PDA

View Full Version : The Peter Principle


Michael
Jul 7th 2009, 03:47 PM
Apparently some new study has just confirmed the 'Peter Principle'.

Why Incompetence Spreads through Big Organizations

Promoting the people most competent at one job does not mean that they'll be better at another, according to a new simulation of hierarchical organizations.

There's a paradox at the heart of most Western organizations. The people who perform best at one level of an organization tend to be promoted on the premise that they will also be competent at another level within the organization. I imagine that most readers will have had personal experience at the way that this hypothesis fails in practice.

In 1969, a Canadian psychologist named Laurence Peter encapsulated this behavior in a rule that has since become known as Peter's Principle. Here it is:

All new members in a hierarchical organization climb the hierarchy until they reach their level of maximum incompetence.

That's not as unfair as it sounds, say Alessandro Pluchino and buddies from Universita di Catania, who have modeled this behavior using an agent-based system for the first time. They say that common sense tells us that a member who is competent at a given level will also be competent at a higher level of the hierarchy. So it may well seem a good idea to promote such an individual to the next level.

The problem is that common sense often fools us. It's not so hard to see that a new position in an organization requires different skills, so the competent performance of one task may not correlate well with the ability to perform another task well.

Source (http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/23800/)

I've always found that the Peter Principle is an extremely effective explanation of why so many senior managers and executives of major companies are complete idiots.

Americano
Jul 7th 2009, 11:04 PM
I haven't head that term, which I fully agree with, in many years. I don't think its limited to large corporations.

Lily
Jul 8th 2009, 06:26 AM
I just used that term at work two days ago. We have a wonderfully capable, genuinely compassionate, hard-working RN who was recently promoted to Charge Nurse. This woman, who was well liked by all of her co-workers, almost overnight turned into a stressed-out control freak who has mananged to piss off just about every person in the department.

We encouraged her to take the job thinking she would do very well. Boy, we were wrong. The step up the ladder she took came with the much added pressure of administration constantly on her back about one thing or another. At first, she tried to straddle the world she had left and her new one, talking to us about "unreasonable expectations" and such from the higher-ups. Very quickly, I think she realized she was a "higher-up."
That's pretty much when she lost it.

This once calm, reasonable, happy woman is now barking orders, losing weight and alienating everyone. The department is worse when she's in charge. In a fit of exasperation the other day she told me she wished she'd never taken the job. "Quit," I said. "Is all this stress really worth $2 an hour extra?"

I hope she does for her sake and for the sake of everyone else. She is the quintessential example of the Peter Principle.