I work at a small start-up developing enterprise software products for global markets (< 200 people) as a Director of Engineering. I have been knocking on the door of a VP level position for about 8 months now, but those plans were put on the back burner by my manager when the downturn hit us and we went into a consolidation phase. Now, after about 9 months of hard work, things started turning around for us and I once again opened up the topic with my manager. He expressed his appreciation of the work I've done and agreed that I should be made a VP. But then, he asked me to lay out a set of goals and a roadmap for making me a VP.

My question to you is: how should I approach this rather crucial communication with my manager, where I myself have to set goals for promotion?

A promotion plan for an employee is usually the responsibility of the promoter, not the promotee. That's because a promotion means a role with greater responsibility — managing a new project, replacing someone who has left, or expanding a current job with more staff or tasks. The need for that new or bigger role is decided by the higher-ups as part of solving a business problem in line with the company's goals.

Since it's not typical for the goals of the organization to be set by an employee, we know your boss is playing some kind of game by making you guess what it will take to get promoted.

I see three possibilities here:

A. Your boss does want to promote you, and has some ideas, but no specific bigger role for you. He therefore is looking to you to help him make a case to convince other executives, and his boss, to agree on a VP job for you.

B. Your boss doesn't really want you promoted because it isn't going to do anything useful for him or his career. As far as he's concerned, he's better off with you remaining right where you are.

C. I'm a completely jaded old man and the boss isn't being sly, he simply wants you to show some initiative and suggest how you would help the company if you were promoted.

In all the cases, your boss hasn't been 100% honest with you. He hasn't let you know why you need to come up with "goals" and a "roadmap." How you should respond now depends on which of these three situations you're facing, and whether or not your boss's interest aligns with yours. You'll need more information to move ahead.

Option A

To find out if you boss is in situation "A," ask him who else will see your goals and roadmap document. Tell him you need to know because writing for him will be different than writing for a larger group, and you want to be sure to add enough context for them to understand your proposal.

If you boss says yes, others may review your plan, then ask him what those people might be looking for in a roadmap. Are there business goals that they feel are important and that, as a VP, you could address?

It's not the ideal way to get promoted, and your boss's inability to tell you in the first place what the firm needs and how you might get promoted shows he is either a poor manager or in a weak position in the organization himself (or both). However, he's trying to help, and that's not all bad. What's bad is option B.

Option B

If your boss says that he alone will review your plans, then what you suspect in your heart is likely true — there will be no promotion now or anytime soon. In option B, the boss sees no political advantage for himself in your becoming a VP, and thus, you will not become a VP. The work he's assigned you is just to keep you occupied and out of his office for a few days.

You'll know you're facing option B if you deliver a short list of a few potential goals as bullet points and he finds issues with them. "I'm not sure this is really in keeping with what the company needs." "Why do you feel that you could achieve these goals?" "How will you handle the extra work?"

All those are questions the boss should be, in this case, answering with your help, not demanding you solve on your own.

If you want to get to the next rung of the company ladder, you're going to need more than a roadmap document. You're going to need a real sponsor.

No one gets promoted as a reward for what they've done — they get promoted for what someone hopes they will do. (That's why doing a good job can result in the opposite of promotion. If you're valuable where you are, a bad boss will not want you to move up and away.)
That someone is your sponsor. If it isn't your boss, you need to find someone else in the organization. Look for a person with a new problem to tackle, and you will find your him or her.

Option C

Perhaps your boss genuinely wants to help you but is relying on you to suggest how he do that. As with option B, I would seek a sponsor in the organization to tell you what things the company values, and put those on your roadmap.

I am curmudgeon and jaded by many years of witnessing bosses and employees place trust in people who didn't deserve to be trusted. But maybe, this time, I'm wrong. The only way to find out is to make your list of things you can do for the company, give them to the boss, and then listen carefully to the message for signs that he can (or can't) be trusted.

What do you think? A, B, or C, or is there a D? Kobayashi Maru, anyone?

That's because the cover letters I see usually fall into one of three categories:

The recap: The résumé in prose form. It's redundant, harder to read than the résumé, and provides no additional insight.

The form letter: This says, essentially, "Dear Sir or Madam: I saw your ad in the paper and thought you might like me." And it's clearly a form letter where maybe they got my name and company right. If they're lucky, I will still take the time to read their résumé after being insulted with a form letter.

The "I'm crazy": This one's rare, and it expands on the résumé of experience with some personal insights. Examples range from the merely batty ("I find batik as an art form has taught me to become both a better person and project manager.") to the truly terrifying ("I cast a pentagram hex and the central line pointed towards your job listing. I know you will find this as comforting as I do.")

There are really only a few times to use a cover letter:

1. When you know the name of the person hiring
2. When you know something about the job requirement
3. When you've been personally referred (which might include 1 and 2)

Under those conditions, you can help your cause by doing some of the résumé analysis for your potential new boss. To illustrate, here's the best cover letter I ever received:

Dear David:

I am writing in response to the opening for xxxx, which I believe may report to you.

I can offer you seven years of experience managing communications for top-tier xxxx firms, excellent project-management skills, and a great eye for detail, all of which should make me an ideal candidate for this opening.

I have attached my résumé for your review and would welcome the chance to speak with you sometime.

Best regards,

Xxxx Xxxx

Here's what I like about this cover letter: It's short. It sums up the résumé as it relates to the job. It asks for the job.

The writer of this letter took the time to think through what would be relevant to me. Instead of scattering lots of facts in hopes that one was relevant, the candidate offered up an opinion as to which experiences I should focus on.

And that means the writer isn't just showing me skills related to the job, he's showing me he'll be the kind of employee who offers up solutions — instead of just laying problems on my desk.

What do you think? Have you ever secured a job thanks to a cover letter? What's your view on the value — or lack thereof — of cover letters?

"Administered resolution of issues and implementation of ideas surfaced by individuals."

"Partaking in meetings designed to enhance collaboration, identify and develop strategies to ensure success regarding the accomplishment of goals."

"Experienced leader with superior interpersonal skills and business acumen talented at building productive relationships across a global organization."

Huh?

We all know that there are more jobs being lost than created, and that an opening will get dozens, if not hundreds, of applicants. But in our fear to avoid saying anything that might get our résumé tossed out of the pile, we end up saying nothing at all. As a result, the hiring manager feels like she's reading tea leaves, not CVs. One feels forced to come up with arbitrary rules to narrow the field. Nobody with an objective statement, no résumés longer than 3 pages, no serif fonts.

I'm not immune. Personally, I look at the width of the dashes. Microsoft Word will helpfully attempt to make a hyphen, n-dash, or m-dash based on the spacing you use when writing. Many people don't know this, and they don't notice that their dashes are all different lengths. Does this mean they are more or less qualified to be a project planner? I don't know, but it's easy for me to say, "If you don't know that your own résumé is inconsistent, how can you be expected to supervise a multi-million dollar project?"

Other people have their own peccadilloes. The best you can do is try to achieve the maximum content with minimum peculiarity. Here's a list of nine things to make your résumé stand a better chance of survival:

1. Get the formatting right. Line up bullet points, dates, headings. Wacky spacing will get you questioned about skills that have nothing to do with what you can do on the job. And please learn to put dates flush against the right margin. The right-aligned tab stop remains a mystery as deep as an ocean for many resume writers.

2. Insert dates for everything. If you've got a gap, explain it in your cover letter. But don't leave the dates off a job or a degree. Maybe you're worried they'll think you're too old or too young — but at best you'll look sloppy. At worst, sneaky.

3. Fill up on the buzzwords. Yes, buzzwords are typically "bad" for clarity, but you have to get past the HR department first, and they're screening for matches with the words in the job description. Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX), consumer goods industry, certified project manager, SPL, BMN, FLB...whatever it is that matches the requirements, put it in.

4. Choose verbs that mean something. "Assisted," "Worked on," "Contributed to" and so on don't convey much to a prospective employer. Instead, say what you did: "Wrote," "Designed," or "Managed." The more specific, the better.

5. Rewrite your résumé for each job application. If you really want a job, your prospective employer isn't going to be impressed by your inability to adjust one 3-page document to meet their needs. Highlight the top 3 to 7 things you've done that match up with the requirements of the job.

6. State career objectives or outside interests — but be very careful. Do you know that they're looking for a "motivated team player who wants to excel in international fashion and likes skiing and hot tubbing?" Great, put that in. Otherwise, save the non-job stuff for the cover letter. Or better yet, the interview.

7. The further into your past, the less detail you should have. Don't have 13 bullets on a job from 10 years ago.

8. Keep it short. A five-page résumé may be justified, but you've got to make it clear through headings and organization why you need so much space. If you've got a list of publications or industry conferences you've spoken at, great, but put it at the end as a separate section. Consider the résumé of a CEO. He doesn't need to say that he "attended meetings, assigned work" and whatever other tasks. He ran a company. One line.

9. No typos. Your résumé is like the restroom in a restaurant — as Anthony Bourdain says, the one room everyone sees. And if you can't keep that clean, what's it like in the kitchen?

What do you think? Are there things you see in résumés that cause you to toss them in the "probably not" pile? Have you ever had your résumé prevent you from getting a job?

"I manage 15 staff who are scattered about. I email them since it's the easiest way for me to communicate with all of them at the same time. Often my emails are very short and to the point. It's business. Two staff see that as my being harsh and have no problem letting me know that. Example: "Would you please update these primary care providers in the database, including addresses and phone numbers?"

Six days later, I sent the following email as follow up to my initial request: "I would like this taken care of by Thursday this week. If you are having trouble getting this done, please let me know."

In return, my employee sent me a lengthy 4 paragraph response on how insulted she was by my follow up email. I would like your opinion."

One the one hand, the employee's response was out of line. What was he or she hoping to achieve? It didn't get the project done and it almost certainly didn't improve your relationship. I'd go as far as to say it's justified for you to reprimand someone for aggressive behavior like that.

But that's me speaking as a boss (or customer) who's sent similar emails to yours. I've also been the recipient — and felt rising anger every time one of my bosses sent an email beginnging with, "Please provide the revised presentation..."

Perhaps unexpectedly, it was the "please" that drove me over the edge. And while I didn't fire off a petulant four-paragraph response, I did seethe quietly. And, more importantly, I didn't feel very much like "providing the revised presentation."

Anyone whose ever been part of an online "flame war" has had the experience of a tiny "e-mole" becoming a mountain. (And yes, I am also shocked that I would attempt such a terrible pun.) Studies have shown that readers add (or invent) emotional bias that is often counter to your intent as the sender.

In this case, all of the niceties you thought you were writing ended up sounding very different in the mind of your employee.

In the echo chamber of the employee's mind, and the absence of other cues from you, "I would like" was probably heard as a passive-aggressive demand, if not a derisive sneer. "If you are having trouble," was meant as "I'm here to help," but interpreted as "I think you're a dolt for taking 6 days to do a minor task." The length of your email also compounded the emotional dissonance. You thought of it as just a quick note on a task, but your brevity came across as curt.

Lastly, the form of communication itself (email) could be interpreted as, "Just so you know, I'm documenting your incompetence."

Ouch, right?

Here are some suggestions for preventing this next time:

1. You could call. Your goal is to check the progress of the task and give the employee a chance to respond with questions — a call could accomplish this while allowing both of you to hear each other's tone of voice. Since you say at least two of your staff find your emails harsh, this could be the easiest solution.

2. Include deadlines when you first make a request. If you don't have time to call, or if time zones make calling a hassle, email can still work if you revise your initial request to include a due date, or, for a bigger project, a due date for an status update. By giving a date, your follow-up won't feel as aggressive and your employee will be less likely to take it personally. Deadlines will also help your staff prioritize — perhaps rendering follow-ups unnecessary.

3. Be conversational. Even if the first email was unchanged, the second email could be written to avoid a blow up. You don't need lots of smiley faces or exclamation points. You just need to write the way you might actually talk. For example, your second email could read: "Hi Cindy, just following up on the email below — can you let me know how far along the task is? I was hoping we could have this by the meeting on Thursday, is that a possibility?"

4. Use the passive voice. It doesn't make for great writing, but it can help you avoid sounding accusatory — and it sounds like your employee felt accused.
5. Share your train of thought. If I know why you emailed me 37 spreadsheets and asked for me to combine them by Tuesday, it allows me to be part of the process rather than feel like a cog being dumped on.

To handle the situation as it is now, call. Let your employee know you meant no disrespect, and that your goal, and theirs, was and is to get the job done. And let them know that the I'm-an-emotional-person-and-you-hurt me email has no place at work.

Lastly, I'd like to use this as an opportunity to repeat why I think even the "simplest" emails need to be revised with care. It takes time and thought to ensure you don't give the wrong emotional cues.

Let's open this up to my readers and get you some more opinions. Does anyone have other advice? Do you disagree with the recommendations I've proposed?

I'm happy the question asks, "how do you deal." An inbox is as personal a space as an underwear drawer — we all have one and are all embarrassed by both its organization and contents. Thus to tell someone how to manage their inbox could be perceived as an intrusion into their undergarments.

And that would be inappropriate.

What is appropriate to share is my own principles of inbox management:

1. No scrolling. The inbox is my task list. I can fit about 20 emails in the message viewer in Apple Mail, which means 20 tasks. Any more than that and I feel like I'm losing control. Nothing spurs me to action like the need to get rid of the scroll bars.

2. Read, take action, and delete or save. Small task or big one, if it's in the inbox, I do it. If not, it doesn't exist (as my wife can tell you about any time we make vacation plans).

3. If it's a task for someone else, file it. I find it hard enough to keep track of my own to-dos. Keeping tabs on other people's through emails in my inbox would triple the number of messages and lead me down the road of micromanagement via the dreaded forwarded email that begins with, "Hey, have you had a chance to look at this yet?"

4. One email per topic. If there's a chain of email on a topic, only the most recent gets to sit in my inbox. Everything else is filed.

5. Save everything that isn't pure junk. Which email is important and which is not? It can be hard to tell. The email with a dancing banana? Probably safe to toss. But will I need an email with the details of my cat's last tooth cleaning? Possibly. And with gigabytes of storage on my hard drive, as easy to save as not.

6. Have very few file folders. Almost everything saved goes into a folder called "saved." With too many folders, the time it takes me to sort and organize emails is prohibitive — and it often requires just as much time on the other end to locate the message I want. Instead, I rely on my email's search feature. (Just now, it was easy to uncover from my "sent mail" folder the information that veterinary dental work costs a terrifying $450 per feline.)

7. Daily scrubbing. I brush my teeth twice a day. And every day, I run through every email in my inbox to see if I can get rid of it.

8. Nothing older than a month. I'll let something molder in the inbox for a up to a month if I'm not sure what to do with it — or if it's something I'd like to do but never seem to get to. But after a month, it's clear I've got to do it or delete it.

What are your tips for email management? Do you disagree vehemently with any of mine?

They're delusional.

These pundits*, including the leaders of Accenture, KPMG, E&Y and HBSC, have lost touch with the people — and by people I mean both the ones they've fired and those they still employ.

*There should be a word for a group of pundits — like a pod of whales or pride of lions. Perhaps a hubris of pundits, a blind of pundits, or a navel-gaze of pundits?

We're all so scared we're going to be next that no one, not the unemployed or the still-employed, are purchasing anything. And that means economic contraction, not recovery.

As an example, I've been told by my daytime employer (affectionately known on this blog as Word Wide Wicket) that there's no plan to "restructure" me — for now. They then fired 10% of the staff. The message: no job, at any level or amount of seniority, is safe. As a result, I, like just about everyone I know, am not buying anything.

If people don't buy, there's no income for companies and there will be more layoffs, and around and round it goes. Here's a short list of the products I will not be buying and the companies I will (hence) not be supporting, in order of increasing cost:

I'll still continue to ogle prices and specs on all of the above while waiting for the "we need to talk" email from my boss. And in the meantime, all those people who would have gotten my money can do the same.

That is, unless someone decides to try the AIG executives who got the bonus money for treason.

A few people are bandying around the big "T" as a way to teach AIG a lesson. However, they want to indict AIG, not the recipients. AIG, though, did what it was contractually required to do in paying those bonuses.

This doesn't mean paying the bonuses is a good idea. Edward Liddy, the new CEO of AIG is, as of my writing this, about to be cooked like a deep-fried turkey by Congress. Forget the chutzpah of flying a corporate jet, Mr. Liddy would have to roll himself naked to D.C. on a carpet of rusty nails to ameliorate the bad press of those bonus checks.

And when Congress cannot give any money to AIG for fear of the constituents storming the Capital, the whole Lehman/Bear/interconnected banking collapse will play out again, only this time, there won't be any stopping it.

One Senator (who since apologized, natch) suggested hari-kiri for the AIG execs. That's a little extreme. Instead let's look at the definition of treason.

"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."

While accepting a check for more than $1 million after you've already left AIG as an employee is not exactly an act of war, if it leads to economic collapse of the country, it certainly could be construed as "adhering to their enemies." Besides that, these execs certainly have the $10,000+ fine readily available.

Regardless, Obama has to find a way to punish these individuals. He needs Wall Street to understand politics are as important as contracts in keeping our mass economic delusion afloat, rather than allowing it to degrade into an "us" versus "them" battle that will leave everyone with nothing.

Otherwise, be prepared for the Dust Bowl of 2010: the empty streets of lower Manhattan.