A Bad Idea: The Peter Principle!
Posted by kennc at 16:13, 06 Sep 2005For those that are unfamiliar with this idea that was conceived by liberal psychiatrists and psychologists over 50 years ago. The Peter Principle basically states that:
People should be promoted to their highest level of incompetence instead of their highest level of competence.
This rule has been followed in the U.S. and many other countries. In effect it puts incompetent people incharge of competent people. I have always disagreed with this idea. The consequences of it are painfully obvious in the world today. Look at what happened in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Look at the pathetic efforts that are being made to solve the problems in the world. Look at the destructive practices of businesses that are destroying the good name of Capitalism. Look at the over paid incompetent corporate executives who prey on the under paid workers. Look at the the world and ask yourself, "Would competent business and political leaders have allow this to happen?"
What do you think?
kennc
Bookmark/Search this post with
- kennc's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Comments
2 March 2005
5 years 18 weeks
Guys (Nongender)
In my opinion, the "Peter Principle" is an insult to the intelligence of a radish! Incompetent people have created the problems of the world today. What did the idiots who conceived this absurd idea think would would happen in the long run? Did they think? Were they capable of rational thought?
What do you think?
kennc
1 May 2004
6 weeks 1 day
Hi Kennc,
Well i'm not sure if you got that right Kennc, as far as i'm aware the peter principle was describing the problem that often people get promoted until they fail as it where, asomething happening all the time. This problem isnt easily solved as people often lack the courage to admit they liked their previous position better, neither are the ' promoters' eager to admit they made the wrong choice. In general its the system that gets people in over their head.
So Kennc i do not understand your anger towards those who described and named this proces as the peter principle, its a handle for the consultants because they know in every organisation there's people stuck like that.
Maybe you have a better way to assess the limits of the employees possibilities- if so, you could become very very rich in no time- if you can handle that, that is.
" do unto others as you would have them do unto you "
2 March 2005
5 years 18 weeks
toxilogic
When you fail you need to be demoted or transfered into a position in which you can succeed and ego should not be a factor. Furthermore, people who fail tend to keep being promoted and this is fatal to society. There is no miracle that is going to save the world. Often, not always, executives end up in positions of authority when they don't even know how to do the work of the common worker. This is fatal to companies. Ego often interfers with managerial judgement and competent people don't get promoted; because, managers don't want to promote people that might be better than they are. Ability and accountability should be the only reasons for promotion. Forget ego or forget a future; because, there won't be a future unless we forget ego and social classes. A free market economy can exist quite nicely without ego and a social class system.
What do you think?
kennc
1 June 2004
49 weeks 3 days
Kennc
When has the world ever been any different? Humans are a greedy and selfish breed. That trait has been there since the first human stood upright. Humans are also corrupt, and easily corruptible. Nice people usually finish last in the money stakes.
Humans love the quick fix. If someone stands on a soapbox and claims that he can solve the world’s problems, then most of the time he is given a chance to change things. When he does not succeed, we replace him with another who claims a new and different set of solutions to the same problem; and on and on we go.
Define incompetent? A manager may appear incompetent from a workers perspective but may be seen to be highly successful from his / her superiors. If he / she is following directives from above then he / she would continue to be successful, regardless of what the workers think.
Most successful business leaders would not bother with politics. If they are successful they are already playing the political game well, within their own demain. Successful business leaders are usually required by their executives and boards to make money first and if ethics fit into the equation then that’s a bonus.
Religions empower people with false impressions of self importance, and instruct their followers to judge other humans from different religions. People are judged by their financial status. Class society in most countries of the world still exists, stronger than ever in most cases. The classes change name and criteria, but they continue to exist.
This will not change. This will never change. It’s survival of the fittest.
Nothing new happens under the sun.
AAiek
2 March 2005
5 years 18 weeks
AAiek
I'm saying that if things keep-up the way that they going, there is a high probability that there won't be anything. But, I'm trying to discuss this, not evangelize it. I'm not one of the nice guys that finishes last. If people want to kill themselves, let them! I have no desire or incentive to save the world and, trust me, I'll survive until the end. I'm a very crafty little fellow. But, I will promise you one thing. The poor and lower classes will finish off the rich and upper classes before it is over at a terrible cost in human life. In the final analysis, only the rich, upper classes, soft and weak are afraid to die.
In terms of human nature and the way things really are, you are perfectly correct. I'm certain that things will not change. So be it! I don't care! But, I think that the consequences of the fact that things will not change needs to be discussed.
What do you think?
kennc
24 June 2004
4 years 35 weeks
that we had before.
I have never heard of the Peter Principle but I have seen in government organisations when people have the qualifications they are promoted, whether or not they are able to do the job.
And in most cases they can't.
And this is where socialism fails because unions fight for them to have the right to be promoted.
As for your saying that there will be a blood bath when the poor rise against the rich, no that will never happen.
Not in western countries.
Because as long as people have TV sets and some sort of income and the opportunity to achieve higher than they are (although in reality not possible) they will not rise against the leaders.
For a start you have the media which exerts a tremendous control over the masses by what they allow them to know.
Did the ancient Romans rise against their emperors? Not that I know of, because for hundreds of years the emperors gave them bread and circuses and that's what our poor have today.
In Australia the God is sport.
We have massive new stadiums while the hospitals are falling apart.
The people are objecting of course, but as long as they can see the footie on Friday night there will be no uprising.
I would even put money on it.How much do you want to lose? I'll give you 10 years and see what happens.
shadows
2 March 2005
5 years 18 weeks
Shadows
People must feel secure! With terrorism form poorer countries, they are losing that security. I expect nothing in western countries except a slow denegration of society. My time frame is roughly 50-100 years. Poorer countries are fed-up. The two major causes of the fall of the Roman Empire were decadance from within and attack from without. Furthermore, the Roman army often rose up against Emperors. Juleus Caeser rose up against the Roman Republic when he crossed the Rubican River. There were numerous slave revolts, Sparticus led one aginst the Roman Republic. Most poor people in western society are, in effect, slaves and everyone can't afford a television. But, you do not understand many of the subtle social undercurrents in the U.S.. I say that with respect. The Romans loved their games also. So, they let their society fall apart and others came in and took over. The samething is happening in the west and others will come in and take over. Nuclear weapons will be used at some point! Future?
What do you think?
kennc
P.S. I never gamble with money! I would not even bet that the sun will rise!
24 June 2004
4 years 35 weeks
I gamble with my partner who has lost every bet with me for the last quarter century.I estimate that he now owes me over 2 million dollars which I am not holding my breath waiting for.I keep a tally just to show him how I am always right.Fancy having to live with me!
You could be right about an uprising but I live in Australia and I was told that due to a lack of certain chemicals in the soil we are apathetic about everything.
A bio-chemist told me this.He said that even people from countries where they are traditionally at war with their neighbours, after a couple of generations become like the rest of us.
As long as the sun shines, which it does, and we get enough dosh for food, and we have our footie we do not care much about anything enough to get riled about it.
I remember when PM Gough Whitlam was told to stand aside and the Opposition took control of the government at the behest of the Queen of England and the Governor General.
People said there would be blood in the streets.No, there wasn't.
I remember coming home from a long period in Africa once and I was suffering from some sort of shock from the terrible things happening at the time,and in Brisbane I saw that the headlines on the only daily paper were about football.
Rick and floppy and AA if you are reading this what do you think? Do you think that there is ever a chance of an uprising in Oz?
Any other Aussies too.I think Lee is one and so is EM.
shadows
2 March 2005
5 years 18 weeks
Shadows
I propose a joint venture to develop a process that will remove certain chemicals from the soils in countries outside Australia.
We can finance it with grants from the U.N. and public donations.
What do you think partner?
kennc
2 March 2005
5 years 18 weeks
Shadows
What do you think?
Kennc
10 August 2004
5 hours 2 min
We probably wouldn't have enough soil left to make much of a difference to the rest of the world. Since hard-hoofed animals and rabbits were introduced into this country they have destroyed the fragile ground cover exposing what little soil there was and a large proportion of that small amount of soil has since blown away in the wind. Good idea, but don't think it's a practical proposition!
Regards, Kathrinn.
2 March 2005
5 years 18 weeks
Kathrinn
Thank-you for the input!
kennc
1 June 2004
49 weeks 3 days
It would need to happen in the 7 days between the football finals and the start of the cricket season. With the way Australia is playing cricket at the moment, there is more chance of a mass suicide than an uprising.
AAiek
24 June 2004
4 years 35 weeks
So true
shadows
30 March 2005
6 years 22 weeks
Such issues - social injustice, erosion of Australian soil, promotion of the schooled and the erudite over the educated and the intelligent. The inevitable implosion of society. But my problem is, the world is too large, too complex. The tide is too great, and my time on Earth too short. Perhaps the only viable approach is the microcosmic over the macrocosmic! Leave the latter to the central omnipotent force who runs the joint! Let us adapt to the environment we are unable to change, and look to the good of ourselves and our loved ones. (Why do I feel like St Thomas More once advocated this?)
22 November 2004
2 weeks 12 hours
But of course, as other real problems, it is exploited sometimes.
Consider this cartoon: in Welt.de about a man who feels it sometimes. Here is the whole page.
22 February 2005
4 years 10 weeks
what a week! Now I got the metel removed from my eye.....put up 2 km of electric fence....set up the irrigation....sold 2 bulls....nursed a sick calf....cleaned out 2 silos....serviced 5 farm vehicles....shot my 'Belarus' Russian tractor with the double barrel shot gun....I don't have time for an up-rising !!!! and whats this about giving away our dirt.....jjjjeeeeeezzzzzzz.
DISCLAIMER:the opinions and veiws in this post are mine only and do not nesessarily reflect those of others.
24 June 2004
4 years 35 weeks
You haven't posted here for a week and Kat and I were going to go and search for you.Check you out, you know how we threatened before.
You've had a busy week by the sound of it.
Must be Spring Fever like my parrot has got.
shadows
2 March 2005
5 years 18 weeks
thefloppy2
I'm sorry. It was just a little humourus banter between Shadows and I.
It sounds like you've had a really rough week. Please take care of yourself and get some rest!
kennc