normal degree in stat board vs ministry

Originally Posted by miwashi

This is very interesting, so people just worked for the sake of working.
But back then the pace of work was also not as fast as today, right?
Today people are forced to work harder, and they in turn expect something more.

i wonder if these fancy titles and rapid 'progression' have something to do with HR and all that equity theory stuff and things like that.

Pace I personally feel not much difference. Sure these days we get more things done in a shorter time, but this is largely due to technological innovations rather than because last time people were more relax and now people work harder. I was clocking super long hours in my early years just like any new grad is now.

Some older workers at my age feel now working too stress, but I think it has more to do with their inability to change their working style to leverage on technology rather than the work per se is getting much stresser.

As for rapid career progression now, at the end of the day to me is just a facade, nothing much has changed. The fact remains that no matter what company in what age, there can only be so many directors : managers : executives : labourer ratio.

The ratio hasn't really changed much, but what has changed is that HR nowadays are taking what used to be "executives" and splitting it into 4 or 5 different titles to try and create the illusion that their employees are being recognised for promotion every 2/3 years. Ask yourself in this age, has the job really changed much when you move from Exec to Snr Exec to AM to Manager? Most of the time the changes are very slight and are more of recognition of your "experience" rather than because you are doing something very different.

[miwashi]

Haha.. thanks for all the insights. I wouldn't know, because I've never been promoted in my life!

[hanszzz]

Originally Posted by NoRMAL

Pace I personally feel not much difference. Sure these days we get more things done in a shorter time, but this is largely due to technological innovations rather than because last time people were more relax and now people work harder. I was clocking super long hours in my early years just like any new grad is now.

Some older workers at my age feel now working too stress, but I think it has more to do with their inability to change their working style to leverage on technology rather than the work per se is getting much stresser.

As for rapid career progression now, at the end of the day to me is just a facade, nothing much has changed. The fact remains that no matter what company in what age, there can only be so many directors : managers : executives : labourer ratio.

The ratio hasn't really changed much, but what has changed is that HR nowadays are taking what used to be "executives" and splitting it into 4 or 5 different titles to try and create the illusion that their employees are being recognised for promotion every 2/3 years. Ask yourself in this age, has the job really changed much when you move from Exec to Snr Exec to AM to Manager? Most of the time the changes are very slight and are more of recognition of your "experience" rather than because you are doing something very different.

very insightful views from NoRMAL!! but i guess this "facade" isn't so bad.. people still enjoy a pat on the back once a while.. having no form of recognition could be so depressing..

so bottom line is that titles these days are inflated and best to go with salary figures/scales..

however.. if the whole title allocation is inflated, wouldn't it be the same?? a higher sounding title is still better than a lower sounding one.. its like saying rupiah is super inflated.. but 200 rupiah is still better than 100 rupiah, inflated or not.. but yup, i guess the main issue is that salary is a better gauge than titles..

should jump from private to govt or govt to private?

[hanszzz]

here's another thing.. tot of this since is it said that salary > title as a gauge..

imagine Person A (through a series of well executed job switches) has a salary which is higher than what an average person of his/her age should have.. and on the other hand, Person B stayed in the same company for years and have an average (or lower) salary..

assuming both have similar work capability (actual work and/or wayang work), who has a better chance of being promoted??
- Person B who stayed in the company longer (more experience locally)
- Person A who is a newer recruit but has a higher salary than Person B (nearer to his/her salary cap)

of cuz, this is up to each individual bosses preferences.. but based on your experience, who is more likely to advance?