When senior employees block all meritocracy

And young talents leave frustrated

Do you recognize this situation?

• Promotions always go to those with most years of seniority
• Young talents propose ideas but are ignored
• "Here you build a career with seniority, not with results"
• The best leave after 2-3 years frustrated
• Only those who accept the status quo remain

---

Corporate gerontocracy

You've built a company based on loyalty.

Those who stay get rewarded.
Seniority is respected.
"You've given so much to the company, you deserve recognition".

Noble in theory.

Disastrous in practice.

Because you reward time spent, not value created.
And this blocks those who produce results but are "young".
And retains those who don't produce but "have always been here".

---

What happens when seniority counts more than merit

On the talent front:

• Capable young people leave: "There's no future for me here"
• Only those who can't find better remain
• Skill gap: old competencies, new world
• Impossible to attract external talents: "Blocked culture"

On the performance front:

• Key roles occupied by inadequate people (but "loyal")
• Decisions made by those with seniority, not competence
• Projects poorly managed because "it's his turn"
• Mediocre results, but no one held accountable

On the innovation front:

• New ideas rejected: "You don't understand, things work this way here"
• Systematic resistance to change
• Obsolete technologies because decision-makers don't understand them
• Market evolves, company stays still

---

Why it happens

It's not malice.
It's confusing loyalty with competence.

Those who have been there for 20 years were probably good.
But this doesn't mean they're still the right person today.

Competencies age.
The market changes.
What was needed yesterday may not be needed tomorrow.

But firing those who are "loyal" seems ungrateful.
And so a system is created where seniority protects from accountability.

---

The (wrong) path many try

Apparent solution: Create "special roles" to satisfy everyone

But this way you end up with:

• Bloated org chart
• Invented roles without real responsibilities
• High fixed costs
• Confusion about who decides what

You don't solve, you postpone.

---

The 5-step method:

1. Role definition based on competencies, not seniority
   → Clear job descriptions: what's needed for that role
   → Objective evaluation: who has it?
   → If it doesn't match, reorganize
2. Serious performance review
   → Not generalized "everything's fine"
   → But measurable objectives, honest feedback
   → Those who don't perform, face consequences (even if senior)
3. Fast track for talents
   → Those who produce results rise, regardless of years
   → Explicit and communicated meritocracy
   → Visible example: "Here merit counts"
4. Dignified management of inadequate seniors
   → Not brutal dismissal
   → But relocation, mentoring, suitable roles
   → Respect for history without blocking future
5. Culture of results, not time
   → Celebrate those who produce value, not those who "resist"
   → Company language that rewards performance
   → Leadership that models the behavior

---

What changes after

Talents stay and grow.

Those who deserve rise, those who don't deserve adapt or leave.
The company becomes competitive again because key roles are occupied by capable people.

And paradoxically, even real seniors (the good ones) are happier:
because they're no longer confused with those who are there only for seniority.