The Peter Principle In Practice. GOOD ENOUGH TO RISE, NOT ENOUGH TO LEAD?

The topic I’ve chosen for this article stems from a persistent and deeply personal challenge I’ve encountered at the managerial level which is understanding what keeps the fire burning in a creative team.

In often subjective world of creative work, be it design, campaigns, strategy, or content, motivation isn't just a ‘nice to have’, it’s the lifeblood of meaningful output. Unlike more structured fields, where productivity can be measured in concrete metrics and routine performance, the creative domain thrives on emotional energy, curiosity, and an internal drive to make something original, something resonant.

We’re in a business where passion isn’t optional, it’s oxygen. It’s the unseen but essential element that keeps the creative process alive and breathing. Without it, even the most technically perfect ideas can fall flat, lacking the soul that makes work resonate on a deeper level. Passion is what drives someone to stay up late polishing a concept no one asked them to revisit. It’s what pushes a designer to scrap a safe layout in favour of something riskier, bolder because it just feels more honest.

As a Creative Director, I’ve developed a bit of a quirk to give this a little check in my team. Whenever a team member presents an idea, a campaign, or a strategy, I instinctively ask,“Do you love what you’re showing me?” It’s not just a gut check, it’s a creative compass. It might seem like a small question, but the answer almost always reveals everything I need to know. The tone, the hesitation or the excitement in their eyes tells me more than any presentation slide ever could. It’s not just about liking the idea on a surface level; it’s about emotional ownership. If they genuinely love what they’re presenting, it usually means the idea has been wrestled with, refined, and shaped with care. There's a pride in it, a belief behind it and that belief is often a reliable indicator of how powerful the idea is going to be.

In fact, I’ve come to realise that this question often tells me beforehand how great the idea will be. When someone’s fully behind their work when they light up explaining it, I know we’re about to build something special. On the other hand, if the love isn't there, the idea may still be solid, but it likely needs more truth, more risk, or simply more of them in it.

But deeper reason I ask this question “Do you love what you’re showing me?” for everything my team proposes is not just to gauge passion in them. My goal has always been to cultivate leaders, not just task executors but thinkers and decision-makers who carry vision and take responsibility. For me, true leadership success is watching someone evolve from needing direction to providing it for others.Yet over time, a more difficult question emerged: Is everyone truly meant to lead or even interested in leading?

I once held tightly to Roy T. Bennett’s quote, “Great leaders create more leaders.” It sounded noble, almost absolute, and served as a guiding truth in my leadership journey. But with time and experience, I began to understand the complexity behind those words. Not everyone is meant to lead, and not everyone wants to. More importantly, even the most talented individuals, carefully chosen for their skills and potential, can struggle or become less effective at certain points in their careers. This raised a difficult but necessary question for me which is, 'why does this happen?' What shifts between potential and performance, and how can we better support people so they do not lose their way after moving up? This quest eventually led me to a highly influential book, ‘The Peter Principle’. Though originally written as satire, it quickly became a staple of business vocabulary and continues to offer profound insights into the complexities of hierarchical management in organisations.

So what is ‘Peter Principle’?

The Peter Principle, introduced by Laurence J. Peter, is a management theory that suggests individuals in a hierarchy are often promoted based on their performance in their current role, rather than their suitability for the new one. As a result, they eventually rise to a position where they are no longer effective, since the skills that led to their earlier success may not apply to the demands of the higher role.

Peter worked alongside Raymond Hull to complete The Peter Principle. To summarize its core idea, here are the key takeaways from their book chapters in relation to the role of employee in an hierarchy:

1. Peter principle in action

Each successive role in a hierarchy often requires a different skill set than the one before it. For example, a skilled school teacher might thrive as an assistant principal but struggle in the role of principal. While they may excel at teaching and effectively manage relationships with parents and staff, they could falter as a principal due to difficulties in handling responsibilities like maintaining strong communication with the school board and superintendent.

2. "Push" and "Pull" Methods

“Push” means you work hard and learn new things to move up. But this doesn’t always help because the higher jobs might already be taken.

“Pull” means someone like your boss or mentor helps you get promoted faster. This way usually works better. A good boss also teaches you leadership skills by example and guidance. They show you how to make decisions, communicate clearly, and handle challenges calmly. They give you chances to lead small projects, support you when things get tough, and provide honest feedback to help you grow. Most importantly, they encourage you to take responsibility and think about how your actions affect the whole team.

3. Pathology of Success

When someone operates beyond their zone of competence, the consequences go far beyond job performance. The stress of trying to maintain control or hide their struggle, can affect their physical health, emotional well-being, and even how they relate to others.

4. Health & Happiness at zero PQ [Positive Intelligence]

Can an employee who has reached their level of incompetence still be happy and healthy? The answer depends on their self-awareness. If the person recognizes that they’re in over their head, the stress, anxiety, and fear of failure can significantly impact their well-being. However, if they remain unaware of their limitations or choose not to see them, they may continue on, relatively content and unaffected, even if their performance suffers. In such cases, ignorance can provide a form of emotional protection, though not necessarily a productive outcome for the organization.

We’ve looked at what happens when an employee reaches their level of incompetence, but it is equally important to consider the employer’s role in that situation. It is not just the employee’s struggle; it is also a leadership responsibility. Often, promotions are based on an employee’s technical competence in their current role without fully assessing whether they have the broader skills needed for the next one. To prevent mismatches, Laurence Peter proposed a practical approach: give the employee a chance to take on some responsibilities from the higher role before officially promoting them. This trial period helps determine whether they can handle the new challenges, reducing the risk of placing someone in a position where they may not succeed.

At Medea, our hiring strategy aligns with a similar approach. It is part of our protocol that when we consider someone for a full-time role, they first join us in an internship-style arrangement, which functions as a probationary period. This allows us to evaluate not just the candidate’s technical skills, but also their compatibility with our team, culture, and creative rhythm. It gives both sides a chance to understand whether working together will be mutually fulfilling before making a long-term commitment.

Now, this is what the Peter Principle suggests, and after exploring it further, I have come to the following conclusion that in creative fields, success requires much more than just technical competence. It demands a deep emotional investment. This kind of passion and commitment can’t be faked or forced, it needs to be carefully nurtured and encouraged over time. When someone truly cares about what they’re creating, when they are inspired and excited by the possibilities of their work, that enthusiasm naturally shines through. It becomes evident in the smallest details, the boldness of their choices, and the clear sense of purpose behind every aspect of the project.

Relating this to the Peter Principle, I strongly believe the risk arises when employees are promoted based solely on past performance or technical skills, without considering whether they have the emotional connection or leadership qualities needed for the new role. In creative environments especially, moving someone into a position that demands different kinds of motivation or responsibilities, like managing others or strategic planning, can lead them to reach their level of incompetence. Without that emotional investment and alignment, their performance may falter, not because they lack talent, but because the new role requires more than just skill, it requires passion and engagement that may not transfer automatically.

Therefore, truly understanding the power of emotional investment is essential to avoiding the pitfalls described by the Peter Principle, especially in creative fields like ours where inspiration is the lifeblood of everything we do. When passion flows from within, fueled by a genuine love for the creation, rather than external pressures or expectations, it creates a steady path and direction that guides every step forward. This inner fire is what fuels innovation, courage, and the bold choices that set great work apart.

Without this inner motivation, the future can feel uncertain and full of hopelessness. It is like trying to sail without a compass, leaving us open to feelings of doubt and frustration. To do well, each of us as individuals and as part of a team must keep a strong connection to our purpose. We should ask ourselves why we started, what difference we want to make, and how this work will help us grow, not just in our roles but as people.

Purpose is what grounds us when the path becomes unclear. It keeps the fire alive when routine dulls creativity or when setbacks shake our confidence. Emotional investment and self-driven inspiration are not luxuries in creative work; they are necessities. And as leaders, creators, or collaborators, we must keep nurturing that connection, not just in ourselves but in those we work with.

As a metaphor for this thought, I want to end this article with a line I deeply love from the film Spirited Away. In a quiet but powerful moment, Kamajī tells Chihiro, “Finish what you start, human!” It’s more than just a command. It’s a call to stay true to the journey, to honor the promise we made to ourselves when we first began, and to keep showing up even when the way is tough. Because in the end, purpose, clarity, and consistency will always promote us to personal growth levels further than talent or career alone.