3 ms·

How is that the Peter Principle? It sounds like he was shunted into a ceremonial position rather than any incompetence on his part in the position.

LeifCarrotson 10y ago
He failed to gain greater power in the organization and accomplish greater tasks after being promoted out of the role in which he was very competent. This implies that he wasn't very good at being a CTO. If he was, he would have had a bigger role in the projects and a larger team with which to accomplish his desired tasks. This may have been intentional as a courtesy rather than accidental due to the Peter Principle, but the result is the same. It is the opposite of the Dilbert Principle, where incompetent people are promoted into a position at which they are sufficiently abstracted from real work that they can no longer do too much damage.
- protomyth 10y ago
  > He failed to gain greater power in the organization and accomplish greater tasks after being promoted out of the role in which he was very competent. He didn't fail, as he was put in a role with no actual power. The Peter Principle is being promoted into a role you are incompetent at. He was shunted away into a ceremonial position with no power. He didn't even have staff. > This may have been intentional as a courtesy rather than accidental due to the Peter Principle, but the result is the same. I'm not talking about the ultimate result, I am talking about the definition of the Peter Principle.
- sliverstorm 10y ago
  Where does an awesome CTO get promoted to? It kind of seems like the end of the road, with the possible exception of CEO, but that position is probably occupied.
  - 0xCMP 10y ago
    Other companies I'd guess.
  - pcsanwald 10y ago
    I agree that typically a CTO doesn't get promoted anywhere. In a smaller company, the role of an executive is about growing and evolving the business as a whole, and the technical strategy and choices that allow for that. I was CTO of a growing company for the past 4 years, and my concern was always around growing the business and the company.

LeifCarrotson 10y ago

He failed to gain greater power in the organization and accomplish greater tasks after being promoted out of the role in which he was very competent. This implies that he wasn't very good at being a CTO. If he was, he would have had a bigger role in the projects and a larger team with which to accomplish his desired tasks. This may have been intentional as a courtesy rather than accidental due to the Peter Principle, but the result is the same. It is the opposite of the Dilbert Principle, where incompetent people are promoted into a position at which they are sufficiently abstracted from real work that they can no longer do too much damage.

protomyth 10y ago
> He failed to gain greater power in the organization and accomplish greater tasks after being promoted out of the role in which he was very competent. He didn't fail, as he was put in a role with no actual power. The Peter Principle is being promoted into a role you are incompetent at. He was shunted away into a ceremonial position with no power. He didn't even have staff. > This may have been intentional as a courtesy rather than accidental due to the Peter Principle, but the result is the same. I'm not talking about the ultimate result, I am talking about the definition of the Peter Principle.
sliverstorm 10y ago
Where does an awesome CTO get promoted to? It kind of seems like the end of the road, with the possible exception of CEO, but that position is probably occupied.
- 0xCMP 10y ago
  Other companies I'd guess.
- pcsanwald 10y ago
  I agree that typically a CTO doesn't get promoted anywhere. In a smaller company, the role of an executive is about growing and evolving the business as a whole, and the technical strategy and choices that allow for that. I was CTO of a growing company for the past 4 years, and my concern was always around growing the business and the company.