Pretty much every company I’ve been in or know of values a vertical trajectory instead of a horizontal one for its employees i.e becoming a manager nearly always means a faster salary progression than becoming an expert in one or multiple fields.
Why is expertise valued less?
Because at some point expertise is worth less than leadership. One person with expertise is still just one person, they can’t usually achieve anywhere close to the same results as a team of people with good leadership. Leadership is a multiplier of expertise.
If having a leader gives idk 10% productivity…
“… anywhere close to the same result…” implies that experts are insanely disorganized and can’t cooperate.
We often are.
I’ve had great leaders, and they really can be a force multiplier, by allowing experts to focus on their area of expertise.
Good leaders promote cohesiveness and keep a team pointed in the right direction - much like a team coach. They focus on strategy and smoothing the rough edges between players.
Until you’ve experienced this it’s hard to see - and I say this as a rough-edged expert who’s experienced both excellent and mediocre leaders.
Sure but “multiplier” by 10x or 1.1x?
IMO managers/bosses are there to take care of the anoying little things so the workers can focus on work. Workers can do all that and even organize amongst themselves (most of workers can). And there are thousands other variables. Question is of pay, so the question is of worth. IMO a manager is not always more worth then a worker, and I wonder how often one is.
Disclaimer: I worked construction and a bit of sales, not an office job.
Correction: 1.1x, not 0.1x.