Some people think that only staff who worked in a company for a long time should be promoted to a higher position. What's your opinion?
One of the reasons why companies choose to promote some staff is seniority. While length of service is undoubtedly an important factor, my belief is it should certainly not be the only criterion for deciding who should be promoted. Rather it would be better for companies to have a more varied policy in this area. There are without question sound arguments for promoting employees who have been working for a company for a number of years. The first of these is that these more experienced employees would be able to adapt themselves to being in a higher position, as they they would understand the culture and policies of the company better. Again, on a practical level, if they were not promoted, they might well leave the company to find a higher position and earn a larger salary. This could have serious consequences for the company, which might lose a signifiicant amount of business to its competitors.
Despite these reasons, there is a strong argument in favour of also promoting staff because of their performance. This can be seen by how some muti-nationals use annual performance and development reviews when deciding on promotion. Under this system a supervisor can set targets for an employee and if those targets are met, then the employee can be promoted, even if they are relatively junior. The benefit of this approach is that it encourages staff to work harder and rewards merit and not just long service.
In conclusion, there is no doubt a case for implementing a policy of promoting longserving members of staff, but I believe that it is also wise to take account of the performance of more junior members of staff.