Do Companies Intentionally Promote Incompetent Employees?

There is a theory that says organisations tend to systematically promote the least competent employees to management positions. 

Does this even make sense? 

Well, to be fair, it started as a joke. Sort of. 

The Dilbert principle

The creator of the Dilbert comic strip, Scott Adams, came up with this theory in 1990. He says that organisations tend to systematically promote incompetent workers to managerial positions.

According to him, since the least competent employees are more likely to make mistakes, giving them managerial posts will limit those mistakes. Organisations avoid putting these employees in positions where competent employees do the actual work.

The Dilbert principle states that an incompetent software designer would be promoted to provide other competent designers with the chance to work at peace. 

The newly promoted manager could spend their working hours going to meetings that are less important. In contrast, the employees could spend their time doing the work that actually benefits the organisation. 

Promotion according to the Dilbert principle

Scott Adams say that promotions happen because the high-level positions are not actually relevant to the organisation's productivity. In the Dilbert comics, the least competent employees are filling managerial positions because that's where they can cause less damage.

Here's the issue: In a position with almost no contact with reality, it's more difficult to empathise and participate in the daily organisation problems. Additionally, it's easier to show disapproval of an employee who does not perform well when you see them in a different position. 

Therefore, if you are very good at what you do, would you be less likely to achieve promotion? Is your skill a barrier in your career? 

This theory believes that incompetent employees will not make bigger mistakes when they're in managerial roles.

The Peter principle

The Dilbert principle was inspired by the Peter principle. The principle states that competent employees are promoted until they are incompetent in the new position. After that, they will stop getting promoted.

The Dilbert principle turned the table and argued that incompetent workers are intentionally promoted to keep them from making mistakes in crucial positions. 

Meritocracy and the Dilbert Principle

Pascal Michaillat and George Akerlof are economists who wanted to understand the promotion culture in organisations. They said that most of the promotions occur because of homophily and xenophobia. 

Basically, they believe that managers tend to promote employees who are similar to themselves and reject heterogeneity or diversity. 

This logic also explains why there is low women representation in the business world, as it's more common for male executives to hire and promote men than women. 

Is there any truth to this?

Most human resources experts and business organisations believe that the Dilbert principle is just a joke about government management hierarchical theories. 

There is no reason for company leaders to deliberately promote incompetent employees to crucial positions. 

But, over time, many of these experts would appreciate this principle. In many giant corporations, it became apparent that some senior management positions had nothing much to do with the organisation's daily operations. 

Some executives promote incompetent employees from a regular department to poorly defined managerial positions to appease unhappy supervisors, coworkers or customers. 

Though the Dilbert principle is mainly satirical, many organisations are still discussing if there is any truth to it. Do you think it's true that higher-level positions have less important responsibilities?

Source: Exploring Your Mind

Learn more about AJobThing!

Articles that might interest you 
Low Monthly Wage Has Become the Norm for Local Fresh Graduates
HR Guide: How to Create a Hybrid Workplace Arrangement
Hybrid Workplace Arrangement: What It Is, The Good and the Ugly