The Peter Incompetence Principle: the "useless boss" theory

The people with the most important positions may be the ones who know the least how to do their job.

Very often, salaried or low-profile employees wonder how the one who was a direct colleague and, eventually is promoted to a senior or boss position, ends up becoming so incompetent or inefficient. This curious but common phenomenon is referred to as Peter incompetence, a concept that was born in the United States at the end of the 20th century.

Laurence J. Peter (1919-1990) was an educator, teacher and writer of the famous Peter principle, or Peter incompetence. Peter principle, or Peter incompetencewhose conceptual basis lies explicitly in the administrative hierarchies in the world of work. In other words, the author analyzed the meritocratic structures and methods that promote promotions in a company or economic organization.

What is the Peter principle of incompetence?

As we have pointed out in the introduction, the Peter principle (formally called the theory of the useless boss) affirms and denounces the malpractice that the mercantile societies have in their system of promotion and promotions of the most competent employees. He categorically rejects this idea since, according to his study, this implies the incapacity and lack of resolution skills for a worker who assumes the position of top manager, or a senior manager with many parts of the company.The study also shows that the principle of incompatibility with the company's own rules and regulations is not a problem for employees who are not in a position of power.

In other words, Peter's principle of incompetence poses a paradoxical situation in which the organization functions despite the incapacity of the top managers.

So far it all sounds familiar, doesn't it? There is a problem that pervades all societies and all areas of business, where the business is governed by a pyramidal structure that ends up failing in its attempt in its attempt to culminate. Mistakenly, qualified workers are placed in positions that do not correspond, that do not end up being to their liking or that are directly too difficult.

Why does this phenomenon occur in companies?

According to Laurence, it is inevitable that there will come a peak in our professional career that will end it. No matter how excellent and privileged an employee may be, the peak will come, for one reason or another.For one reason or another, but above all, because there comes a time when our skills no longer have the capacity to develop.

Peter himself sentenced: "in a hierarchy, every employee tends to work his way up to his level of incompetence.. The cream rises until it is cut off. This is the best way to reflect the principle of the useless boss. We all have a limit to our capabilities, to withstand pressure, to take on responsibilities and obligations. Often, this model employee is overwhelmed when he or she is moved out of his or her area of responsibility.

Another very obvious reason is the simple fear of rejecting change. In these cases, it is when an employee refuses to accept that he or she is not cut out for the job and accepts the offer from his or her superiors so as not to disappoint them - quite a contradiction, yes - or not to miss an opportunity that, a priori, will take a long time to come.

Is the Peter syndrome applicable today?

We cannot ignore the obvious, nor deny the obvious. According to a study by the EAE Business School, there are a number of worrying cases that occur in many prestigious companies, especially multinationals, in which a bad decision by a manager or executive can result in large financial losses..

However, it seems that this trend is changing, especially thanks to the inclusion of a new and increasingly essential department in a company, Human Resources (HR). Today, it is almost unanimous among experts and economists to include this department in their ranks to ensure long-term success.

How to avoid labor incompetence?

Perhaps forty years ago Peter's theory of incompetence had little response at the academic or scientific level, but nothing could be further from the truth. As is usually the case with any kind of refutable theory, this one in particular has become somewhat obsolete. To begin with, Lawrence forgot a basic premise in life, both personally and professionally, and that is that everything in life can be learned, at least in theory.at least in theory.

Returning to the previous point, companies invest great efforts in including a human resources team that avoids including in the workforce people who are not very competent. A task that used to fall to the boss or manager, who, in general, can extract little from a person's psychology to know if he or she is committed, if he or she is really motivated or if he or she wants to be promoted in the company.

That being said, HR managers can and should reduce the symptom of the can and should reduce the symptom described by the Peter PrincipleThis has greatly facilitated the dynamics of internal promotions, with the demotion of a promoted employee back to his or her original position (which used to be practically a pipe dream) without having to sanction or dismiss him or her.

To consolidate promotional success, firms include very attractive training packages, motivate employees by involving them more directly in important decisions within the company, reward commitment with language courses or courses of interest to each employee, and ensure that hierarchies are horizontal rather than vertical.