Talent management is occupying an increasingly prominent place in companies' HR priorities. And for good reason: the meaning found in work has once again become a central concern for employees, whether they are recent graduates or experienced professionals. Many struggle to perceive the real impact of their daily contribution, and expect recognition that goes beyond salary alone. Yet understanding what genuinely drives progression within a company requires challenging a number of deeply ingrained assumptions.
Why promotions do not always reward the most competent
The Peter Principle: when incompetence climbs the ladder
The Peter Principle, theorised by Laurence J. Peter and Raymond Hull, puts forward a troubling observation: within an organisation, the most incompetent employees end up being promoted to management positions and overpaid relative to their actual contribution. This seems counterintuitive. And yet the mechanism is straightforward to understand.
Promotion is often based on an employee's current performance, without assessing their capacity to succeed in the role being considered. A brilliant technical expert is propelled into a team leadership position, without their managerial aptitude ever having been tested. A skilled technician becomes a manager, without any training or support. At each stage, what worked before is rewarded, not what will be required afterwards.
The Oracle case: self confidence does not equal competence
The example of Larry Ellison, cofounder of Oracle, illustrates the potential pitfalls well. He was in the habit of asking during recruitment interviews: "Are you the smartest person you know?" Candidates who answered in the affirmative saw the process continue. The others were dismissed.
This approach, as radical as it is debatable, reveals a frequent bias in promotion and recruitment decisions: confusing displayed confidence with genuine competence. Yet these two notions, whilst they can coexist, are by no means equivalent. Clearly distinguishing self confidence from actual skills is a vigilance that any serious talent management approach would do well to cultivate.
The myth of hard work as the sole path to promotion
Working hard is necessary, but not sufficient
The belief persists: those who give everything without counting the cost, whilst others "waste their time" in informal exchanges, are naturally best placed to progress. This myth of relentless hard work as the only driver of advancement is deeply embedded in the collective consciousness. It is also, in large part, inaccurate.
Skills and diligence form an indispensable foundation. But promotion decisions do not rest solely on measurable results or time invested. They incorporate a more subjective dimension, equally real: the trust that the manager places in the employee.
The value of informal moments in building trust
Informal exchanges, at the coffee machine or during team lunches, may seem incidental when viewed purely through the lens of productivity. In reality, they play a structural role in promotion dynamics.
It is often in these moments that employees reveal themselves in a different light: their interests, their way of thinking, their manner of interacting with others. These moments are spaces where trust is built progressively. And yet promotion rests on two inseparable dimensions: the skills to take on the new role, and the bond of trust between the manager who promotes and the employee who progresses. This bond is rarely built behind a reporting dashboard. It takes root in shared daily life, in those spaces that are all too easily dismissed as secondary.
The three pillars of lasting career progression
Skills, trust, network: a balance to be built
Simplified, three levers concretely structure progression in the world of work: skills, the trust one inspires, and the network one builds. None of these three pillars functions in isolation.
Skills constitute the core legitimacy. They ensure that an employee will be capable of shouldering the responsibilities of the role they are moving into. Without this, promotion weakens the individual just as much as it destabilises the team.
Trust is built over time. A manager does not simply promote someone they consider competent: they promote someone in whom they have confidence. This trust does not arise from a spectacular performance on an isolated project. It takes root in the regularity of exchanges, in the consistency between actions and positions taken, in the capacity to show up in a variety of registers.
Network, finally, plays a role that is often underestimated. Being visible beyond one's immediate remit, knowing the key people, knowing how to position oneself within the organisation: these dimensions genuinely count in promotion dynamics, even if they replace neither skills nor trust.
Creating the conditions for a healthy working environment
For these three levers to be fully activated, the organisation must create the right conditions. Finding the right balance between phases of intensive work and moments of respite is not a managerial luxury: it is a condition of sustainability for teams and managers alike.
Organisations that establish healthy working environments facilitate these dynamics at a deeper level. They allow operational employees to show themselves from different angles, not solely in the execution of tasks. They create spaces where trust can take root, where informal moments have their legitimate place, and where progression criteria are legible and shared by all. This is precisely what well conducted talent management seeks to produce: a clear framework within which everyone can progress on solid and transparent foundations.
