Leadership Development Efficacy and the Peter Principle

ABSTRACT: Intuitively, Army leaders are thought to be those in uniform. Most can easily picture the faces of famous Army leaders, such as the late President and General Dwight D. Eisenhower or Band of Brothers’ Major Dick Winters. However, Army civilians who do not wear a uniform also fill many senior military leadership roles. These civilian leaders typically have fewer leadership development opportunities during their careers than uniformed counterparts due to less structured civilian career pathways. This means Army civilians can be promoted to supervisor or higher roles without formal leadership training, which starkly contrasts with uniform personnel required to attend developmental training before promotions. This potentially leads to superiors making promotion decisions with less focus on managerial potential and more on current technical performance, resulting in promotion beyond their competency. This phenomenon was first theorized by Peter and Hull in 1969 and termed “The Peter Principle.” Additionally, the Army struggles to mitigate manifestations of the Peter Principle, termed counterproductive leadership, amongst uniform and civilian personnel. Since Army civilian leaders have limited leadership development opportunities intended to help reduce the Peter Principle dynamic, studies on civilian leadership development and its efficacy are critical to ensure civilians are adequately prepared to lead. The following mixed-methods study is a work in progress and will examine Army civilian leadership development experiences throughout the careers. It will also evaluate a leadership development program offered to the Army Acquisition civilians. The consequences of leadership mismanaging Army personnel, critical equipment, and taxpayer funds are significant and far-reaching, hence the importance of such studies. KEYWORDS: Leadership, Leadership Development, Peter Principle, Counterproductive Leadership