Tech Talk: Don’t Overlook the Importance of Job Titles

Matt MacBeth (left) and Don Inmon are ready to take tech-enabled Edwin the Duck to new territories with their ambitious vision for the Edwin the Duck franchise.

Since I started my first company, Purified Audio, in 1998, I’ve learned a lot, including the importance of small details like job titles. Titles might seem like a minor concern, especially at a one or two-person start-up, but the truth is, getting them right is essential to the foundation of any business … especially now, with the exposure of my current venture, pi lab – and Edwin the Duck.

Giving clear and accurate job titles to both yourself as the business owner and the employees you eventually hire sets the tone for your growth and keeps everyone in their own lane. However, there are also some pitfalls to be avoided. If you’re trying to decide what your title is, or the title of your new hire, here are some points to consider about the message those titles send to both your employees and the outside world.

What’s in a name?

In the broader business community, a job title is one of the first things your peers want to learn about you. The job title sends a message about the level of responsibility someone has and what duties they’re responsible for at the business.

For example, if someone is called a manager of some department, that implies they’re in charge of managing other employees, while a director might be a one-person department making lots of decisions. It’s important to consider the connotations of a job title, not just pick something that sounds official, impressive, or trendy.

Chain of command

The other goal achieved by giving accurate job titles to yourself and employees is to establish the organization’s chain of command early on. Whether you’re making your first, second, third or 10th hire, ask yourself what their specific tasks will be and who they will report to. By defining the role and then establishing the title, you ensure the title is comprehensive and specific to their duties.

Lastly, remember that some job titles are accompanied by salary expectations for qualified candidates. Before putting out a call for applicants, make sure you’ve done the research about comparable positions at your competitor companies and know what you’ll need to offer a talented person.

Don’t just talk the talk

Especially at a start-up, the desire to appear robust and competitive can lead to some serious job title inflation. What many entrepreneurs don’t realize is that the disconnect between yours or an employee’s actual life experiences and the implications of a title can be jarring for prospective clients and partners.

For example, if a client thinks they are meeting with your company’s chief information officer, and they walk into a meeting with a 22-year-old who is fresh out of college with no work experience in IT, that sends a message about your business’ competence and legitimacy. Just because someone is your first hire in a specific department or skill set doesn’t mean they should automatically get the highest-ranking title.

Don’t give people job titles they aren’t qualified for. Just keep it real and genuine, and the titles won’t matter so much, because your success will speak for itself.

Job titles only get more important as a business grows. At first, most people on a team are usually part of sales and generating revenue, but they might take on other duties too as necessary.

With more staff on hand, job titles are essential to delineate who has what duties and who is accountable to whom. Without that organization, your internal team will be less efficient and outsiders like clients will have a hard time understanding how your business functions.


Author: Matt MacBeth is co-founder and CEO of pi lab, creators of Edwin the Duck. MacBeth and partner Don Inmon were the 2016 Indiana Vision 2025 Dynamic Leaders of the Year. See story and video.

Teamin’ Up to Keep Hoosier Children Safe

Here’s some great news, courtesy of our partners at Inside INdiana Business:

Bright House Networks and Net Literacy have partnered to launch a new Internet Safety Awareness Campaign, featuring six new Public Service Announcements (PSAs) focusing on Internet Safety in Everyday Life. This newest round of PSAs that will air across Central Indiana on Bright House Networks is part of a seven year partnership between Bright House Networks and Net Literacy with a mission to increase computer access across Central Indiana and educate youth on the importance of Internet Safety.

“Bright House Networks is committed to educating our customers about the importance of Internet Safety,” said Don Williams, Vice President General Manager for Bright House Networks. “Our partnership with Net Literacy allows us to work closely with student volunteers, who are closest to these issues surrounding Internet Safety, and develop a strong Internet Safety message relatable to internet users of any age.”

The new six-spot PSA campaign is part of an ongoing commitment between Bright House Networks and Net Literacy. Since 2004, a total of nineteen Internet Safety Awareness PSAs have been created and aired on Bright House Networks. Each PSA is scripted by and stars Net Literacy High School Student volunteers, and discuss issues such as cyber bullying, sexting and social networks.

The Internet can be a great tool, but children should be taught how to use it safely. Too many students have fallen prey to online predators and cyber bullies, and even something as simple as posting an inappropriate picture on a social network can come back around to hurt and embarrass the student.

I spoke with Net Literacy Chairman Don Kent when he was named an afterschool ambassador by the Afterschool Alliance for our March/April 2011 edition of BizVoice®. You can read that story here, which gives a little background on what Net Literacy does for the community – from serving as an afterschool program for students (keeping the students safe and involved in the community) to working to reduce the “digital divide” by increasing computer access and digital literacy throughout the state.

Hopefully students and parents take heed of these PSAs and use the information to protect themselves in the digital age.

California Still Not Learning Hard Lessons on Education

Oh, California. You gave us good wine, the Grateful Dead, and Reggie Miller. We should probably be a little kinder to you than we are. But you don’t make it easy. The Heartland Institute asserts the Golden State just isn’t getting it when it comes to education, throwing money at a failing system instead of letting the system work for the kids. Here’s an excerpt: 

Frustrated by some tough budget years, California public school officials want a court to declare the state’s Byzantine school finance system unconstitutional. The stated goal of the lawsuit is to circumvent lawmakers (and reality) by asking a judge to force billions of dollars in unaffordable education spending increases.

But the system isn’t "unconstitutional" so much as unworkable. The way to achieve an equitable and affordable public school system in the Golden State isn’t more funding to prop up a bloated bureaucracy. The answer is to fund all children equally by letting the funding follow the child. The answer is choice.

This is hardly a radical idea. Arizona, Florida and Pennsylvania, for example, offer tax credits to corporations and individuals who finance scholarships for children from low-income families. Even Sweden lets families choose the school they want, public or private, backed by a tax-subsidized scholarship…

The education establishment views the case as a bureaucracy preservation problem, which evades the real problem – the failure of that bureaucracy to educate California’s children. Students only enter the equation as a pretext for propping up the salaries and benefits of public employees.

The fact is, court-ordered school spending has never translated to academic success. A federal court judge ruled in 1985 that school officials in Kansas City, Mo., had to double local property taxes to fund $2 billion aimed at improving performance in low-income and mostly minority schools. In the blizzard of spending that followed over the next two decades, students got state-of-the-art science facilities, Olympic-size swimming pools, small classes – and no measurable improvement in academic outcomes.

Voters’ efforts to boost school funding haven’t translated to success either. Proposition 98, which Californians passed in 1988, locked California into a budget-busting mandate directing at least 40 percent of the state budget toward elementary and secondary education. Since its passage, California has seen negligible gains in academic outcomes and lagged well behind mediocre national trends.

What the California case needs is a second group of plaintiffs to intervene and argue the only workable way to secure the fundamental right to an education in a truly equitable fashion is to fund every child equally. The court certainly could declare the entire system unconstitutional – and then insist that funding follow the child to any school that meets California’s content standards.

Lasting reform requires shifting from the stifling chaos of the current "bureaucracy-based" system to the spontaneous order that will unfold as we fund the child. That’s the only system that comports with the spirit and the letter of the "equal protection" clause in any constitution.

“Show Them All the Beauty They Possess Insiiiiiiiiiiide…”

Call me a pessimist. Go ahead. Do it. I freakin’ dare you.

But I’m not finding this Josephson Institute report, which surveyed the ethical tendencies of nearly 30,000 youngsters across the United States, to be very encouraging.

In its 2008 Report Card on the Ethics of American Youth, the Los Angeles-based organization said the teenagers’ responses to questions about lying, stealing and cheating "reveals entrenched habits of dishonesty for the workforce of the future."

Boys were found to lie and steal more than girls.

Overall, 30 percent of students admitted to stealing from a store within the past year, a two percent rise from 2006. More than one third of boys (35 percent) said they had stolen goods, compared to 26 percent of girls.

An overwhelming majority, 83 percent, of public school and private religious school students admitted to lying to their parents about something significant, compared to 78 percent for those attending independent non-religious schools.

"Cheating in school continues to be rampant and it’s getting worse," the study found. Amongst those surveyed, 64 percent said they had cheated on a test, compared to 60 percent in 2006. And 38 percent said they had done so two or more times.

Despite no significant gender differences on exam cheating, students from non-religious independent schools had the lowest cheating rate, 47 percent, compared to 63 percent of students attending religious schools.

"As bad as these numbers are, it appears they understate the level of dishonesty exhibited by America’s youth," the study warned, noting than more than a fourth of the students (26 percent) admitted they had lied on at least one or two of the survey questions.

What I liked the most is that one in four admitted they had lied on a survey that was asking if they ever lied. Although, maybe they were lying about lying. Who knows with these kids today?

Somebody please submit a comment telling me there is hope for our children and that I, and those of my ilk, are just cynical ne’er-do-wells who have too little faith in humanity.

That said, perhaps my hypocrisy knows no bounds as I’ve eaten more than my fair share of "complimentary" supermarket grapes in my lifetime. (But in my defense, if it’s not on the stem, it’s fair game. It’s just going to die a slow death anyhow. It’s a mercy killing, really — so you’re welcome, mother nature.)