3 ms·

> The problem seems to be that someone at your company hired these people and assigned them to roles they don't fit. It could also be the Peter Principle in ef

• _7acn 2y ago
  This also leads to an interesting conclusion. If we assume that, generally speaking, the most competent individuals tend to get promoted, then those who have stopped being promoted are likely the least incompetent among all possible options :D
  • stefs 2y ago
    did you mean "the most incompetent"?
    • _7acn 2y ago
      No. The Peter Principle states that in a hierarchical organization, everyone gets promoted until they reach their level of incompetence. This means we could conclude that if someone has stopped being promoted, they are incompetent in their current position. However, if we assume that promotions are generally given to the most competent individuals within a group, then ultimately, while such a person may be incompetent, they will still be the least incompetent option compared to others.
      • stefs 2y ago
        ah, i remembered the principle wrong - incompetent people get promoted, because competent people are most valuable right where they are right now.
        • Volundr 2y ago
          Otherwise known as the curse of competence.
        • cookie_monsta 2y ago
          This is pretty much the opposite of every explanation I have seen of this principle
          • stefs 2y ago
            because it's not quite the same principle. i remembered it wrong.
        • MattPalmer1086 2y ago
          No, wrong way around. Competent people get promoted, until they end up in a position they are not competent in.
  • numpad0 2y ago
    and the chain of least incompetent really sounds rational, no? Surely moreso than the chain of perceived peak competency... which is just a gamble.
    • _7acn 2y ago
      Personally, I find the so-called hydraulic theory of management the most accurate. The crap flows from the top to the bottom.