The Incompetence Principle Peter: The "Useless Boss"

Too often, salaried or low-profile employees wonder how the former partner and, is eventually promoted to a higher or boss position, ends up becoming so incompetent or inefficient. This curious but common phenomenon is known as Peter's incompetence, a concept that was born in the United States at the end of the 20th century.

Laurence J. Peter (1919 - 1990), was a pedagogue, teacher and writer of the famous Peter principle, or Peter's incompetence, whose conceptual base explicitly resides in the administrative hierarchies in the world of work. In other words, the author analyzed the meritocratic structures and methods that promote the promotion of a company or economic organization.

• Related article: "Work and organizational psychology: a profession with a future"

What is the principle of Peter's incompetence?

As we have pointed out in the introduction, the Peter principle (formally referred to as the useless boss theory) states and denounces the malpractice that mercantile companies have in their system of promotion and promotions of the most important employees competent. He categorically rejects this idea since, according to his study, it supposes

the disability and lack of resolution skills for a worker who assumes the position of maximum responsible, or high-ranking with many parts of the organization below their position of power.

In other words, Peter's principle of incompetence poses a paradoxical situation in which the organization functions despite the inability of senior officials.

So far all of the above sounds familiar, right? There is a problem that spreads in all societies and in all business areas, where the business is governed by a pyramidal structure that ends up failing in its attempt to culminate. Skilled workers are mistakenly placed in positions that do not correspond, that end up not being to their liking or that are directly too difficult.

• You may be interested: "Useful psychological keys to improve business leadership"

Why does this phenomenon occur in companies?

According to Laurence, it is inevitable that there will come that high point in our professional career that ends with herself. No matter how excellent and privileged an employee is, the cap will come, for one cause or the other, but above all, because the moment comes when our abilities no longer have the capacity for development.

Peter himself declared: “in a hierarchy, every employee tends to rise to their level of incompetence. The cream rises until it is cut ”. It is the best way to reflect the principle of useless boss. We all have a capacity limit, to withstand pressure, to assume responsibilities and obligations. Often times, that model employee is overwhelmed when they change their area of ​​action.

Another very obvious reason is the simple fear of rejecting change. In these cases, it is when a worker refuses to accept that he is not cut out for that position and accepts the offer of his 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 arrive.

Is Peter syndrome applicable today?

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

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

• Related article: "Personnel selection: 10 keys to choosing the best employee"

How to avoid job incompetence?

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

Returning to the previous point, companies invest great efforts in including a team of human resources that avoid including less competent people on the staff. A task that previously fell to the boss or manager, who, at a general level, can extract little from psychology of a person to know if she is engaged, if she is really motivated or if she wants to promote herself in the company.

That said, those responsible for the HR department can and should reduce the symptom described by the Peter principle, even resorting to the demotion of a promoted employee to his initial position (a fact that before practically a chimera) without having to sanction or fire him, which has greatly facilitated the dynamics of Internal promotion.

To consolidate promotional success, firms include very seductive training packages, motivating employees with a more direct involvement in decisions important within the company, reward the commitment to language courses or courses of interest to each employee and, in addition, they ensure that the hierarchy is horizontal and not vertical.