Having a Clear Understanding of How To Get Ahead In The Workplace Promotes Stability

Having a clear idea of how to get ahead in the workplace promotes stability. The opposite does not. We'll look at some examples to see why. As always, our guide will be The Rule of St. Benedict. Let's begin.

Organizations have different ways of ranking, rewarding, or advancing the careers of their members. I've worked in companies where your connections within the organization played a significant role in your future; at others where connections mattered not so much. I remember hearing my father, a blue collar guy, talk about how "seniority" governed pay and advancement in one of the shops where he worked. It far outweighed skill or performance. On the other hand, there are some sane places where merit sometimes trumps all. Or maybe some combination of one or more of the above - or other factors - might fall into the mix.

The way companies reward workers - in the form of pay or promotion - is part of the "culture" of any company. When you seek to work at a given company, it's good to know their culture, especially concerning pay and promotion. You don't want to walk in to a shop believing your superior skills and performance will inevitably get you where you want to go, unless you've got some assurance the company functions on that basis. 

You might have already sniffed out where we're going with this. Misunderstandings based on how workers are rewarded can be disruptive to the workplace. We're looking for ways to promote order and stability in the workplace, so we need to be aware of this.

The same situation holds in a monastery. So The Rule of St. Benedict takes the time to discuss this. St. Benedict here combines his understanding of human nature with his supreme management skills. He also makes it clear that the big boss - in a monastery the abbot - ultimately bears the responsibility to be just and to make clear the circumstances that could lead to any advancement in status in the community.

"The brethren shall keep their order in the monastery according to the date of their entry, or according to the merit of their lives and as the abbot shall determine. Yet the abbot must not disturb the flock committed to him, nor by an exercise of arbitrary authority ordain anything unjustly; but let him always consider that he will have to render to God an account of all his judgements and deeds...on no occasion whatever should age distinguish the brethren and decide their order; for Samuel and Daniel, though young, judged their elders. Therefore, excepting those already mentioned, whom the abbot has by special decision promoted or for definite reasons degraded, all shall take their order according to the time of their entry..."

A well-run monastery or business establishes a basic understanding of a path of advancement and how rewards will be doled out. If not, the monks and workers are left wondering and the bosses wind up exercising a level of discretion that lends itself to being somewhat arbitrary. Not that every boss's decision to reward has no thought behind it. But shouldn't that decision reference some sort of policy that guides the decision?

In a previous employment, options on company stock were typically reserved for senior management. Occasionally a few - very few - options were dribbled out for us worker bees. Since getting these typically represented real money at some point, I inquired how I might qualify for more options. The answers I got were quite hazy. I would need to get promoted to "x" position. Okay, so how could I qualify for that? Again, hazy. After a lengthy (albeit civilized) exchange, it became clear that I was not part of the privileged class of special people in line for the promotions I sought and likely would never be. There were certain backgrounds and connections that provided entré into the exalted few. I had neither.

Now, had I been aware of this arrangement, it would have cut down on the level of frustration I felt in being "left out" of this reward for good work. I was someone who produced quite effectively, indeed in the top level of producers. I had thought I might merit consideration based on my production. But because there was no baseline or clear understanding of how all this worked, and the explanation was so disingenuous, I eventually worked my way to a better position - at another company.

In this case, management did not promote stability in the workplace.

Of course, we all - both myself and the former company - survived. But I frankly would have been just as happy to keep being a good employee where I was. 

So I think we can see why St. Benedict takes the trouble to lay all this out with a high degree of specificity. He takes seriously the desire to promote stability. My former company obviously did not.