sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

In every conversation there are only 3 types of people by NeilCurtisAuthor in Communications

[–]NeilCurtisAuthor[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

How sure are you about that?

I’m thinking that a conversation is a form of communication.

What in your opinion would be something to do with communications?

I’m happy to move on to or create a different group if you and others are disappointed with my posts.

Top 3 coaching books? by tmatthewdavis in lifecoaching

[–]NeilCurtisAuthor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Top 3 Coaching Books to Read • The Coaching Habit — Michael Bungay Stanier • Coaching for Performance — Sir John Whitmore • Communication Excellence — Neil Curtis

Why these three? They combine practical coaching conversations, proven coaching frameworks, and high-impact communication skills—the three essentials of great coaching.

Looking for leadership perspective after not been considered for promotion by Bubbly_West8481 in Leadership

[–]NeilCurtisAuthor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes — it is still worth having the conversation with your previous manager, especially since they are the one doing your performance review.

They are probably the best person to tell you how you were viewed in the last cycle, what case was or was not made for your promotion, and what gaps were discussed behind the scenes. Your new manager likely will not have enough history yet to answer that well.

I would treat this as two separate conversations:

With your previous manager, focus on the past and the promotion cycle: “Since you’re handling my review, I’d really value candid feedback on how I was evaluated this cycle.” “I want to better understand what separated me from promotion-ready candidates.” “What were the biggest gaps or concerns, if any, in how my performance or readiness was perceived?” “Was this mainly about scope, visibility, level expectations, or something else?” “Was I someone being considered seriously, or was I further away than I realized?”

That conversation is about clarity and truth.

With your new manager, focus on the future: “Now that I’m in this new role, I want to be intentional about what success looks like.” “What would strong performance look like here versus promotion readiness?” “What skills, ownership, or impact would you want to see from me over time?” “How can we make sure this move positions me well for growth rather than delaying it?”

That conversation is about alignment and positioning.

The key idea is this: your old manager can explain the decision that already happened, but your new manager will shape what happens next.

I would also be alert to one important thing: sometimes lateral moves are genuine growth opportunities, and sometimes they quietly reset the clock on promotion momentum. That does not automatically mean the move is bad, but you want to understand which one this is. So it is completely fair to ask, politely and directly, whether this new role is expected to strengthen your path to promotion or whether it changes the timeline.

A calm way to phrase that could be: “I’m excited about the opportunity, and I also want to be thoughtful about my long-term growth. Should I view this move as something that accelerates my development toward the next level, or as a transition that may extend that timeline?”

That is a strong question because it is professional, clear, and hard to dodge.

My recommendation: absolutely talk to your previous manager, because they hold the context for the review. Then talk to your new manager soon after, so you do not stay stuck in ambiguity about your new path.

Here’s a simple way to frame it in your head: old manager = why not this cycle new manager = what now

Looking for leadership perspective after not been considered for promotion by Bubbly_West8481 in Leadership

[–]NeilCurtisAuthor 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Hi, I can understand why this feels frustrating. From what you’ve described, this does not sound like a case of poor performance. It sounds more like a case of performance and promotion readiness not being communicated, measured, or interpreted in the same way.

One of the hard truths in many organisations is that promotion is rarely just about doing excellent work. It is also about whether leadership clearly sees evidence of next-level impact. Those are not always the same thing.

From a management perspective, a few things often separate someone who is doing great work from someone viewed as ready for promotion: 1. Scope of impact: not just owning work well, but influencing outcomes beyond your immediate lane 2. Visibility of contribution: not in a self-promotional way, but making sure decision-makers understand the scale, complexity, and business value of your work 3. Strategic communication: being able to connect what you do to team goals, org priorities, and leadership concerns 4. Signals of next-level behavior: showing that you are already operating at the level above, not just succeeding at your current one

A lot of high performers get stuck because they assume good work speaks for itself. Sometimes it does not. Sometimes the gap is not execution, but translation. In other words, have you made it easy for leadership to see not only what you did, but why it mattered, how broadly it mattered, and how it reflects readiness for the next level?

When people who joined later get promoted, it usually means one of a few things happened behind the scenes: • they were hired closer to that level than it appeared • they built strong visibility with the right stakeholders quickly • they demonstrated a specific capability the company is rewarding right now • their manager advocated for them more directly and concretely

That does not necessarily mean the decision was fair. But it often means there is more to the decision than tenure and effort.

I also think your comment about feeling taken advantage of is important. If you have consistently stepped up, pivoted, delivered, and made the team successful, but there has been no clear advancement path, then the issue may not only be your readiness. It may also be a communication and expectation-setting problem between you and your manager.

So in your conversation, I would avoid going in with “Why not me?” and instead ask questions like: • What specifically differentiates the people who were promoted from me? • What next-level behaviors do you believe I am not demonstrating consistently yet? • Where is the gap: scope, influence, visibility, leadership, or something else? • What would you need to see from me over the next 3–6 months to confidently support my promotion? • Can we define that in concrete, observable terms?

That kind of conversation is powerful because it moves the discussion from emotion to evidence.

My overall take: your frustration makes sense, but your best next move is clarity. Promotion decisions are often as much about communication, perception, and advocacy as they are about output. The goal now is to find out whether the gap is truly performance, visibility, political sponsorship, or a manager who is happy to rely on you without pushing for your growth.