Academic Kakistocracy

This doesn't just apply to academia. You can always see it in the workforce. And, more visibly, in the primary, secondary schools. Good hackers rarely make good managers, and good managers get promoted not because they are good at hacking code.

My mother told me a story about giving a glowing review to her colleague, not because she was a good worker, but because she wanted her out of her hair. She wasn't fireable, so the only option was to send her somewhere else.

And most people will first encounter this in school. Where the best teachers don't always have the best titles. And the worst are always promoted. Teachers have strong unions so if you can't fire them then you can promote them. Some of the worst human beings I've ever met were vice-principals. People who clearly have no business in education at all. But through fortune and incompetence are given titles and offices away from students.

It's an interesting idea, but I can think of three other possible explanations for the individuals who rise to the top being the least adept at research:

1) The individuals who rise to the top may be the most socially/politically able - developing these social/political skills might be time consuming, thus reducing the amount of time a particular individual has to perform research.

2) Rising to the top might saddle individuals with so many new responsibilities that they do not have the time to perform quality research.

3) People may resent others in their field who are doing better research and align against them, not because they have more opportunities elsewhere but because they resent their ability.

See also previous discussion here on HN about this topic:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=793205

On a sidenote,"kakistos" means "the worst". hence kakistocracy.

Reminded me of this saying:

"Someone that pretends he is an idiot, is not actually an idiot."