Rex Miller

The eight phases of a project provide a nice on-ramp for discussing why projects so easily go sideways.

1. Project Initiation
2. Wild Enthusiasm
3. Disillusionment
4. Chaos
5. Search for the Guilty
6. Punishment of the Innocent
7. Promotion of Non-Participants
8. Definition of Requirements

Its the 40th anniversary of the book The Peter Principle: Why Things Always Go Wrong.

The premise goes something like this:

Employees who do well get promoted until they finally reach a level outside their competency. Once reached – they stay put. That leaves companies filled with people who have reached their level of incompetency.

Over the last few years we have plenty of examples of failed plans, policy, corporations and our entire financial system. The Peter Principle offers an easy explanation. However, something more profound may be taking place.

When the mindshift consortium looked at the frequent failure of late construction projects we ran into a brick wall with this line of assessment. As hard as we tried to find a clear culprit – architect, contractor, sub-trade or owner – it was never that simple.

Then the light bulb turned on – the system for design and construction has reached its level of incompetency. We took a system that was clearly successful 50+ years ago and kept promoting it to more complex challenges. Eventually the complexity of the challenges outstripped the system’s ability to cope.

One member said, “The current system causes good people to do bad things.”

It is time to revise The Peter Principle so that it addresses the deeper source of incompetency – systemic dysfunction.

Unfortunately, we’re trained like heat seeking missiles to find culprits.

Dysfunctional systems AND getting the right people in the right chair require NEW leadership skills.

I worked with an organization this week dealing with both issues. Two years ago they went through their near-death experience and brought in a new leader. After stabilizing they have been able to get back on track with most of the same leadership core using the existing structure. With 33% growth and a major expansion planned for 2010 the organization’s leader was feeling the stress of an organization bogging down but without insight as to why.

Over two days we looked at the talent configuration of each leader, their current role, the logic of that role and the aggregate talent configuration of the team. We then plotted these against the anticipated needs of a larger and more complex organization. Using tools developed by CoreClarity we were able to see clearly that the organization had moved into a new phase requiring greater Strategic and Execution capacity. The current leadership core had been performing at a very high level as specialists for their area.

We were able to avoid a common and often tragic error of pushing these leaders higher into Strategic and Executive requirements that they had previously not functioned in. We also had a tool that showed us exactly how to prepare these leaders to make the move if that is where they thought they could perform at their best.

Organizations confronting strong challenges in today’s economy will need to do more than wait this one out or work harder with what they have. It will require a dispassionate look at whether the system that got you here is suited to take you forward. It will take tools to provide an evidenced based understanding of what your organization is naturally good at. It will take coaching and training to reconfigure and better align with current realities.

If you would like to find out more about this alignment process let me know and I’ll send a sample executive summary adapted from one of the organizations I’ve recently worked with.

This video from Jim Rohn provides a key to adding value – to yourself, to your organization.

Tags: alignment, economy, incompetence, incompetency, leadership, management, strength, strengths, talent, talents