The associates who have firm ownership were willing to join me three years
when I was only working out of the basement of my home; thereby showing the
required "guts" I was looking for...
So the "contradictions" you raise do not exist.
Although I can certainly understand your situation, if you want engineers to
come in with the understanding that they are excluded from rising within the
firm because they were not in on the ground floor, then you will never be
able to recruit the best engineers. If you are able to find any at all,
probably young ones, the best you can hope for is that they will stay a few
years while they build experience and network, and ultimately move to a firm
where they can move up, or start their own. Why would you expect other
talented individuals to settle for less than those you now associate with?
The quality ones who cannot find a home within your firm will surely end up
as your competitors. I know several firms that are now in close competition
with firms that need never have been created, or need never had gotten key
employees, if the original firm had more potential for advancement. But
coming full circle, you said you don't want people who want opportunities
and advancement, then you said it isn't wage busting and that you do offer
many opportunities and advancement to your employees, but now you say
advancement is only for those who were with you from the beginning, and you
now seek people who will work without potential for advancement. And, you
are interested in bringing in people so you don't have to offer anything to
the locals. So again, what part of it isn't wage busting?
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com