111–120 of 144 posts
[0] http://www.art.net/~hopkins/Don/unix-haters/tirix/embarrassi...
I wonder how many people who reference "The Peter Principle" have actually read it? It's short-- maybe 100 pages long-- and IMO not particularly good. It's essentially just a pile of brief vignettes about incompetent people being promoted, many of which feel like they were largely made up for the book. "There once was a guy named bob. He was bad at his job and got promoted. So there." ---- it is not quite that bad bu…
That is not what the Peter principle (the principle, not the book) is about, that would be the Dilbert Principle.
Peter principle says that people who are good at their jobs are promoted into a different job at which they are not as good.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This raises a question in my mind -- do any of these traits actually make the company more successful? Or more generally, are traits that are undesirable to subordinates, yet desirable to higher management, actually good for the company, and are traits that the subordinates value actually detrimental to the company? The reason I ask is that it would seem that natural selection would take over, and if a management sty…
The McDonnell/Boeing merger is a good example of why the natural selection logic is not a good model to think about human interactions.
Often, they get promoted to get them out of the way of day-to-day work and into pie-in-the-sky land where they can't be a drag on the real work of the company. It's best formulated as the Dilbert Principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilbert_principle
I once held a presentation titled "How come my boss is an utter idiot" and used "Parkinson's Law", "Peter Principle" and "Dilbert Principle" as source
Because they are useful to do the "dirty" work. I realised that when I started running my company. There are good employees and bad ones. It's emotionally hard to fire the bad ones, but if we are separated by a few managers, it's easy to make the cold rational decision and let those managers do the rest.
Its present in some aspects of nearly every field and while its frustrating to those of us who like to think that we're more rational, it is more likely a genius hack of the human system that lets us get things done at scale/speed than otherwise.
I once held a presentation titled "How come my boss is an utter idiot" and used "Parkinson's Law", "Peter Principle" and "Dilbert Principle" as source
What did your boss say about it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> delivering new revenue AKA growing the company. This seems like an accomplishment that is very worthy of reward/promotion based on the requirements of ownership (shareholders) and senior management.
Delivering new revenue today is extremely easy and too often overrated. Delivering new revenue today, without negatively affecting future revenue , is what drives a business to be successfull.