[ZephyrBlu]

If you want to be promoted, every single thing you discuss with your manager should center around that goal.

Any conversations about things going well, feedback, etc should always be framed as "am I getting closer to Senior?".

You really need to understand what the delta between where you currently are and where you are aiming for looks like, and make everything about closing that gap.

Many people do not even pass step 1, which is defining the delta with your manager. This can actually be fairly difficult, because it requires your manager to both understand your current level and have a strong understanding of what Senior looks like so they can explain the areas where you are lacking.

Once you have a delta you need to figure out what success looks like. If I'm currently bad at X, what does being good at X look like? Ideally you should be able to demonstrate and discuss progress between every 1:1. If you can't, your feedback loops are probably too short and it will take you a long time to improve.

I think SMART goals largely don't fit with skill growth, because operating at the next level is about learning new behaviours. They tend to be highly contextual, not specific. They do not tend to be measurable. They do not tend to be things that you can set timelines for, like "I will operate like X in 1mo". It's a holistic change in the way you function. Level matrices are extremely poor representations of the behaviours for each level. They tend to describe the outcomes of the behaviours, rather than the behaviours themselves.

Also, the reason this takes time is exactly because it's about learning new behaviours not following a checklist of things that Seniors do. You need time to make them habitual and build the intuition associated with them.

[voiceblue]

If you want to be promoted, find a manager who has a track record of getting people promoted and transfer to them, then do the above. Many managers (and to be fair, environments and factors outside of their control) are awful in ways that boggle the mind, and no (sane) amount of effort will help you in that case.

The other method is to quit, if you are actually better than your level but your company fails to acknowledge it for whatever reason.

[pfannkuchen]

I don’t think that proper leveling can really be broken down in this way. It is more of an ape brain reputation score within the group.

I think when managers are made to outline a concrete path to the next level, a gradual level inflation may occur at the company. This is because a manager is never going to say “I don’t know” when you ask them this, even if they don’t know, and then they are forced to advocate for you to promo after you satisfy whatever they told you.

If they don’t advocate for you at that point, they end up looking like a terrible manager to you and anyone else you tell your true story to (including their own manager).

If the level inflation is not identified and accounted for, this can lead to a company collapsing via inept leadership from bad internal promotions.

[ZephyrBlu]

That entirely depends upon whether you are in an environment that takes levelling seriously or not. It is possible to break it down like this if your org and manager are competent [0].

Good managers understand what the shape of each level looks like, and companies that care calibrate levelling across orgs. Your manager advocating for a report who does not meet the bar doesn't work because it requires approval from more than just your manager.

In saying that, I think there is always going to be some title inflation and some level of playing the system. But I have found that people at higher levels do tend to be more competent and embody more behaviours associated with that level, though levels can get fuzzy above senior.

[0] https://commoncog.com/seeing-expertise-milestone-worth-aimin...

[pfannkuchen]

Leveling establishes a social hierarchy. The ape brains of the people on the team don’t care about the ladder. If you mess up the social hierarchy people will be unhappy.

If there is peer input into the grading system, the ape brain social hierarchy judgements are being leaked into the leveling system (in a good way). If someone feels bad about the reviewee being at the new hierarchy spot they aren’t going to support the promo, regardless of what the candidate did. Of course the candidate doing things influences the ape brain judgement so it’s not as if these things are completely disconnected, it’s just not how it looks on the surface.