Peter Principle Reconsidered

 

Related imageIt has been nearly a half-century since the publication of Lawrence J. Peter’s (1919-1990) management opus The Peter Principle: Why Things Always Go Wrong.  The main thesis of the best-selling book, according to Wikipedia, is:

…the selection of a candidate for a position is based on the candidate’s performance in their current role, rather than on abilities relevant to the intended role. Thus, employees only stop being promoted once they can no longer perform effectively, and “managers rise to the level of their incompetence”.

Most of the text focuses on the negative impacts on the organization or system in which the now under-qualified manager is employed.  For example, the best sales person in a business is elevated to the position of vice-president for sales, a job which is not about managing assigned customer accounts but scaling the company’s entire sales infrastructure  The company now suffers because their best salesperson has been pulled off the street and the overall sales effort deteriorates because the new VP has never been responsible for identifying, recruiting and training talent.

Peter spent minimal time trying to understand the impact on the individuals who now might as well have a “Scarlet I (for incompetence)” sewn on their business attire.  One can imagine the whispers among employees, not just those under the new VP’s supervision, but everyone whose livelihoods depends on the success of the sales department.  After all, that is where the revenues originate.  Put yourself in the the shoes of the VP.  Sleepless nights?  Self-isolation?  Denial?  Not willing to seek help for fear of being viewed as weak?

This private hell violates every cannon of good business management.  Numerous business gurus have written the happiest and most successful members of an organization are those in positions when they feel both capable and challenged.  But fortunately, it is a PRIVATE hell.  Corporate managers, except in the instance of major failure or scandal, are not covered by the media.  And rarely are they the butts of late night humor.  Yet even in cases when those with knowledge of a manager’s shortcomings is a relatively small circle, the deterioration of the principal’s physical and mental state soon becomes apparent.  In short, the negative impact, when someone rises to their level of incompetence, can be equally destructive for that individual as it is for the organization.

This is why successful organizations develop career ladders with incremental promotions.  In the above case, no salesperson would immediately be promoted to VP for sales.  Instead, they may first be given responsibility for a regional team of company representatives.  And, under the tutelage of the VP for sales, learn what it means to motivate others, present and explain company directives and fill vacancies when they occur.

Now imagine a different scenario where the sales VP’s every decision, action, words and memos were shared openly.  And immediately become fodder for every news outlet — broadcast, digital and print.  And are fodder for writers of the opening monologues of every late night talk show.  That PRIVATE hell has now gone PUBLIC.  And not to make matters worse, the newly anointed manager has multiple skeletons in his/her closet which, if exposed, would ruin both the individual’s career and personal life.

Welcome to Donald J. Trump’s PUBLIC hell.  He is that VP with one major exception.  No individual or board of directors appointed him to his current position.  He was the one who decided to take over the sales department.  And then spent his first year bringing in middle managers who also did not understand the task or worse felt the company did not need a sales department.  He disparaged those who had devoted their careers making sure the unit was a success.  And finally, he is cooking the books to make stockholders believe he is the “greatest VP of sales” in the company’s long history.

I make this comparison for one reason only.  Not to reiterate Trump’s lack of knowledge about his responsibilities or to explain what appears to be his spiraling decline into irrationality or worse.  Others have taken up that mantle.  It is time to focus attention on those who are watching this debacle and doing nothing.  At the head of the list is the so-called “donor class” who will soon become the primary beneficiary of the emerging tax scam.  They would NEVER tolerate this situation in their own organizations.  They know the effect such a rotten apple will have on the entire barrel of fruit.  And they would immediately pull the contaminated product off the shelves.

Yet they have no qualms about putting the country and the rest of us at risk by continuing to underwrite a dangerous product.  And they wonder why an increasing number of young Americans question the value of capitalism.  Strangely, in this case, an NRA analogy is most appropriate. “It is not the theory or system that is killing capitalism, it is the people who are misusing and abusing the system for their own purposes.”

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

 

4 thoughts on “Peter Principle Reconsidered

  1. Think of the quality and direction of decision making should the “donor class” become our only “decision making” participants…

Comments are closed.