Workplace Anti-Patterns

Anti-patterns are common counter-effective behavioral responses to classes of problems or situations. Some anti-patterns are specific to individuals, some to groups, and some appear for both individuals and groups. Generally, anti-patterns differ from behavioral dysfunctions, which are also counter-effective, but which are usually associated with intellectual disabilities or psychological disorders.

The Peter Principle is an example of a group anti-pattern. It is the tendency for people in organizations to be promoted to the level of their incompetence. That is, organizations tend to advance the careers of individuals until they reach a level at which their performance is substandard, which leads to populating staff ranks with people who can't do their jobs. Another anti-pattern is the Identified Patient, who is the person identified by the group — usually incorrectly — as being the cause of its problems.

For any anti-pattern, five attributes are of interest.

Indicators

An anti-pattern's indicators signal its presence. For the Peter Principle, one indicator might be incompetence in managerial ranks.

Causes

Any anti-pattern can have multiple causes. For the Peter Principle, one cause is that organizations tend to promote individuals based on their demonstrated performance in their current role, rather than an assessment of their fitness for the intended role. If at some level of advancement, their performance becomes substandard, advancement usually halts.

Stabilizers

What mechanisms create anti-patterns can differ from what sustains them. Sustaining factors Helping the organization root out
a specific anti-pattern is an
admirable goal, if your organizational
responsibilities include such activityinclude mechanisms that help it to survive or repeat despite its obvious counter-effectiveness. For the Peter Principle, in family businesses, for example, resistance to discharging incompetent employees can arise from a desire to maintain the livelihood of the incompetent family member. In government, political party loyalty can be a resistance-generating factor. In business, reluctance to discharge can occur when the consequences of the incompetence are subtle enough, or when they can be concealed.

Defenses and workarounds

It's helpful to know how to defend yourself against anti-patterns that represent threats to safety, relationships, emotional health, or career. For example, if you're the identified patient, begin by understanding that you aren't the cause of the group's troubles, and that you don't have to accept the designation. Then you can begin to search for the actual cause — or the actual causes — of the group's problems. And it's also helpful to know how to avoid an anti-pattern, or how to evade it.

Interventions

Helping the organization root out a specific anti-pattern is an admirable goal, if your organizational responsibilities include such activity. Determine first whether the needed actions are within your charter. If the issue is yours to address, what you do depends on the nature of the problem. Otherwise, you must choose whether to accept the situation as is, or bring it to the attention of someone who is empowered to act on it, or move on. It's a difficult choice.

In future issues we'll explore anti-patterns with this framework. In the queue already are Warlords; Ready, Fire, Aim; Utility Pole; Financial Nearsightedness; Refrigerator Territoriality; and Performance Review Revenge. Let me know if there's something special you'd like me to address.  Top    Next Issue

Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info

For more about the Peter Principle, check out Laurence J. Peter and Raymond Hull, The Peter Principle: Why Things Always Go Wrong, New York: William Morrow and Company, 1969. We should note that the Peter Principle was first enunciated in the 1960s, when involuntary terminations were much less common than they are today. So although examples of the Peter Principle were more common 50 or 60 years ago, they are still in evidence. Order from Amazon.com

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness:

When Meetings Boil Over

At any time, without warning, you can find yourself in a meeting that boils over. Sometimes tempers rise, then voices rise, and then people yell and scream. What can a team do when meetings threaten to boil over — and when they do?

Ten Reasons Why You Don't Always Get What You Measure: II

Although many believe that "You get what you measure," metrics-based management systems sometimes produce disappointing results. In this Part II, we look at the effects of employee behavior.

The Ups and Downs of American Handshakes: I

In much of the world, the handshake is a customary business greeting. It seems so simple, but its nuances can send signals we don't intend. Here are some of the details of handshakes in the USA.

Management Debt: II

As with technical debt, we incur management debt when we make choices that carry with them recurring costs. How can we quantify management debt?

The Focusing Illusion in Organizations

The judgments we make at work, like the judgments we make elsewhere in life, are subject to human fallibility in the form of cognitive biases. One of these is the Focusing Illusion. Here are some examples to watch for.

See also Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness and Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming December 11: White Water Rafting as a Metaphor for Group Development

Tuckman's model of small group development, best known as "Forming-Storming-Norming-Performing," applies better to development of some groups than to others. We can use a metaphor to explore how the model applies to Storming in task-oriented work groups. Available here and by RSS on December 11.

And on December 18: Subgrouping and Conway's Law

When task-oriented work groups address complex tasks, they might form subgroups to address subtasks. The structure of the subgroups and the order in which they form depend on the structure of the group's task and the sequencing of the subtasks. Available here and by RSS on December 18.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info