A “normal” corporate hierarchy is a triangle. Lots of positions along the bottom, very few positions along the top. As far as career paths are concerned, doesn’t this imply that most paths are dead ends? Is this why so many organisations push an “upwards or out” career “development” policy – because that know that most people moving up the ranks will have nowhere to go but out?

Am I being too cynical too early in the year?

I blame The Cluetrain Manifesto by Levine, Locke, Searls and Weinberger.