Peter Principle

The idea that people who are incompetent at higher ranks were, in fact, competent at lower ranks seems to fall apart at first contact with reality. Combined with the notion that people arrive at a place where they are incompetent but otherwise well-intentioned or benign, it makes the peter principle look almost wishful/fantastical.

In order to understand actually existing organisations, you are probably going to be much better served by the MacLeod Hierarchy/Gervais principle:

https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-...

Peter is basically describing the clueless in this setup.

I prefer to think of the Peter principle as you arrive at your point of unhappiness rather than incompetence. Not everyone wants to be the CEO of a billion dollar company. Everyone has a place where they reach maximum happiness in there career. If organisation actively asked people if they wanted to be promoted then this could be avoided to some extent. It may require soul searching and difficult conversations though.

The hardest thing though is when the Peter principle occurs as organisations grow. The CEO of a 10 person startup might not enjoy running a 100 or 1000 person company. The skills required are very different.

I loved the story about the guy who "accidentally" parks in a big boss's spot once in a while, in order to stay right where he is in the organisation.

Peter Principle is not only for individuals, but also for teams, companies, or other orgs.

Many people want this to be true.

Unfortunately, there are many counterexamples.