> In my work we are constantly giving people chances to take on more responsibility,

In my experience, this means one of two things:

You're asking people who already have too much to do, to add even more to their plate.

Or

You're throwing the projects which are doomed to failure and nobody else will touch at them.

In basically every job I've ever had this has been the case. There is nothing like being given a shit sandwich and being told it's delicious ice cream.

So you don’t think people have a skill ceiling in this area?

There surely is at some point.

I'm saying this more from the perspective of an IC though, who is dealing with the next 2-3 levels of management. Perhaps it's a different story in the C-suite, but I'm dubious.

IMO it's more often a problem of training and support. Throwing people into the deep end and standing back while they sink or swim seems like a myopic strategy to me, but maybe that's why I'm not a CEO.

I’m typically an IC as well. I’m certainly at my ceiling whenever I do any management.

You can't drop everyone in that position but there is a significant number that still could do it. It is not 100% more like 50%/60% luck.

Does execution, management, marketing and hiring not matter? The best product or opportunity wins and it’s just whose along for the ride?

Everything matters. Luck matters as much as the other things.

What is luck and why assume an equal weighting? Is it luck whether you accomplish your household chores?

Of course! For example, luck may be the difference in being in good health or not, or having people that depend on you being in good health or not. If you are suffering from a depression, or (undiagnosed/untreated) ADHD, or a broken leg, or blindness, or you have to take care of a sick loved one, those are all things that you have little control over but they affect your ability to do household chores. And if you are disabled but you also happen to be rich due to a large inheritence (so luck), then you can hire a housekeeper. There are so many factors that can influence your ability to complete household chores that are outside your control, that we should surely include luck as a factor.

I hate this new cult of personality thing many are trying to cultivate.

But to that point most of the time, poor performance is attributed to "the market" and strong performance is attributed to "leadership". There is some clear cognitive dissonance going on.

So you don’t believe execution on these points makes a difference?

Bring it more local. Does how you manage your household or work matter? Where does scaling that up break?

Seems people have been very clear on this and you keep dragging it back to points already made.

I’m asking for clarification because if the answer is no I’m afraid we are in psychologically different worlds and people feel out of control of very basic parts of their lives.

>people feel out of control of very basic parts of their lives.

Yes, yes they do. Especially these days where the systems are completely failing an entire generation before they can even get a foot in the door.

Of course that matters but many can do this.

I go to plenty of homes and their dishes are perfectly clean.

You know which people are eager to take on more responsibilities? The people who don't believe in the concept responsibility.

It also depends on whether you're providing appropriate compensation for the responsibility that you're offering. I see several cases where managers offer more responsibility for a peanuts' worth of pay hike and then say the same stuff you said.

Yes. At my work place a level bump is almost a doubling of comp and the main criteria is being able to be responsible for projects.

Are there people who could do more and are happy where they are at? Sure. But that’s also not going to work for CEO.