communication General chit chat, laughs Longer conversations about personal life Focus on people management, rapport building
          Focus on Work vs Social Focus on work tasks Spends time talking about non-work topics Balances work and people-related tasks
          Time spent on non-work conversations Minimal Around an hour a day Varies, based on people's needs
          Managerial Position Status Not selected (twice) Successful applicant Senior people manager
          Perspective on Management Wants to become a manager Already a manager Questions if management is the right path for everyone, offers advice on demonstrating leadership capabilities
      • ratman on 12/04/2023 - 14:05
        +1

        Wow. This is literally the best and most informative response you could ask for.

    • Littlevu on 10/04/2023 - 21:41
      +8

      Such a well thought of response, on topic and something for the OP to really think about. Those who skipped it it just based on size of text missed out on learning something.

    • Roman Sandstorm on 11/04/2023 - 12:37
      +4

      Interesting reply, P1 ama.

      And so much of what you say actually makes sense. In an ideal world.

      What you dismiss as "non-work related things" were extremely important to me as a junior people manager. Things that I've picked up from those sorts of conversations are things like:
      Person A has had a really rough week, I'll try and take some load off them for the next few days
      Person B's kids are sick, let me just make sure that I'm also across this critical piece of work so there won't be any disruptions if they take a day off
      Person C has to do school drop-off in the morning, let me reschedule our morning meetings to 10am so they can make it and won't have to dial in
      Person D is really unhappy with this job, can I reshuffle the work I've assigned so they're working on something else?

      This is sensational, and over the (roughly) 80-odd jobs (including many temp/contract roles as well as perm ones) I have had in my life, I could count on the fingers of…. one finger… the number of managers I have had who would conform to your excellent quality.

      I am fairly confident that if we held a poll (even here on OzB) along the lines of: Does you current manager conform to P1 ama's A, B, C, D level of care and responsibility? Or… Does you current manager (or any previous manager) really prioritise a combination of their staff's welfare and the overall benefit to the company? I feel the results would be…. disappointing… to say the least.

      Yes, in a good corporate culture and environment what you describe, and so many others in this thread, would be applicable.An environment where everyone works to a common goal, where both the benefit of the company, and the benefit of the individual align, where staff are not over-worked or exploited, where skills are appreciated, valued and encouraged.

      Perhaps it is my own personal history (neartly 40 years working in differing sectors - including govt admin, politics, sports, and IT) which prejudices my views, but I have seldom had managers (In Australia) who held their positions based on their managerial abilities and skills, and who really had either the company or their staff's interests at heart. In my experience managers mostly gain their positions based on cultural and sociological similarity to existing managers, on their conformity to their superiors, on their corporate ass-covering ability, and on their tolerance level for endless, vacuous, meaningless meetings, which make things look like work is being done. It doesn't hurt for them to play golf/attend events/social circle coincide with senior managers either.

      Note the absence of actual people managerial skills, corporate knowledge or actual company benefit.

      But, I admit, this may just be my coloured and cynical view,.

      • p1 ama on 11/04/2023 - 13:03
        +2

        I am fairly confident that if we held a poll (even here on OzB) along the lines of: Does you current manager conform to P1 ama's A, B, C, D level of care and responsibility? Or… Does you current manager (or any previous manager) really prioritise a combination of their staff's welfare and the overall benefit to the company? I feel the results would be…. disappointing… to say the least.

        Of course a manager will need to prioritise a combination of their staff's welfare and the overall work being delivered for the company. This is what makes people management challenging. It's the need to balance often conflicting KPIs that are outside of your control - you need to make sure that your team is productive, but that people also have enough time for development, that everyone is supported, that you keep attrition low…etc.

        In my experience managers mostly gain their positions based on cultural and sociological similarity to existing managers, on their conformity to their superiors, on their corporate ass-covering ability, and on their tolerance level for endless, vacuous, meaningless meetings, which make things look like work is being done. It doesn't hurt for them to play golf/attend events/social circle coincide with senior managers either.

        I'm not running a defence apparatus for all of the managers out there. Obviously there are good and bad managers - I've worked with plenty across the entire spectrum. I'm outlining what (in my opinion) should be expected of a good manager and what skills one would need to have to be competitive for a managerial position in direct response to a question around whether people who are introverted can become managers.

        • Roman Sandstorm on 11/04/2023 - 15:02
          +1

          I'm outlining what (in my opinion) should be expected of a good manager

          100% agree! And I hope that you didn't feel my overall cynicism regarding Australian management was in any way directed towards you.

          Your idealism (and obvious excellent experience) is admirable, and it would be hoped that more managers/companies were like that.

          Sadly, my experience is… not so positive.

          • ThadtheChad on 12/04/2023 - 23:26

            @Roman Sandstorm: This exchange has been exceptionally enlightening. As someone who is trying to be (what I perceive to be) a good manager to my team, I feel quite validated that my views are echoed by veterans in the industry such as yourselves.

            The quality of discourse is remarkably atypical of Ozb. :D

            • Roman Sandstorm on 12/04/2023 - 23:50
              +1

              @ThadtheChad: Thanks Thad. P1 ama often has some quite reasonable and well constructed thoughts on various topics.

              And while I can be cynical (due to years of jaundiced experience) in many areas, I also like reasoned and reasonable arguments and opinions, often backed by evidence if required.

              <Rising onto platform….>
              If enough of us here at OzB work at raising the standard of discourse………… bzzzzzzzzzzt…. who am I kidding? Sigh. Sorry.

              • ThadtheChad on 13/04/2023 - 09:21

                @Roman Sandstorm: This has been genuinely very helpful!

                Its the shitposting AND the occasional remarkably insightful discussions that makes me check out the forums from time to time! 😁

    • aboogee on 11/04/2023 - 16:25

      But OP did not mention that this is a people manager role.
      Would you agree that there are some "managerial level" roles that require more technical skills
      It ultimately boils down to the KPI defined, which everyone is assuming that requires more people skills than technical.

  • FlyingMiffy on 10/04/2023 - 19:20

    You are asking the wrong the question and your comments lack an appreciation of the spectrum of leadership qualities that people look for. In that very simple example of your ability to make idle chit chat and have a joke versus someone who invests time to build rapport - you will always lose out. What that says to the hiring manager is that you dont understand the value of relationships in the workplace or the need to understand the motivations of others when working in a team. No wonder you didnt get the job…

  • [Deactivated] on 10/04/2023 - 19:23

    Just look at our former prime minister's career and you will have your answer. Though unlike Scomo you may need to focus on work related tasks and get shit done for at least 5-10% of the day if you want to keep said managerial position after getting it.

  • xyned on 10/04/2023 - 19:26

    Getting to and remaining a manager requires a lot of politic-ing.
    I learnt it the hard way, when I was standing at the brink of knighthood, I found that rug was pulled from under my feet.
    Years later, I understood that when in a managerial post or when vying for one, you have to realize that you are getting paid for manager-grade skills and that includes being smart enough to have people by your side and the occasional politic-ing.
    That may include motivating-people, people management, conflict management, being social and appealing to other as an extrovert.
    I thank god that I belong to a country where my attitude counts as a skill. I believe it is the Aussie way. It was and I hope to god, it always remains(despite unfettered immigration diluting oz culture) that "the right fit" and "team player" counts towards excelling in workplace.

  • spammingb on 10/04/2023 - 20:04
    +3

    You should be having these conversations long before you actually apply, it shouldn't be a surprise that you are rejected

  • xlimit on 10/04/2023 - 20:15
    +2

    If you're getting that kind of feed back, might be worth asking yourself if that position will be suited to your personality.

    Imagine having to gear yourself up to do something that doesn't come naturally all the time. Eg An introvert having to give public speeches everyday or say being the co-ordinator of a trauma scene.

    Of course you could do it, but if it doesn't come naturally you'll just burn out and resent the job.

  • coffeeinmyveins on 10/04/2023 - 20:33
    +2

    will spend an hour or so a day talking to people about non-work related things, such as how their kids are, how their weekend was etc. I feel like this is too much wasted time talking and not getting work done.

    Honestly had to laugh at this

    You must be a special kind of person if you can't see that this isn't wasting time and is literally the reason you won't be promoted into a managerial role

    • techlead on 10/04/2023 - 21:09
      +1

      will spend an hour or so a day talking to people about non-work related things, such as how their kids are, how their weekend was etc. I feel like this is too much wasted time talking and not getting work done.

      This is actually part of a manager's job. I'm speaking from experience, I'm a director level head of a function. I have a periodic series of meetings with my direct reports, direct reports of direct reports in my diary just to talk about non-work related stuff. The subject of the meeting is, non-work related catchup and we'd talk about all sorts of things, sports, politics, kids, crypto, economy, US fed, RBA anything not work related and SFW of course, nothing inappropriate.

  • buckethat on 10/04/2023 - 20:34

    No.

    Being extroverted and being able to engage with people is extremely important. It doesn't always have to be about work, a good manager needs people skill, you are afterall managing people, and the fact that you don't really see the importance of this indicates to me that you're not managerial material.

    • the wiz on 10/04/2023 - 22:50
      +1

      Introverts can have good people skills and make excellent managers. People skills are essential.

      It is more the OP not recognising the importance of people skills to being a manager.

      Extroverts gravitate towards management. They don't necessarily make good managers.

  • techlead on 10/04/2023 - 20:40
    +2

    You need to own your own career, that means if the current company don't value you, then its time to leave.

    Loyalty don't pay. Looking back at my career, I'm glad that I was ready to walk when I don't get a pay rise or a promotion. I just went and found my own pay rise/promotion. I cannot get to where I am today without this mentality, don't let your company take you for granted. If they don't pay you what you are worth, time to go.

    Of course, your own personal circumstances would be different to mine. I can retire right now and be quite comfortable because I started investing in Bitcoin and other cryptos in 2013. I'm not up to my eyeballs with debt from property investing, so I'm not chained to my job because I'm worried about mortgage payments. This has allowed me to be bold and walk when I need to.

    I lead a team and I can tell you that the quiet achiever types often lose out. Its the vocal ones who threaten to leave or actually do so, that forces me to think of creative ways to keep them (if they are worth keeping, which do include out of cycle pay rises and promotions). This has happened to me, I've had counter offers and out of cycle pay rises and promotions to keep me. You need to be vocal, if your company don't value you, then go to a company that do, loyalty do NOT pay. Its a very important lesson to learn in life and it applies to many things.

    You need to get to know your team, so chit chat is not "a waste of time", that's the wrong mentality. You need to be relatable, and know your team on a personal level, it shouldn't all be work work work. I make sure that I have a periodic running series with my direct reports to discuss anything not work related, the agenda is anything not work related. Then I have another series where I meet with my skip level, direct report of my direct reports. This is how you can be an effective leader, your team needs to know you care about them, its part of the culture you need to create. All about work, makes people have a bad perception of you and you need to show genuine interest, not just as a passing thing.

  • anfs on 10/04/2023 - 20:41
    +2

    You may be very good in your job (task oriented) but I don't think you understand the people side of things. Being able to joke with someone in the kitchen is different to working closely with someone. I don't feel like you would be the type who would take the time to build a rapport with your direct reports or show concern for their employees, things that would help an employee feel supported or motivate them and instead only focus on the tasks required of them.

    As an example, the senior manager and director of the department I work in all graduated as engineers and are shocking managers. Talking to all the lower level employees, they are all demotivated. This is because they don't treat people like humans but like the machines we use in the factory.
    They approach everything from an engineering perspective which isn't correct because humans are complex people and you can't apply a checklist to all problems and expect the problem to be solved everytime.
    If someone hasn't done something or really busy, rather than showing concern they would immediately ask about your workload so they can help prioritise (giving the impression of micromanaging) or I even heard one say "Why are you busy, you should have plenty of time to do this task".

    Overall, what I'm getting at is you're looking at the wrong things on why you didn't get the job. You think it's because the other applicant is an extrovert but there's more to it. He may do less work than you but he would have demonstrated being able to get the best from people or handling difficult situations within teams. As a final point, ask yourself this question: If an employee or direct report came to you about some major work problem that causing him distress, what would be the first thing you ask? If it's "what do you need from me?" or discussing on how to get the work back on track, I don't think you're ready to be a manager yet

    • techlead on 10/04/2023 - 21:06

      So true, good leaders connect to their team on a personal level, as people, not as machines.

      Being a leader is very very different to someone on a more junior level, the skill set moves to the soft side, the people side, because you need to create the right culture, inspire the team, not so much do the grunt work. They employ people like OP to do the grunt work hahaha. Leaders need to keep the team motivated, inspired and towards a common goal.

      Do you think Tim Apple, I mean Tim Cook, do any coding? He's not gonna touch that, and we don't expect him too, that kind of work is way way below his paygrade, his time can be spent doing other more value added things.

    • jacross on 11/04/2023 - 11:01

      Yeah I think this is a really good point and I know it is my number one weakness in relation to management. I love thinking about processes. I love thinking about resource deployment. Building a rapport with people…not so much. I just called people a 'resource' in the previous sentence.

      But it's part of it. Most humans don't want to be treated like a cog. So I work on it because I've identified it as the part of the job that doesn't come naturally to me.

      I don't think OP actually wants to work on ANYTHING in relation to their skillset. They sound like a managerial disaster because there is nothing worse than a technical expert who is promoted into management. You've lost the technical expert and you've gained someone with no management skills.

  • May4th on 10/04/2023 - 20:48

    The short answer is yes. The long answer is, potentially, but what makes you think you are qualified for the managerial position? Nothing you said reflects an understanding of the skills required of a managerial role, nor how you fit into it. Being efficient / good in a technical capacity and being around for a long time does not automatically make you a good manager

    • techlead on 10/04/2023 - 20:56

      The answer is no. You can't be an effective leader if you are a quiet anything. As a leader, you need to be vocal, out there, be seen. Unfortunately, quiet achievers hit a glass ceiling.

      • May4th on 11/04/2023 - 10:49
        +1

        loud/quiet are communication styles, quiet doesn't mean you don't talk. you can be a good, effective communicator and still be "quiet" think tim cook rather than elon musk

      • ddn2004 on 13/04/2023 - 11:17

        I'll say OP needs to be more approachable. Plus, do people really need to be productive 8 hours a day that they can't spare time on chitchat?

        • techlead on 13/04/2023 - 12:56

          Speaking from experience as a director and head of a function, once you get to this level, you don't actually do much "actual work" otherwise known as the grunt work.

          I don't code from scratch, but I review code, and at times I've stepped in and offer suggestions and even wrote some code when people are stuck, but that's not my main job.

          Most of the time, I direct workflow, delegate, give guidance, unblock road blocks, get to know my team, planning, creating roadmaps (this is a huge part) and other tasks which requires soft communication skills. I go to alot of meetings with my team and other stakeholders. Its a very different skillset to earlier in my career when I was doing the grunt work.

  • xavster on 10/04/2023 - 21:10
    +1

    That one hour talking about the kids is called relationship building and is an important part of being a manager.

    I understand where the OP is coming from, but he hasn't mentally transitioned from being a worker to a manager. These are 2 different skillsets.

    The successful applicant was the right applicant.

    As a manager, you need to build a team, that means they have to trust you, believe in you, understand you, and be willing to follow you and do what ever shitty job you ask them to do.

    Management is about people.

    I've seen a few different management styles
    - Arm chair general: never leaves the confines of their desk, give orders and expect you to report back, have no idea what is happening outside.
    - MBWA (Management By Walking Around): never IN the office, always wondering the halls, checking in with people in the cubicles and general chit chat.
    - Quiet one: never talk to people or communicate, nobody knows what he wants, see him walk the halls but never says hello. Give work out by email.

    Which one are you?

    • techlead on 10/04/2023 - 21:17

      Quiet one: never talk to people or communicate, nobody knows what he wants, see him walk the halls but never says hello. Give work out by email.

      That's a bad manager! Wouldn't be employed as a manager for long.

  • Bob Svargis on 10/04/2023 - 21:29
    +1

    Introverts can manage. I had a team of 5 direct reports in my last role. It’s how you engage with you people that makes the difference, and introversion is just a label, not a straight jacket.

    The fact you see your competitor’s spending time asking people about themselves as a waste of time tells me that you lack self-awareness. Sorry for the harshness of my message, but people want to talk about themselves and a good manager gets the best out of people by being personable.

  • Miss B on 10/04/2023 - 21:29
    +4

    My manager is a bit quiet and introverted, she doesn't always have time to chat with the team because meetings. She'll join in when she can though and shares about things going on for her too. She's good at managing up and has a good relationship with her boss, so she will tell them directly if something's not going to happen. One example was the going back into the office and a mandatory 3 days per week, she told them that 2 made more sense and why and we just went with 2 days and everyone's okay with it. We need to do work for different areas of the business and if she thinks something we're being asked to do is unreasonable she'll let them know. Or if someone in the team is not being treated respectfully on a project they're on or something, she'll have our back.

    She's a really good manager and a good fit for our team. I don't think she really had managerial aspirations and I don't think she'd enjoy managing most teams, but we like, appreciate and respect her and are a self-motivated bunch. We all get along really well with each other and everyone is mindful of being inclusive of everyone in the team. She also advocated for our team to have greater responsibility and a pay rise to go with it, after confirming the team was on board.

    In some workplaces you can, but I would also consider if that's really what you want or if you just want more money. I applied for a manager position many years ago, I would have done much better than the person they gave the position to, who they had to fire because she was bullying people. Honestly though, I wouldn't have been a very good manager, because the team were definitely not self-motivated and there was constant bickering and bullying.

    Anyway, I realised some time later that managing people was not for me. I was looking for more data/technical/process type roles. It was a relief to stop trying to figure out how to be a passable manager and to look at other areas I can go into that pay reasonable money too.

    If you're set on being a manager you need to figure out what they're looking for (i.e. the other guy) and be that person. If you want a position, it's also a good idea to chat to them BEFORE you apply for the job and get an idea of what they're looking for, it shows interest before they make a decision and is actually a much better way of showing it than complaining. Let them know that you're really keen to be a manager and why and ask them for tips about what you can do to have a stronger application next time a position becomes available and what areas they think you need to develop further as a person to be a good manager.

  • Bunnyburger on 10/04/2023 - 21:35
    +2

    You may not be management material but build a niche for yourself and leverage that for a raise.

    That or find another job, loyalty doesn't pay these days.

    • techlead on 10/04/2023 - 22:26

      Some people are just not management material.

      They are excellent at being consultants and SMEs. I know people who are like that, they refuse to have direct reports and are brilliant at what they do. They will eventually hit a glass ceiling unfortunately.

  • Luminary on 10/04/2023 - 21:43

    You can but you still need to demonstrate your ability to take on those managerial tasks which isn't always about simply doing the work. As you move up, you generally do less deep work and more people management which requires a different set of soft skills. The challenge is you often have to be able to demonstrate some of these skills before the promotion rather than getting the new role and learning the skills. I'm very introverted and hate small talk but I have to actively and consciously do things I wouldn't naturally do because simply being good at executing isn't always enough to move up. One thing I always do at the start of a performance year is ask what I need to do or demonstrate to get to the next level. This showcases that 1. I'm pursuing the next level of my career and 2. I have a list of items/targets I need to achieve or work towards. Throughout the year, I write down things I've done for each list so that I have tangible evidence to use. I understand exactly how you feel so feel free to DM if you want to chat further. :)

  • the wiz on 10/04/2023 - 22:25

    The successful applicant is more extroverted than me, they will spend an hour or so a day talking to people about non-work related things, such as how their kids are, how their weekend was etc. I feel like this is too much wasted time talking and not getting work done.

    Managers manage people. If you don't know people, you can't manage them.

    Introverts can make great managers (despite what some others are saying here). But you seem to be missing the point.

    I suspect that you want to be a manager for money or prestige. Introverts can talk to people about their lives, but you don't want to. So…..

    You need to think about what you want.

  • fredk1000 on 11/04/2023 - 00:08
    +2

    I am like you, quiet. Managers like me because I get the job done and good at it. I am not a manager or do I want to be. Even a team leader for that matter.
    I have have gone through many managers, team leaders, I do not recall any quiet managers.
    Managers need to talk, that is their job. Small talk is networking, if you are quiet and people don't know you, they think you are a snob.
    It's just the way it is.

    • aboogee on 11/04/2023 - 09:31

      But OP wants to move on to managerial level.

      • fredk1000 on 11/04/2023 - 22:39

        They need to change their personality. Which is hard to do.
        What is harder is he is doing it in the same work place and people know them already. If they change all of the sudden people would think it is strange.
        Maybe in a new environment/job.

  • hasher22 on 11/04/2023 - 00:15

    There are many theories with real world application studies and interviews where skill can only take you so much up the ladder. In my experience and reading these studies, depending on how high the management role is, let's say its the first entry level management role, usually skill and experience is looked at.

    But the more higher you go, skill/skill sets does not play an important role but networking is king. If you can network, you can pretty much get any job high classed role in any company.

    The saying "it's who you know, not what you know" is true. When I went back to uni and needed a retail job in the same company from corporate head office to part time retail, I knew the area manager and she hired me over coffee whereas other candidates had to go through formal interview process.

    It also helps to voice out every now and then you're keen to move up in a company to co-workers, managers even HR if you have a small enough company to chat to them, planting a seed in their head that you want to move up, so when you do apply for it again, you're not just another applicant but when they see your name, they may be like "oh it's Greg! He's been saying for 2 years that he wants a role like this!"

    • aboogee on 11/04/2023 - 08:48

      I think that speaks to precisely the problem

      Everyone starts in a role where you need to be hands on and get things done
      Eg both start as a junior engineer or junior analyst
      There are some honest (and tend to be introvert) people who would just look at present and get things done
      As a result, when the come to that point in their career where they need want to move on higher, all they have to show is their know how
      In contrast, there are some that who prefer to just talk and build relationship from the get go and therefore do not get as much done
      When they get to the same point, they are seen to be the one who know everything because of big talks

      I always believe in zero sum game.
      Its just unfair that in very early stages the honest people are not recognized for contributing more (to make up for the slack)
      But at later stages of career, the assessment just considers only how loud one has spoken.
      If companies ultimately want a someone who can talk, then make that requirement clear from the get go
      Its not right to disadvantage someone throughout their career just because they picked the wrong path (that is, to be the doer) from the start.

      • hasher22 on 11/04/2023 - 16:01

        I fully understand and agree with you and it's ironic how the higher you go, the less, work-knowledge and skill plays an important role. People and management skills trumps everything else, combine that with networking and how likeable you are, you are winning.

        I mean, if you think about it, in any higher positions, when are they actually doing entry level or physical labour roles? You never anyone higher up doing the bottom lines work, that's where the bottom line skill set becomes invalid to an extent.

        It's good to have that background knowledge and empathise and converse easier with your team as whatever level manager, but going from an entry level, let's say call centre rep to team leader to call centre manager are all different people skill sets and this is what OP needs to understand that while being an amazing bottom line is great, he/she needs to be vocal to the relevant departments and network and see what skill sets are needed to go higher up as the OP can't rely on being a great bottom line worker.

        Prob best time to not be quiet and just kiss ass to a few people and be vocal on where they want to go in the company.

  • OBEY YOUR MASTERS on 11/04/2023 - 07:40
    +2

    Your ability in a job is irrelevant. If you present well and talk a big game there's no place you can't go.

    • FallaM on 11/04/2023 - 10:16
      +2

      Sad how truthful this is

    • Bunnyburger on 11/04/2023 - 12:11

      People skills is just talking…with style!

  • DingoBilly on 11/04/2023 - 07:40

    My answer is yes, but you do need to advocate for yourself more and you may need to change jobs often. It will be very job specific as well.

    I am very quiet and often don't say much at all. I'm just very technically proficient and in a very technical role. Over the last few years I've gotten numerous promotions to the point of being a manager rather than working in tech. I kinda hate managing people tbh but the pay is good at least.

    If I had stayed at my old positions I wouldn't have progressed at all. And if I didn't bug my manager about saying I need a promotion whenever I got more responsibilities then I also wouldn't get a promotion.

    But I will also be the first to admit I've been lucky and many quiet people have not been promoted or have just kept their heads down/not said anything and been passed for promotion. The managing role itself is also so technical that you're almost always going to get a tech head into it and they will often be quiet. Can't imagine managing a non-technical team.

  • lostgoat on 11/04/2023 - 07:46
    +1

    I think there is hope OP . Brown nose the right person and of course family run businesses you will have no problem becoming the manager .

  • aboogee on 11/04/2023 - 08:40

    I am not able to offer any advice - but I can totally resonate with your experience.

    We see people as talking (as opposed to working) their way up. Their contribution is next to nothing.
    At work, when I am given a problem, I will always try to solve the problem myself (with help of other people at my level) and tend to not go back to my manager with more problem (eg too hard, no data etc).
    I somehow feel thats not being appreciated as managers prefer to hear the whinge.
    I know that goes against what we've been told not to do in our career but truth is the louder you are, the more visibility you get

    I haven't been denied a promotion so far due to my performance, but I am also approaching / at the junior managerial level where i think my frustration will start to intensify.

  • Hardwood198 on 11/04/2023 - 08:41

    There is definitely hope for OP. First step in any process is to ask why and understand what went wrong. I think the replies on this chat (taken with a heap of salt) do shine some light on why he/she wasn't promoted.

  • pr0o on 11/04/2023 - 08:56
    +1

    Happened to me last year. Technical Team Lead was not handed to me even though I was the Escalation Engineer for all the tech related stuff. I was sad at first, but looking at the person who got it and the amount of stress he goes through. I am thankful that I did not get it.

    His communication skills are better than me, and company needed someone who could have monthly meetings with the clients so thatswhy he got the promotion but I am pretty sure his pay is more or less same as me :D

  • ozbren on 11/04/2023 - 09:12

    I'm an introverted manager, but I need to adapt to whatever situation arises and sometimes being an introvert is not what is needed. I went from IC to manager.

    In my role, the two most important things a manager does is results and relationships. So whatever it takes to get the results for the company, while maintaining good relationships to get it done. You don't need to be inauthentic but you do need to know and do what it takes to get something done.

    Lastly, if you really want to be a manager you need to let them know (sounds like you've done this) then you need to take steps to show you want it. Training of some sort or asking for manager tasks or taking on more. If they can't give you a clear path or keep telling you you're not 'managerial' material, look for a team lead role at the same or another company (or if you can go straight into a manager role - but this is tough because of lack of experience)

  • The Wololo Wombat on 11/04/2023 - 09:28
    +1

    You seem to believe that being a manager is about being hard-working an efficient at the work. Being a manager is about navigating the complexities of people.

  • Cave Fire on 11/04/2023 - 09:49

    O.P : Office Politics. Surprising what goes on behind the scenes. Other person could be talking shop while you're around. Then giving opinions etc while you're not around.

  • FallaM on 11/04/2023 - 10:16

    No

    If you are quiet, introverted - People will actually assume you are a mean person amid other bad assumptions. Seriously, it sucks

    • The Wololo Wombat on 12/04/2023 - 18:02

      Sounds like you have mean and bad assumptions about others…? Hmmm…. projecting?

  • Limitless on 11/04/2023 - 10:20
    +1

    Google of Susan Cain

    https://youtu.be/c0KYU2j0TM4

    https://susancain.net/book/quiet/

  • moo on 11/04/2023 - 10:24

    There is a different way of looking at it. I'd use the coin analogy, as an introvert, you'd start the day with say 5x coins, and each time you perform something extroverted (e.g. presenting), you draw down on those coins. As you draw down, you will become more exhausted as this is stretching an introvert's behavioural norms. Whereas, extroverts start the day with 0 coin, and the more extroverted activities they perform, the more their coin jar will fill up. The energy shift differs.

    To be honest, having a good balance of introverts and extroverts is key here. Too many extroverted managers could mean that there is less of an opportunity to listen and contemplate. The social norm says that you have to be outgoing and extroverted to get anywhere in life, so maybe it is time to rethink and reflect on what the balance should be, rather than what is socially 'acceptable'.

    Do not change who you are, focus on your strengths and work on your 'weaknesses'. You can be a good manager AND be introverted, or somewhere in between ('Extroverted' Introvert).

    Couple of items to consider for your 'action plan:
    * Get a mentor/coach or 2. Some from who inspires you at work and outside of work.
    * Join your local ToastMasters

    Just my 2 cents.

  • nightmarez3k on 11/04/2023 - 10:34

    If your a quiet person don't expect to become a manager/leader.

    I accepted this and become a technical specialist instead. I get paid as much as a manager and more than team leader. Not sure if I'll be able to leapfrog into a Director role one day until is Technical Director role.

    Do not accept to become a pleb worker if you have the skills and capabilities.

  • apple2016 on 11/04/2023 - 10:36

    I was the quiet achiever type who needed to be more vocal.

    You need to be vocal and assertive enough to take credit where its due. No its not chit chat with colleagues. Rather being assertive and letting the top management know of your achievements and take /demand credit for them.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join