Leveraging Leadership

Listener Question: Defining VP Roles and Titles for Growing Teams

• Emily Sander • Season 1 • Episode 202

Share episode

Emily answers a listener’s question about job titles in a growing 50-person company, giving advice on moving beyond generic VP roles and considering more specific titles like VP of Operations or Chief of Staff. She explains the importance of planning for future growth, staying flexible with titles, and being mindful of internal dynamics when making these decisions. She also shares cautionary tales about people getting attached to their job titles.


Links Mentioned:

 

Free Resources:

 

Get in Touch With Emily:

 

Who Am I?

If we haven’t yet before - Hi👋 I’m Emily, Chief of Staff turned Executive Leadership Coach. After a thrilling ride up the corporate ladder, I’m focusing on what I love - working with people to realize their professional and personal goals. Through my videos here on this channel, books, podcast guest spots, and newsletter, I share new ideas and practical and tactical tools to help you be more productive and build the career and life you want. 

 

Time Stamps:

00:56 Importance of Structure at 50 Employees
01:35 Specific Titles and Chief of Staff Role
02:21 Planning for Future Growth
03:15 Reverse Engineering Titles
04:02 Considering Team Dynamics and Flexibility
06:46 Motivations Behind Title Changes
08:03 Conclusion and Contact Information

emily-sander_1_07-29-2025_081745:

All right, listener question from anonymous who asks, we are a small 50 employees, but growing company and struggling to identify the correct quote unquote terms for our job titles and identifying what each VP should do. We have four VPs with that title only and have been this way for nearly three years. We are trying to figure out if we need a chief of staff, VP of operations, et cetera, what resources or recommendations would you have to help us make progress with these decisions? Okay, so this is a good, this is a good question because at around 50 employees is kind of. An inflection point where you do wanna start building some structure, and I don't wanna say layers necessarily, but it's where you, it's where you can't just pop over the top of the cubicle and, Hey Bob, I have a question for you, and everyone kind of knows what's up, 50 employees. You gotta start building in some structure there and help professionalize and grow the business so. It sounds like the way I read this, your little sentence in the middle here is we have four VPs with that title only, so they're just called vice presidents, not of anything. So some things to think about here. One. So the short answer to your question is one, yes, I would add more specific titles than just VP. I, of course, am gonna make the argument for chief of staff that there should be a chief of staff at this, at this stage of the company. I think that could add a lot of value to the majority of companies now without in depth, detailed, rigorous analysis of your company and business model and leadership team makeup, et cetera, et cetera. I can't a hundred percent guarantee that, but I would say in the majority of cases, you're gonna want a chief of staff and can get a lot of benefit out of that. If you get the right person in that role and if you set that role up well, so other things to consider if you are continuing to grow or you or you project or plan, or hope that you will continue to grow. You can start thinking about what does the company look like and what does the team structure look like 12 months from now, 18 months from now, 24 months from now. Further, if you have that roadmap ahead of you, you can also take things like what is the average tenure of an executive at our company? Let's just say it's. Two years, for example, like two years is the average tenure that an executive, a VP, and above will stay at the company. Okay? So what does it look like in two years? What do we project the teams are gonna look like in two years? For example, it might be, um, our product team should be growing. Should be like three x in two years. Like maybe that's kind of where you need the growth in people. It might be our sales team would need to expand globally in order to support what we're trying to do in, in two or three years time, whatever, whatever that that looks like for you. And then I would kind of do a reverse engineer exercise and, and the example that's coming to mind is, for instance, I would not. Create a VP of technology right now when really that person is like a manager of the help desk. Then in a year from now, or in two years from now when you might need to hire an actual VP of technology? Well, that title and spot is kind of already taken. So you can get creative and get kind of swirly with titles and you know, overinflate certain things and call certain things something else where no one quite knows what that mean, but I guess they do that in real life. So we kind of figure it out as we go. So those are some things to think about. It also might be, okay, where, where will we need? Additional layers of support may be mid-level management, maybe additional VP or SVP. Where does it make sense to have those future inflection points thought through? And it might be the case where it's like, Emily, like we don't know what's happening in like three months from now, let alone two or three years from now, which is totally fine. I think if you're coming to the point where you're starting to ask the questions, do we need further titling for our, for VPs that are just VPs? And you're sensing that, then I would say. Go along with that intuition. At least have some discussions around that. Are people unclear? Are people unhappy with their titles? Is it external folks who need more clarity and direction about who they're talking to? Is it internal? Like, what is the impetus for, for that discussion? I think it's a good discussion to have. What else? Let me read this question and scan it again. Uh, a small company growing, struggling to identify correct terms, um. Yeah, the correct terms. Um, if that's, that, can, that word can mean a different thing. So it can mean, Emily, should we be calling folks, VPs? Should we be calling them VP of something? I'm trying to figure out like different ways that you might be asking that question. Um. Figure out if we need chief of staff, VP of operations. Yeah. I would say like VP of operations. Like what? What are you the vice president of? I think that. Another thing to think about. These are kind of cautionary tales, but things that I've seen over and over again is some people, not all, not all, but some people get real touchy about their title, like real touchy about their title and their title in comparison to other people. If, if they're a vp, then why am I not a vp? Um, if you're calling that a vp, you know what's, what's an SVP? Like, how can I do a good job? How can I be a top performer? All these types of things. So. 50 employees. Again, this stuff will start happening most likely, especially as you continue to grow. So just keep these things in mind and maybe one, one guideline you can use as you go through this process is what allows you to be flexible and have options and optionality as you move forward versus locking yourself in to something like, okay, we've made this title so concrete and so definitive, and so. Specific in, in almost a detrimental way versus something that gives us a little more flexibility in the future. So those are some things to think about. I think that, again, these are good discussions to have. I think that you're at the right stage, a company and inflection point to start having these discussions. And one of the thing I'll say is make sure you're doing this for the right reasons. So. Hopefully it's just a natural part of the conversation. As your company grows, if one particular person is griping and has a, has a act to pick with someone about something, and that's the whole genesis of, of this discussion, the whole motivation for this. Mm. Maybe take a look at that. Maybe there's a kernel of truth and it's worth a discussion where it's like it didn't come from the greatest place, but honestly, we, we could talk about this. If it's to placate one person and everything else is fine and everyone else is fine and it's almost more trouble than it's worth. I would kind of take a look at the motivations and reasoning, and maybe it's that. Maybe if that is the case. It's not that you don't respond at all, it's just you respond. In kind of a proportional way, uh, where it might be not be like, okay, we're doing a huge retreat and every wall of our leadership team managers are up, are going on this retreat and we're coming up with titles and we're making sure this is right. If it's like, Hey, this person like needs a change in their title and it doesn't cost us anything, no one else is gonna get their feathers ruffled. No one else is gonna even care or know it's just gonna be this person and they're gonna be happier. Okay. That might be a thing you consider as well, so hopefully. That helps, and if you have any follow-up questions or if anyone listening has a question off of this question or it spurs a question of their own, then please feel free to reach out. You can email me directly at Emily at next level coach, find me on LinkedIn or drop a question in the comments and I'll catch you next week on leveraging leadership.