There may have been a time when titles meant something, when there was some consensus around the difference between a Director and a Vice President. Those days, if they ever existed to begin with, are over.
In her December 17 Washington Post column "President, or Decider-In-Chief", Amy Joyce writes about the proliferation of titles in today's workplace. She, like many others, believes that the creative title tide turned back in the boom of the late 90's:
The dot-com boom was the start of major title creativity for many workplaces. No longer were there human resource directors. Instead: chief people officers. Steve Jobs called himself chief know-it-all. And workers at Wal-Mart and other stores were no longer employees, but rather associates.
The article also points to the result of a recent Korn Ferry survey of 279 executives where 42% of respondents said that they have seen a rise in the practice of awarding inflated titles to retain top talent. Face it: titles have a kind of capital of their own. They can provide a way to reward an employee when the financial means of doing so aren't available.
Most compensation and staffing professionals, as they work to value and fill the jobs, have learned to look at titles with a somewhat jaded eye, focusing instead on job scope, responsibilities and qualifications. Job titles, according to Brad Patrick, senior vice president of human resources at Sara Lee Food & Beverage, matter "very little". He says "We really underscore the importance of writing a clear, concise résumé. The titles? We look beyond those."
Comments