daydreaming and realistic goals

[Al Schoonmaker]

Mike,
I agree with your Peter Principle message, but you did not go far enough.
In poker people apply it to themselves. They move up until they can't beat the game. Then, for ego reasons, they stay there, losing, but unwilling to step down.
Regards,
Al

[x2ski]

I believe the GE thing you were talking about was known as "High Performance Management" or something or other.

I worked at a company that was bought out by a larger corporation that decided to implement this strategy. Before long, 90% of the employees, even the top producers, hated where they worked and either decided to not care anymore or left on their own free will.

It simply did not work, especially since our job performance was directly related to the cooperation of the companies that we serviced (I was a retirement plan consultant who assisted smaller companies with the administration of their 401(k) and profit sharing plans).

I personally serviced plans for more than 100 companies and organizations. If they were too lazy or unwilling to provide the information I needed to do my job, my "performance" sufferred through no fault of my own. HPM did nothing but create a stressful and demoralized workplace.

HPM may work in manufacturing jobs, but in the white collar service sector, it needs to get the hell out. Sorry, but this was a rare opportunity to complain about this philosophy, so I apologize if I went off on a tagent.

[Mike Gallo]

Then, for ego reasons, they stay there, losing, but unwilling to step down.

Dr Al,

Thanks for finishishing the thought for me. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[lacky]

I must be the exception. I get my ass kick and move back down on a regular basis.....there could be a planing problem there.

Steve

[tek]

I believe people limit themselves in their growth, at least in areas where they have a high degee of decision-making.

In poker, you have the ability to move up in limits to the extent that you have a "proper" bankroll (in each individuals opinion).

So, with that bankroll problem solved, the question becomes "Do I have what it takes". If yopu have studied and practiced, the answer for the technical aspects should then be yes. That leaves the psychological aspects.

What we have left is a self-induced psychological Peter Principal. Or to restate it, if you think you are outclassed at a certain table and/or limit, you are...

Nobody else knows what's inside your head. If you act like you've been there before (that is with confidence) and establish a strong table image, the problem is largely solved. (There is always some fish that will suck out on the turn or river--oh well).

But basically, you need to feel and act like you belong. That may sound simplistic and too much like a Norman Vincent Peale think positive book, but it works!

[Al Schoonmaker]

The Peter Principle is more applicable to poker than it is to organizations.
Countless people move up until they reach their level of incompetence, and then they stay there indefinitely.
They can't accept that they aren't good enough, and moving back down to a level they can beat is too ego-deflating.
Instead of being successful, satisfied winners, they become frustrated wannabes.
Some of them NEVER accept that they are not good enough.
When it comes to poker, Norman Vincent Peale's principle can be extremely destructive.
Regards,
Al

[tek]

I disagree with you about Peale. Without any positive belief in oneself, one would reach an artificially low ceiling.

Your comment about people reaching their ability limit and not accepting that they may be successful one step below is valid.

The Peter Principle and Peales philosophy are different.