banner

Subscribe by email (it's free!)

Your email:



Facebook fan site

RR test

call us 888-123-4567
Loading

Working 5-9

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

When getting a promotion is a bad idea - The Peter Principle

  
  
  

In our careers most of us aspire to go up the corporate ladder (with varying degrees of zeal), but most wishing for greater responsibility, autonomy and visibility.  So I was surprised when in a recent discussion with my father he told me about the Peter Principle which says that everyone eventually gets promoted to their level of incompetence.  Taken to its logical conclusion it means that in steady-state every non front-line employee, i.e. every manager, is incompetent.  Great.  Glad I’m a manager.

Barney Stinson how i met your mother 10317825 1024 768

Even worse is the consulting industry where I used to work that has an “up or out” policy.  The policy states that if you aren’t promoted to the next level after a predetermined time period you must leave the firm.  Taken with the Peter Principle, the up-or-out policy effectively guarantees incompetence of all managers!  This will come as no surprise to some consultants that have worked for some questionable partners.

So, is the Peter Principle really true?  In my experience, yes.

However, that doesn’t mean one shouldn’t strive for promotions.  If people didn’t strive for higher roles there wouldn’t be progress and indeed the up-or-out policy has the upside of making room for junior staff to grow and growing the firm overall. 

But the Peter Principle does suggest that new managers are often ineffective in their new role and take time to adjust and learn the ropes.  In my experience it takes a full year to learn a new job and in the second year you’ll be good but make at least one or two major mistakes.  Provided management can grant you leeway on these mistakes you’ll recover and likely be an excellent manager in the subsequent three years.

At this five year mark, however, senior management should not automatically assume this person is ready for the next level.  Rather a conversation is warranted on what the managers really wants to do as a happy effective junior manager is far more useful than a stressed-out ineffective senior manager as the manager’s state of mind filters down to their team.

Conversely, similar to my post on knowing your strengths and weaknesses, every manager should learn, over time, their ideal level of responsibility.  This is hard to gauge without failing at some level of authority.  After all without failing how would you know when you’re operating beyond your means or in a role you don’t like?  A more sobering realization is when you observe peers who you feel are so far ahead of you that you won’t catch up. 

As they say in basketball, “no pain no gain”, and so too it is with being a manager.   Yes, you will fail at some levels but that’ll either expose you to a new role that you learn to excell at or teach you that you may not want to progress further in this line.  Either way, a good outcome and one that reaffirms that you need not always be gunning for the CEO job.

Epilogue

A good article on what the Peter Principle can teach us in Bloomberg.

Comments

I've certainly seen the Peter Principle in action, and I know of several strong software engineers who felt obliged to take manager jobs and ended up being poor managers and wishing they were still coding. There is, however, tremendous pressure for tech employees to rise up in responsibility and role as they get more experienced - whether it's the right move for them or not.
Posted @ Monday, June 04, 2012 7:28 AM by Will E.
I have seen this a lot more with government employees than private business. Since government employees pretty much can't be fired, they are often instead promoted to a different job in a different department. It seems that government promotions are more often the result of good showmanship than actual competence, and what time you get to work is more important than how much work you do when you get there. In private business, incompetence is lost profit, though nepotism and the "good-old-boy" network are common there too. 
 
 
 
Also, there are smart people who are just not good at managing (and not all promotions are to managerial positions - ex: programmer 2,3, senior...), and then there are the few good managers who keep the company from falling apart every single day.
Posted @ Thursday, June 14, 2012 3:08 AM by Everyman
Agreed @Will regarding the pressure to rise up in tech firms. I do see the existence of technical non-managerial tracks becoming more prevalent so maybe this will alleviate the problem somewhat. 
 
@Everyman - your comment reminds me that working in the public sector used to be lauded a while back and still is in some countries around the world. Unfortunate that this is no longer true. 
 
I have less of a problem with the job security aspect of the public sector (the lack of this in the private sector causes other problems like short-term optimization and cheating) but agree that it has downsides like those you state.
Posted @ Thursday, June 14, 2012 8:03 AM by arjun
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics