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:

Help for Asking for Help

When we ask for help, from peers or from those with organizational power, we have some choices. How we go about it can determine whether we get the help we need, in time for the help to help.

Bonuses

How we deal with adversity can make the difference between happiness and something else. And how we deal with adversity depends on how we see it.

Finding the Third Way

When a team is divided, and agreement seems out of reach, attempts to resolve the conflict usually focus on the differences between the contrasting positions. Focusing instead on their similarities can be a productive technique for reaching agreement.

Bottlenecks: I

Some people take on so much work that they become "bottlenecks." The people around them repeatedly find themselves stuck, awaiting responses or decisions. Why does this happen and what are the costs?

Red Flags: III

Early signs of troubles in collaborations include toxic conflict, elevated turnover, and anti-patterns in communication. But among the very earliest red flags are abuses of power. They're more significant than other red flags because abuses of power can convert any collaboration into a morass of destructive politics.

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

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming January 22: Storming: Obstacle or Pathway?

The Storming stage of Tuckman's model of small group development is widely misunderstood. Fighting the storms, denying they exist, or bypassing them doesn't work. Letting them blow themselves out in a somewhat-controlled manner is the path to Norming and Performing. Available here and by RSS on January 22.

And on January 29: A Framework for Safe Storming

The Storming stage of Tuckman's development sequence for small groups is when the group explores its frustrations and degrees of disagreement about both structure and task. Only by understanding these misalignments is reaching alignment possible. Here is a framework for this exploration. Available here and by RSS on January 29.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenjTnUayrCbSnnEcYfner@ChacdcYpBKAaMJgMalFXoCanyon.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