Opinion article by Rodrigo Maia Prinzo, Head of People at InnoTech
Read here the original version in Portuguese published at Human Resources Portugal
There is a conversation that repeats itself in many companies when the performance review goes well, objectives are largely met and the feedback is positive: “What’s the next step?”
In corporate language, this usually means: “When will I be promoted?”
There is nothing wrong with ambition. Quite the opposite. Organizations need people who want to grow, take on challenges and increase their impact. Today, “wearing the company shirt” means something very different. It no longer means arriving earlier or leaving later. Much less the number of hours spent at the office. Thankfully.
It means wanting to contribute, make a difference and feel that your own footprint leaves a mark on the organization. It means feeling that the company is also yours.
The problem begins when we confuse growth with promotion. And even more so when we confuse promotion with leadership.
For years, we convinced people that growing in their careers meant climbing a kind of invisible pyramid — invisible, but very much present in company corridors. And climbing meant leading people.
Now we are surprised when someone who has been with the company for a short time asks when they will be promoted to manager. But that expectation did not appear out of nowhere.
A career was presented as a ladder. First specialist. Then senior. Then team leader. Then manager. Then director. As if each step were the natural consequence of the previous one.
It is not. And it should not be.
In the meantime, hierarchies have become flatter, organizational charts more modern and structures more flexible. We talk about horizontal organizations, flat models and distributed leadership. But in practice, we still often measure professional success in the same way: how many people you lead and what your job title is.
Being an excellent professional does not mean being an excellent leader. In the same way that a great football player does not automatically become a great coach when their playing career ends. They are different skills. They require different motivations. And often, even different personalities.
Even so, we continue to treat leadership as the main reward available. Met the objectives? Promote them. Performed above average? Promote them. Became a technical reference in the team? Promote them.
And suddenly, someone who was excellent at solving problems now has as their main responsibility developing people, managing conflict, aligning expectations, leading difficult conversations and making decisions that will not always please everyone.
Not everyone wants that. And not everyone is good at it.
There is a curious idea in organizations: that people management represents the next level of a career. As if leading teams were a natural evolution of any professional path. But it only takes a few conversations with experienced professionals to understand that many of them prefer to continue deepening their specialization, influencing strategic projects or taking on more complex responsibilities without having to manage teams.
And that is perfectly fine.
What is most curious is that this reflection comes at a time when there is so much talk about personalization. We personalize benefits, work models, development plans and employee experiences. We create systems where each person can choose how to use part of their compensation, where they work and even when.
But we still often treat careers as a single, predictable path. As if everyone wanted to reach the same place. As if everyone should want to reach the same place.
The truth is that some of the most valuable people in an organization should never lead teams. Not because they lack ambition or competence, but because leadership is not a prize awarded for the best technical performance.
When we promote someone into a role they do not want, or one they are not prepared for, we rarely gain an exceptional leader. What we are more likely to lose is an excellent specialist.
And, interestingly, it was precisely to retain that person that we promoted them.
In the end, we lose twice: the specialist we had and the team that now reports to them.
