Some people believe that only employees who have worked at a company for a long time deserve to be promoted to a higher position. What is your opinion about this?

A few people think that only specific employees who have shown longevity at their workplaces should be promoted

further

. While it's important to be stable in a professional institution, it is unlikely that an employer would only seek stability and not the quality of work

one

delivers as a criterion to give an appraisal. In my opinion, a promotion depends on multiple factors and all of them should be met whilst considering a promotion. Stability is

one

of the many qualities an employer looks in its employee whilst promoting a member of the staff.

Firstly

, an employee who's been in the system for over a couple of years knows its employees which help churn trial out faster.

Secondly

, the worker is well versed with the job and is proficient at it.

For example

, there are companies which guarantee a 20% hike in remuneration when having spent more than 2 years in a company. It's key for someone to spend time in a place to grow and gain expertise in it.

However

, it's not the only thing required to get promoted. Quality of task is

also

equally important.

Moreover

, coming from a different field brings in a different set of skills to the table which prove beneficial at times.

For example

, professionals from Software companies are now moving to writing copies of advertisements from a fresh and valued perspective. Being diverse is valued and is equally required. To summarise, staying in

one

place for a longer time is important to grow and is preferred, but having more than

one

skill is

also

an essential quality expected from recruits. In my opinion, there should be a proportionate balance of qualities.