Promotion & Raise Case

Name what the next level requires, match it with results someone else can confirm, set your pay target and floor, and plan the conversation so your manager can carry the case into rooms you are not in.

Structured, criteria-based assessment is strong research (Campion, Palmer & Campion, 1997; review: Levashina et al., 2014); the Context, Action, Result format used here is untested as a package. Upward influence tactics are strong research (Kipnis, Schmidt & Wilkinson, 1980). BATNA has mixed research (Fisher & Ury, 1981; Schaerer, Swaab & Galinsky, 2015). The case logic and timing are practitioner craft and rules of thumb.

Use it when:

• A review or promotion cycle is two to three months away and you want your manager to have time to support you.
• You believe you are already doing part of the next-level job and want to know what is missing.
• You want a pay conversation based on your work and the market, not on a feeling.

Skip it when:

• You and your manager have not agreed what success in your current role looks like: start with 9.2 Expectations Alignment Canvas.
• You are negotiating an offer from a new employer: use 5.11 Negotiation Prep Sheet.

A promotion or raise is a judgment made under uncertainty, often by people who have not watched you work. Selection research has shown that such judgments get more accurate when they compare specific, verifiable behavior with defined criteria instead of general impressions (Campion, Palmer, & Campion, 1997). Upward influence has been its own research line since Kipnis, Schmidt, and Wilkinson (1980) mapped how people get their way with their bosses; a documented, reasoned case is the approach this page trains. The pay fallback is principled negotiation and knowing your best alternative (Fisher & Ury, 1981). Here the evidence is mixed: the advice is influential, but experiments suggest a weak alternative can anchor you low, so a thin fallback is a reason to build options quietly, not to lean on it in the room.

So Step 2 names the criteria before the evidence, Step 3 asks for results someone can confirm, and Step 4 separates target, floor and alternatives. The case has to survive being retold by your manager to people who know your work only secondhand.

Write the ask, and how and when the decision is made. Your manager may decide, recommend or only present you to a panel; that changes what they need from you.

Strong answer: "Team lead, decided by the June promotion panel; my manager presents candidates; the budget is approved by the department head."

Ask (promotion, pay rise, both, title or scope change):

Target role or level:

When and by whom decisions are made (cycle, panel, budget approval):

My manager's role in the process (decides, recommends or presents):

Illustrative example: the roles, the company and all numbers are made up.

A senior analyst at a regional energy utility in Sweden wants to move to team lead. Promotions are decided by a panel in June, where the manager presents candidates.

Step 2: "Owns stakeholder relationships" is Strong (main contact for two large business customers). "Leads others" is Some (runs the analysts' weekly planning since January, mentors one junior). "Sets team priorities" is a Gap.

Step 3: the grid-loss report went from three days to half a day, confirmed by the head of operations. A large customer renewed and named the analyst's reporting as one reason, confirmed by the account manager.

Step 4: target at the band midpoint, floor at the bottom of the band, based on union statistics and job ads; fallback: a review date in six months.

Step 5: in February: "I would like to be considered for team lead in June. Here is where I think I already am, and the one gap I want to close. What would you need to see to put me forward?" The manager agreed, offered the Q2 priority planning as the gap plan, and suggested the analyst present the grid-loss report to the leadership team in April for visibility. The analyst also asked a panel member who knew the work for feedback (see Optional: Allies).