the Principle of Peter , of Lawrence J. Peter and Raymond Hull, is a Satire of the organization of work. It is appeared in an original manner under the title The Peter Principle (1969).
Statement of the principle
Very employed tends to rise on its level of incompetence.It is immediately followed “ Corollary of Peter ”:
With time, any station will be occupied by an inefficient incompetent to assume the responsibility for it.
It is thus understood that, parvenu on this level, the incompetence blocks the exercise of the Compétence.
Explanation of the principle
In a company, the qualified employees are promoted, and the inefficient ones remain in their place. Thus a qualified employee climbs the hierarchy until reaching a station for which it will not be qualified. At this stage, it thus becomes inefficient which will occupy its station indefinitely.
With the final one:
- inefficient keeps its station
- a qualified employee is replaced by another employee, potentially inefficient. If the new employee is qualified, it will be replaced in its turn by a new employee until the station falls to inefficient.
Evolution of the hierarchies
Hiérarques having reached their level of incompetence
Peter notices that the more the number of hierarchical levels is raised, plus each one sees a chance to arrive to his level of incompetence and to undergo “ stagnation of Peter ”. He notices that the hiérarques ones, when they became really inefficient, take pleasure to attend:
- of the meetings,
- of the conferences,
- of the seminars,
- of the symposiums,
- of the conferences.
With a little chance, the body of hiérarques can then enter in “ lévitation ” under the name of “ top volant ”. In short, one cannot unbolt hiérarque inefficient:
- only hiérarque can it make,
- if it does it, it déjuge and admits its incompetence to distinguish the qualified personnel.
Hierarchical defoliation
Peter notices that competence, at the employees of an organization, is distributed according to the normal Loi:
- 10% is perfectly inefficient,
- 10% are inefficient,
- 60% are moderately qualified,
- 10% are qualified,
- and 10% surcompétents.
Peter observes that all is well for the 80% in the center of the curve, but that the problems exist for the 20% to the extremes. Each one includes/understands the need for transfering the 10% perfectly inefficient, but the same ones will wonder about the need for also transfering the 10% surcompétents.
The surcompétence is more frightening than the incompetence, in that which it upsets the hierarchy. She derogates from the first command: The hierarchy must be maintained . So that one surcompétent is transfered, two series of events must occur:
- the hierarchy badgers it at the point to prevent it from producing.
- It does not obey the principles of “ respect of the hiérarchie ”.
If one of the two series misses, it is not transfered.
The solution
The solution which Peter proposes consists in being maintained at a station corresponding to its optimal qualification level. But how to refuse a promotion?
Peter proposes various solutions with examples and it packs the whole in the expression “ the incompetence créatrice ”, which consists in sparing consciously or not, of small spaces of incompetence so that the proposal for a promotion does not occur.
See too
| Random links: | François-Joseph Delegorgue | Golias (newspaper) | Palmoli | Doan Hoat Vietnamese soldier | François Briouze |