The Peter Principle

Capodecina
Soldato
Joined
30 Jul 2006
Posts
12,130
Wikipedia said:
The Peter Principle is a belief that, in an organization where promotion is based on achievement, success, and merit, that organization's members will eventually be promoted beyond their level of ability. The principle is commonly phrased, "employees tend to rise to their level of incompetence." In more formal parlance, the effect could be stated as: employees tend to be given more authority until they cannot continue to work competently.
I have observed this principle in practice for years. However, listening to the announcement this morning on revalidation of Doctors it just occurred to me that it seems particularly relevant in terms of Government Ministers. What on earth does the failed Minister for Culture Media and Sport know about the NHS?

What other examples can you think of where people are promoted or hired to "their level of incompetence"?
 
Out of my four 'main' GPs, one has been stellar and the others have never seemed competent. It is totally a 'luck of the draw' thing, though. Glad you've had decent ones.
 
I have observed this principle in practice for years. However, listening to the announcement this morning on revalidation of Doctors it just occurred to me that it seems particularly relevant in terms of Government Ministers. What on earth does the failed Minister for Culture Media and Sport know about the NHS?

What other examples can you think of where people are promoted or hired to "their level of incompetence"?

What do any cabinet ministers know about anything most of them have zero real world experience and the ones that do either have worked in Media or dads mates bank/law firm for a couple of years and this applies to all parties they are adults playing schoolboy politics
 
My doctor's have always been alright actually. Never awful, some not fantastic...

University lecturers is the major one.

Yes, I realise you're very smart, and probably very good at your subject. But just because you're intelligent, and know your subject, does not mean you are any good at imparting your knowledge to others!

kd
 
i think you'll find people like that in all walks of life. Some people know how to game the system better than others, they have the social connections to find out when the promotions are up and what the criteria for selection are, etc etc. Other people get the jobs on merit then life changes them someway and they drop down the work rate and dedication that got them there and to new starters appear incompetent but not to those who remember how they used to be before the system ground them down.
 
I think this is a good theory actually, as in my area of work you can shine by doing things that don't directly contribute to your ability at the job. So you can look better by standing out for charity work and what not but actually be worse at the actual tasks. There for these people get promoted into positions of management which leads to having an incompetent management chain.

Having said that there also the people who definitely deserve to be where they are and are brilliant bosses to work for.
 
My doctor's have always been alright actually. Never awful, some not fantastic...

University lecturers is the major one.

Yes, I realise you're very smart, and probably very good at your subject. But just because you're intelligent, and know your subject, does not mean you are any good at imparting your knowledge to others!

kd

a lot of them don't want to lecture either but it's part of thier contract.
 
Which, frankly, is probably what causes them to be so poor! xD (Not all of them as a side point)

It just strikes me as a remarkably flawed system.

kd

only way you ensure you ahve epople actually involved in the leading edge of science etc teaching rather than a bog standard teacher whos years out of touch,.
 
Back
Top Bottom