4 ms·
"In the worst case scenario, a large number of people go "up" to the point where they're no longer capable of doing the job they're in and then go "out" after a
by msluyter 14y ago
"In the worst case scenario, a large number of people go "up" to the point where they're no longer capable of doing the job they're in and then go "out" after a brief period of doing their job badly."
AKA, "The Peter Principle."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle --
The Peter Principle is a belief that, in an organization where promotion is based on achievement, success, and merit, that organization's members will eventually be promoted beyond their level of ability. The principle is commonly phrased, "Employees tend to rise to their level of incompetence." In more formal parlance, the effect could be stated as: employees tend to be given more authority until they cannot continue to work competently. It was formulated by Laurence J. Peter and Raymond Hull in their 1969 book The Peter Principle, a humorous[1] treatise, which also introduced the "salutary science of hierarchiology".
- jonnathanson 14y agoYes, but I see no proof that the Peter Principle is any more prevalent in up-or-out organizations than in other types of organizations. PP occurs in every large company.
- jholman 14y agoUp-or-out is supposed to prevent the Peter Principle. When the PP is active, people "rise to the level of their incompetence", and then stay there indefinitely. In Up-or-out, if you stop rising, then (after some suitable attempts to help you get unstuck) the company starts encouraging you to leave (with increasing vigour). They get the benefit of your knowledge at every level that you can operate at.