Promotion given to a younger man

[Whatiswrongwithme1979]

Am I being unreasonable to be angry, feel worthless and to wish I didn't have to go back to work?

Ive worked 20 years in a senior role and was strongly encouraged to apply for a promotion going in my department. As context, I get excellent performance ratings and have won awards in the last year for that as well.

I apparently did very well at interview, with no feedback given. The job was given to a man with less than half my experience, no professional qualifications and who is junior to me in position at work. He is a smooth talker but is rarely seen at work and has an uncanny ability to do very little whilst getting his team to work to the bone - perhaps a leadership quality in itself.

Im angry, dejected and feel rubbish. I'm not quite sure what to do next as it is a clear signal of how I'm valued.

The decision makes me feel like the executive lack integrity and dont live up to the values the company espouses, though I can't put my finger on why.

How do I process this and move on, how do I not feel so angry, am I even reasonable to feel angry about their decision!?

Also I think that you are overrating the value of your experience, seven years ago you had infinitely more experience than the other candidate, but now its just two or three times what he has. And were you not a director by your late twenties? If he is seven years in from graduation he is on a similar career trajectory to you, why not be glad for him instead of making plans to undermine?

Shitty employers like this are usually paying men more too, or are at least not transparent about pay.

I feel your pain, I'm at that stage in my career too, and I'm livid about it. I was recently excluded from even applying for the new more senior post, and a younger man isnow my boss. He is clueless about my area which is technical/scientific. But yeah how could a dumpy old blonde know how to run a technical programme?!

Why on earth would OP be glad for him? He got the job that she wanted. If they were close friends that went for the same job, that would make more sense but they aren't. Obviously, OP shouldn't undermine him and she needs to be professional but it would be unfair if she is expected to train him or even take on some of his duties.

You say yourself he is a smooth talker. Maybe he came across better at interview. I do not like interviews being used in isolation for jobs but that is how some companies work. I have come across many people who interview well (bullshiters) that are crap at the job.

Experience isn’t irrelevant though

It depends what they were looking for sometimes they went less experienced so they can mould in to there ways
being there forever and being a woman doesn’t give you a head start or guarantee you the job

as for him
smooth talker = good communication skills

getting the team to perform by doing very little = a good manager who has his team organised running smoothly and performing
with minimal effort

Younger people can be so much better for the team. They bring a freshness that maybe some older people don’t have.

I doubt it. It’s probably because she’s been there 20 years and is a bit.. stale.

I’d definitely want more feedback but hold fire. This happened to me - young man, older woman but I was actually doing the job as a temporary. He left three years later because he wanted to climb the greasy pole further and I was offered the job then.

It's hard but that is life I'm afraid. Happens all the time. You invested time and energy in the application as well as having loyalty to the company therefore you feel the loss. I always think it is important to hold your head up high - acknowledge the feedback and stay professional. However - keep your eye out for any other jobs/opportunities available and don't stick around too long in your current role.

This is part and parcel of the corporate world. You need to grow a thick skin and stop pitying yourself like that.
There was a selection process. Another candidate got chosen for whatever reason. It happens. Move on and quit the drama.
In those circumstances, I would leave the company. It is blatantly obvious that you got as far as you could in this organisation. Time for another challenge.
Take it on the chin and onwards and upwards.
Good luck.

I don't know if I can explain this in the right way but some perfectly capable people are kept out of promotions because they have made themselves "too useful" in their current role. People promoted to managing teams/departments are often those who are good at seeing the big picture, delegating the work out, schmoozing with clients and coming up with ideas while others do the actual graft.

That's kind of where I am in my career. I'm a workhorse rather than a schmoozer so I've probably got as far as I can but, meh, I've realised it suits me fine.

Age and gender aside there are always people who can talk their way to the top and will get any job they apply for.
I have worked with a few - brilliant at interviews but useless at the job. Have big plans but have got a new job before it all goes pear shaped.
Think Liz Truss

Your opinion would be valuable if you read my posts. I haven't been at the company for 20 years.

I agree, a diverse mix is invaluable to a good team. However, leading the function with a lack of experience means they will likely not discharge the obligations of the role and are not credible for shareholders and colleagues.

Work has been interesting this week following the announcement as it has put the cat amongst the pigeons and there seems to be a lot of negative feeling about who has been appointed.

Im staying out of these conversations but validating to hear disappointment and concerns similar to my own echoing around the office.

I agree, a diverse mix is invaluable to a good team. However, leading the function with a lack of experience means they will likely not discharge the obligations of the role and are not credible for shareholders and colleagues.

Work has been interesting this week following the announcement as it has put the cat amongst the pigeons and there seems to be a lot of negative feeling about who has been appointed.

Im staying out of these conversations but validating to hear disappointment and concerns similar to my own echoing around the office.

Excellent advice, thank you.

Expressing my disappointment so far has been limited to my husband and mumset. Thanks to those providing good counsel and sensible perspectives.

As an employer myself, I have to take into consideration the Equalities Act 2010. I mention this because I have to pay an external HR consultant to make sure I comply with this law. I can think of a few reasons why the chose him. I would have chosen him too mainly based on cost. If I were to employ someone older and closer to retirement, it would cost me more to pay more in final salary contributions towards their pension. Another reason would be leadership skills as you rightly noted that he manages to get others to work hard whilst seemingly does little himself. That can be seen as working "smart". On the other had, an employee who has spent a long time in the same position may be seen as a low-achiever despite consistently working hard and not going outside their comfort zone to grow.

Now is the time to launch your consultancy business so they have to hire you in to coach him at 5 times your salary.

Honestly - I reckon he's got connections and is cheaper. It's a bitch isn't it. You have my full empathy.

How much of the experience prior to the past 7 years is of relevance today?

I'm a specialist in a field which is 40ish years old,.of which I've specialised in the past 8 years. My more experienced colleague just doesn't "get" the changes in the past 7 years in the way I do. He's a very nice man, and very competent where his experience is of relevance, but in just as many cases, his experience is a hindrance.

I've also performed at c-suite level and have recruited staff upwards. Sometimes you want someone who needs a bit of development, someone who will challenge the status quo. When it came to scoring, it was to make sure that you didn't appoint someone with worst scores - not that they had to be the best, but had to meet a certain threshold.

You're quite snippy about his achievements with his team, but I wonder if others would report it differently.

Its all relevant - whist I work in energy the role itself isnt in R&D. I wouldn't agree with what youre inferring, that age means youre not equally as good at new technology or ideas in the workplace. I find it quite a small minded view.

I dont think I'm snippy about his management style, my observation is that he is a poor manager based in my experience of him and staff feedback. It is important to get the best from people, but I would expect the same efforts to be put in at all levels. He works few hours, rarely seen in the office and often seen lunching at the golf club.

Good for him that he has played the system, perhaps I'm envious. That said, I wouldn't behave like that even if I'd get away with it.

With respect, I disagree - it's not "all" relevant, it can't be. If you can't even filter out a few things that might be less relevant, then possibly that is part of the problem. And I didn't say age, I said experience.

One of the most important things you learn with experience is what to set aside, how the game is played, how work happens.

This isn't all to do you down about your competence, it's pointing out that longer experience isn't necessarily the incisive skill they need in this situation. You're disappointed that you or someone else didn't get the role, but clearly length of experience isn't what they wanted here.

There's no point calling a stranger on the internet small minded when you won't even give more than narrow "I'm more experienced" as a reason you should have got the job.

@PumpkinSeasonOctober bloody hell - I don’t think you could be any more ageist. You have peaked.

OP some of the comments on this thread illustrate some of the issues you are facing...

From people suggesting that you should blame yourself entirely for not getting the job, be nice to this man to others implying that older workers are by definition too stuck in their ways and unable to bring a "fresh" perspective.

Then you have the ones who claim that gender and age has no impact in what happened.

As a middle aged women I have seen many, many people promoted to senior roles not because they were the best candidate for the role but because of connections, time spent sucking up to the CEO and directors or simply because their face fitted better.

To suggest that ageism and sexism is not an issue is naive.

OP it seems that your workplace has decided that they are happy with you being in your current role but they have no interest in your professional development and in promoting you further.

Now that you know that start job hunting if you want to keep progressing.