Behavior-Based Leadership
and Followership
Training
Founded 2010
We support
SEPTEMBER 1, 2025
SENIORITY VS. CAPABILITY
Does Seniority Equal Capability
We hear people say things like, “I have (xx) years on the job,” or “You’ve only been here for (xx time) you don’t have enough time on the job…” but is time alone an indicator of capability? What makes someone competent at a job? Is it time, or knowledge skills and abilities?
As a brand new employee in one of the first organizations I've worked in, I was being introduced to some of my new co-workers. I was introduced to one employee this way, “Chris this is ‘Bob’ he’s been here almost 30 years, he has seniority over everyone.” That was pretty impressive to me until we left that office and the person showing me around said, “He’s been here thirty years, but he only has about one year’s worth of experience 30 times.” This was my first clue that seniority may not be as important a factor as we tend to place on it. Seniority is used in many companies and organizations to determine vacations, pay, assignments, who gets what equipment, offices, vehicles, etc.
Many organizations put a lot of emphasis on "time-in-grade," to show the level of exprience, but does time really equate to capabilities?
Is it possible that we as leaders, managers, and supervisors could be placing value on “the time served” without actually measuring or accounting for the knowledge skills and abilities of the person, and what capabilities they should have? Take “Bob” for instance…here is someone that had seniority over everyone else, but they recognized that he only had about one year’s worth of experience in his knowledge, skills, and abilities. Yet, he was paid seniority wages, and allowed to work a modified duty shift because of his tenure and “time on.”
How does this emphasis on seniority
impact another person's motivation?
What if the other employees are much
more capable than the senior person.
Let's Test This Out
Many times we tend to use seniority as
a measure of ability by default. So, can
this be a motivating or de-motivating
factor?
You decide…with the following scenario:
A work team (two supervisors and
fourteen employees) was having a team preparation meeting while getting ready to go out to work for the day. One of the employees asked if he could switch assignments with another employee because there was a project that he wanted to work on in that particular area. The employee explained how he had already spoken with the other employee and they both thought it would work, and the other employee had already agreed, and thought it was a good idea. The employee also explained the project and how he planned to work on the project, along with his other assignments. All-in-all there was a great deal of thought and preparation put into his request.
The senior supervisor who had been running the meeting said without hesitation, “You’ve only been here about a year and a half, you don’t have enough time in to make those kinds of decisions.” The second supervisor (junior in seniority) at first laughed it off as the first supervisor joking, but quickly realized that the first supervisor was dead serious.
Now answer these questions:
a. Did the employee that wanted to switch assignments:
-
Feel valued and respected?
-
Feel that he was listened to?
-
Feel that all his preparations for the team were appreciated?
b. What is the probability that the employee is going to make that extra effort again?
c. What message did the first supervisor’s response send to the entire team?
If you said “no” to all of the questions in (a), and felt that the employee would not make the extra effort again and that the supervisor’s message was one of you have to “pay your dues,” then you must have been sitting in the meeting also. Because that is how every employee reported their perception of the meaning of the supervisor’s comments. The employee reported feeling alienated, disrespected, and de-motivated by the supervisor.
Putting It All Together
Longevity or seniority doesn’t necessarily equate to comparable knowledge, skills, or abilities (KSA’s). Time on the job doesn’t mean you have more knowledge, better skills, or sharper abilities, it just means you have had more time or opportunity to develop KSA’s, but the proof is in the actual application of the KSA’s in performance. And, if someone has had more time on the job but is being eclipsed in performance by a newer employee, maybe that says something about the level of ability or effort of the “senior” employee. However, both provide an opportunity to the supervisor…An opportunity to develop a new employee and show value and respect, as well as help re-energize the senior employee to “sharpen the saw.” In both cases the supervisor shouldn’t let “seniority” or “time on” determine if an employee is capable, it should only be based on performance.
-
Quotes to Put into Practice…
-
“You go for the quality of the performance, not the longevity of it.” – Don King
-
“Ability is what you're capable of doing. Motivation determines what you do. Attitude determines how well you do it.” - Lou Holtz
-