The Peter Principle revisited
Saturday, April 26, 2014 at 07:32AM
The Peter Principle: people will tend to be promoted until they reach their "position of incompetence." Laurence J. Peter.
I've been thinking about the Peter Principle* a lot this spring. It's the time of year many in education start looking for greener career pastures.
When most people think about the Peter Principle it is as an explanation for why people are not good at their jobs. I've never been a total believer in Peter Principle, working with many people who know themselves, appreciate their personal skill sets, and strive to do the best job possible rather than climb a career level until they find themselves unable to perform well. I'd put most classroom teachers and librarians in this category - they like what they do, feel competent doing it, and know they are making a difference in the world.
What I am bedeviled with are those wonderful people with whom I work who are career climbers and who have not yet reached their level of incompetence. These are younger, early or mid-career people who do great work at their current position and are looking for more responsibility, more challenge, and possibly more prestige, if not better pay.
As a supervisor and faithful district employee, I should be doing everything in my power to keep these folks where they are because they benefit the district. In creating a positive, flexible work environment, not micro-managing, and empowering whenever possible, I am proactive in this regard.
But I also recognize that in an organization/department of our size, career paths are rather stunted. If a person wants more responsibility and greater remuneration, he/she will probably have to move elsewhere. I've long come to accept that we are sort of a farm team for bigger schools and even the private sector in producing good tech people.
So when people in my department talk to me about other positions they've applied for, my question is always: "Will this new job offer you the opportunity to stretch, to grow, to be challenged?" and remind them that one has to make a hell of a lot more money to see much difference in the individual paycheck. If the job is bigger than the one they have, I'll do what I can to help them get it.
Doesn't everyone deserve the chance to rise to the level of their incompetence?
Any tips for keeping career climbers when you can't offer more pay or a lot more responsibility?
*The 1969 book The Peter Principle is now available as an e-book. I am going to re-read it.
See also:
Peter's Laws (The Creed of the Sociopathic Obsessive Compulsive)
Reader Comments (5)
If you can't at least offer them more responsibility and prestige, don't try to keep them. Encourage everyone, EVERYONE to grow to their full potential, even if it means you need to rehire. If they hit a ceiling where they are and can't go past it, they will just grow frustrated and that stellar job performance will suffer eventually. No one is served by trying to keep someone in a position that is not the right fit.
Hi ksol,
Yup. I don't think we have much hope of keeping those who don't want to stay anyhow. Why not help them along their career path. I try to be nice because I never know but I maybe working for them someday!
Doug
Being in a small, rural environment, retention is certainly an issue for us as well. We have 'incentive' pay, based on a training program which could take several years to complete. Typically, they don't stay around that long, but if they did, they could do my job.
Our strongest tool is atmosphere and attitude. We're flexible any time they need time off, and we have social things we do. Sometimes it's helping them move, or a pizza lunch, perhaps a game night at my house. We don't let them work too much, and be sure to praise their successes.
We don't tier our techs from helpdesk on up to director. Everyone does a little of everything, so we don't burn out. I take my turn, spending 1 day a week onsite doing end-user support, and answering phones when needed. Everyone needs a project to look forward to or 'geek out' on to balance the frustrations.
So far, I'm able to retain guys for 3-6 years, which seems better than average, considering the private sector will snatch them up with a healthy raise. When they're ready, I always support them leaving.
Josh,
We're in a similar situation, but I am guessing our city of even 50,000 has a larger talent pool - but more job options than our rural neighbors. I like the description of your work atmosphere. There are more rewards than pay!
Doug
So true, even today.
Thank You for your posts.