The Peter Principle is one of my favourite truisms. At the same time though, I wish it didn't come true so often. Briefly, the Peter Principle states that in an organisation where promotion is based on achievment, success and merit, each employee will eventually arrive at a position beyond the level of their capability.
Reading this piece, I defy you not to think of at least a dozen people to whom this applies. The recent headlines concerning the Co-Op bank provide us with as good an example as we could reasonably wish for. In promoting a Methodist preacher with no formal banking experience, it is all too easy to jump on the bandwagon and pillory Paul Flowers. The fact is that he only did what most of us might have done if offered such a high salary. He proved he is human. He took the money. I have genuine sympathy for the church whose name has been dragged through the mud with him but not for the politicians who turned a blind eye to his evident inexperience for such an important role.
The Methodists I know don't take drugs or engage in the sort of activities Flowers is alleged to have engaged in. Instead they are decent folk who look out for their fellow man and just try to do the right thing. Whenever a leading figure in the church is exposed like this, it undoes all the hard work of their colleagues who tirelessly get on with the real challenges with little or no recognition on a daily basis. That said, I hope his church shows him the support he will now badly need and I hope he is once more reminded of what really matters in life. He of all people shouldn't need too much reminding. Perhaps his promotion within his church was an example of the Peter Principle as well and the entire organisation needs a period of introspection to learn from the error.
After the crash of 2008, we were nevertheless assured that no bank would be badly led again. This makes it all the more surprising to understand. It wasn't even as though he had a banking background. I note that the Labour party has already begun the process of distancing themselves from the man whose low interest loans they have all too gladly accepted. The relationship of political parties with donors seriously needs to be reviewed because the current system absolutely stinks.
UKIP have the patronage of Paul Sykes. Labour enjoy the patronage of the Unions and the Co-Op bank (even though the latter can barely afford to buy a pint of milk such is the extent of their current mess). The Tories enjoy the patronage of various city billionaires and even the ailing Liberals have friends in high places. There has to be a better way of doing this because it is fast becoming a case of whoever has the most money gets the keys to number 10. This in no way reflects true public opinion and does not reflect well on the current political system.
I read a number of years ago that bureaucracy is rather like an enormous cess pit in which the really big bits float to the top. Sadly, that comparison is depressingly true and we badly need to rid ourselves of that smell. The greatest irony in the Paul Flowers story is that at a time when faith has so much to offer by way of a meaningful alternative to the vices of modern life, it has shown itself to be no better than the rest. Church congregations are dwindling up and down the land yet the church has so much to offer.
As Cameron seeks to distance himself from his green credentials and as Farage seeks to spend his way to an EU referendum, as Milliband seeks to distance himself from all knowledge of Paul Flowers and as Nick Clegg seeks to change with the wind, we can all rest assured that the Peter Principle is as true today as it as ever been. Just as the Co-Op put Paul Flowers at the head of it's massive banking operation, the Unions put Milliband at the head of the Labour party. It seems that such decisions don't concern the likes of you and I.
No comments:
Post a Comment