Talk:Peter principle/Archives/2015

Who is Peter?

The article doesn't mention where "The Peter Principle" gets its name. However, it mentions Peter, as a person who apparently coined the principle, in many places. No last name, no reference, no information.

Who is Peter? TricksterWolf (talk) 01:03, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. Who is this Peter the article refers too? Stephenjh (talk) 18:21, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Looks like it's writer Lawrence Peter.

[1] --Harizotoh9 (talk) 21:43, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Earlier version

The same experience was described as early as 1767 by Gotthold Ephraim Lessing in his comedy “Minna von Barnhelm” (3, 7) as follows: “Mehr als Wachtmeister zu werden? Daran denke ich nicht. Ich bin ein guter Wachtmeister und dürfte leicht ein schlechter Rittmeister und sicherlich noch ein schlechtrer General werden. Die Erfahrung hat man.” – Can someone please find an English translation of the comedy or translate the quotation into English, showing due credit to Lessing in the article? -- Wegner8 (talk) 06:41, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Done, with kind help of http://www.erinatranslations.de -- Wegner8 (talk) 06:26, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Jetzt verstehe ich, warum du es auch in der deutschen Version haben willst. TF und Etablierung in möglicht vielen Versionen.

This quote is freely associated by Wegner8, who tries now - without success - to establish it also in the German Wikipedia. There is no reference in Peter/Hull to Lessing or with Lessing to the Peter Principle. Please comment. GEEZER^{nil nisi bene} 07:09, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Recognizing the same experience elsewhere is not research, let alone "Original Research" (see the reason for deletion). Identity of the experience has never been questioned. Please restore. -- Wegner8 07:04, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

The two forerunners are factual, verifiable, whether someone else referenced them or not. As forerunners, even a weaker relation to the later principle would be enough. -- Wegner8 07:41, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

The ideas are basically old, but this book expressed them in a humorous way. Long time since I read it, but I think the discussion here is actually quite misleading and shallow. In particular, he was talking about mature organizations nearing equilibrium status, because it takes quite a bit of time for some people to reach their level of incompetence. He also addressed some of the organizational countermeasures to get the incompetent deadwood out of the way, for example by lateral transfer to a relatively harmless position. However my own reason for visiting the article was to search for successor books, and once again Wikipedia hasn't been helpful... I suppose you can treat this comment as an invitation to send me references to such books? Oh wait. Wikipedia is a poor communication channel, too, though the spammers are increasingly fond of it... Shanen (talk) 03:51, 25 March 2015 (UTC)