.svg)
During a recent fireside chat, we delved into a common HR dilemma: Is years of experience truly an effective measure for leveling employees? This discussion sparked a lot of interest and led me to share my perspective that years of experience might merely be a proxy for what really matters—autonomy.
Defined by Merriam-Webster as "the right or condition of self-government," autonomy in the workplace can be categorized into several critical areas: identifying problems, identifying solutions, implementing solutions, and setting directions for both others and the organization.
Example of Entry-Level Expectations
- Identifying problems: 10%
- Identifying solutions: 10%
- Implementing solutions: 10%
- Setting direction for others: 0%
- Setting direction for the organization: 0%
This implies that entry-level employees need substantial guidance and have minimal decision-making authority. As they gain experience and training, their level of autonomy should ideally increase.
Contrast With a Principal Level Role
- Identifying problems: 99%
- Identifying solutions: 99%
- Implementing solutions: 99%
- Setting direction for others: 30%
- Setting direction for the organization: 0%
At this level, a principal engineer operates almost entirely independently within the organizational framework set by executives, demonstrating high autonomy in daily functions and the ability to lead others.
The Limitations of Measuring Experience
Years of experience are often seen as quantifiable evidence of expertise—similar to choosing a driver with 10 years of driving experience over someone with just one week. However, the context of experience can dramatically shift perceptions. For example, five years as a professional driver may be more impactful than ten years of casual driving.
Why Autonomy Aligns More Closely With Role Requirements
Focusing on autonomy rather than years allows for a more direct correlation with job competencies. For instance, while a Senior role traditionally requires at least five years of experience, this metric does not account for the quality of that experience or adaptability to new technologies, like AI, where a few years might equate to extensive expertise due to the novelty of the field.
The Benefits of an Autonomy-Based Framework
Using autonomy as a leveling tool allows for more flexibility in hiring and promoting. It enables organizations to recognize potential in individuals who may lack years but show significant capability and to identify those who, despite long tenures, may not meet the autonomy needed for higher roles.
For example, let’s look at this potential framework for a Senior-level role that would typically require 5 years of experience:
Proposed Autonomy Levels for a Senior Role
- Identifying problems: 100%
- Identifying solutions: 70%
- Implementing solutions: 50%
- Setting direction for others: 0%
- Setting direction for the organization: 0%
This structure suggests a candidate should independently handle problem identification and solution development, with some collaborative implementation—providing a clear and practical framework for assessing candidate readiness. Rather than focusing on years of experience, we can assess experience based on what the role truly needs.
Conclusion
If years of experience aren't yielding the insights needed for effective employee leveling, considering autonomy might provide a valuable alternative. This approach not only aligns more closely with the actual demands of a role but also opens opportunities for more dynamic career progression based on real performance and potential.
Are you interested in learning more about Pequity? Look around on our website, and if we can help, let us know!