The Gervais Principle - How company hierarchies work and how to take advantage of them

[melty]

Recent events brought me to read this classic:

https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-or-the-office-according-to-the-office/

Summarizing it wouldn't really do it justice, so I suggest you read it for yourself, but it's basically a theory of how companies rise and fall and why some people seem to get ahead easily in them while others don't. I’ve read the entire series twice. At first, I thought it was genius, due to events in my work life that seemingly validated its premise. It explained a lot of what I’ve seen in corporate life, and talking to other people higher up in the company somewhat confirmed that what the author is saying about how companies operate, and how to get ahead in them, is real. Trying to see things from the "sociopath" perspective did explain a lot of why those people get ahead and clarify things that didn't make sense previously.

But there's a big catch – I had never actually watched The Office, so everything proposed in the Gervais Principle made a lot of sense when taking the author’s word for what the show is like. But after actually watching the series, I think the writer of the Gervais Principle might just be a mega autist reading way too much into things. It's just a funny show, the interactions are written to be funny. It's not that deep. A lot of what the author describes in later "chapters" reads like someone unfamiliar with social interactions trying to explain what is going on but kind of missing the point.

What do you, my fellow autists, think of the Gervais Principle? Have you read it before? I’ll say that the first part is the least controversial, it’s the later additions to the series that stretch plausibility for me. What is your experience with corporate hierarchies and how to take advantage of them?

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

It's classic internet autism - taking jokes and trying to forcefully fit them into reality, you might get a few IRL examples, usually big name psychos like Bill Gates, but the amount of competence, manipulation and luck needed makes the list very small. And in the end the whole subject is just copium "everybody in higher position than me is just dumb/psycho while I'm the one keeping the business afloat".

The truth is the far simpler fact that everything that loses the need for meritocracy (which corporations always do) devolve into nepotism where people skills is more important than technical abilities. People who can communicate well will go up and will usually be informed of incoming crisis while the people in the wage cage will just slave away and be surprised when the company goes under.

 

[$80 Nude Haircut]

Isn't Ricky Gervais the guy who had a radio show with Karl Pilkington & somehow managed to look like the bigger self-absorbed retard?

 

[NoReturn]

Isn't Ricky Gervais the guy who had a radio show with Karl Pilkington & somehow managed to look like the bigger self-absorbed retard?

Yes.

The more time goes on, the less Karl seems less like an idiot and more like a prophet.

 

[Chaos Theorist]

Isn't Ricky Gervais the guy who had a radio show with Karl Pilkington & somehow managed to look like the bigger self-absorbed retard?

Karl is just aspergers level of autism

 

[Beautiful Border]

Karl is just aspergers level of autism

No, he's a master of dry humour and deadpan delivery. It amazes me how many people don't get he's doing a bit.

 

[Chaos Theorist]

No, he's a master of dry humour and deadpan delivery. It amazes me how many people don't get he's doing a bit.

"People always ask me is Karl real. I tell them 'You think I'd waste a character like Karl on this shitty podcast?"

Ricky Gervais

He's a walking archetype of a Norfen skilled working class man

 

[Beautiful Border]

"People always ask me is Karl real. I tell them 'You think I'd waste a character like Karl on this shitty podcast?"

Ricky Gervais

He's a walking archetype of a Norfen skilled working class man

Look into Karl Pilkington's career. He co-wrote and starred in a sitcom, he wouldn't be doing that if he were "just" a skilled working class man who doesn't realise how funny he is. He's as much of a comedian and writer as Gervais or Merchant. I'm not saying he's playing a character necessarily, he's not doing a Keith Lemon, but he's definitely more canny than he lets on.

 

[Lord of the Large Pants]

I think Karl is real, and not stupid, but he's somebody who has a hard time saying what he means. Something gets lost in translation between brain and mouth and it makes him sound dumber than he actually is.

 

[Dr. Ricearoni]

Karl isn't an idiot so much as he thinks differently. He notices the things no one else picks up on and it bothers him, so he ends up coming up with the most inane sounding things,

 

[thegooddoctor]

It's classic internet autism - taking jokes and trying to forcefully fit them into reality, you might get a few IRL examples, usually big name psychos like Bill Gates, but the amount of competence, manipulation and luck needed makes the list very small. And in the end the whole subject is just copium "everybody in higher position than me is just dumb/psycho while I'm the one keeping the business afloat".

The truth is the far simpler fact that everything that loses the need for meritocracy (which corporations always do) devolve into nepotism where people skills is more important than technical abilities. People who can communicate well will go up and will usually be informed of incoming crisis while the people in the wage cage will just slave away and be surprised when the company goes under.

I think what he's saying technically has merit but Karl's dry delivery makes him miscommunicate things that make him appear more autistic than he actually is.

 

[$80 Nude Haircut]

I think Karl is real, and not stupid, but he's somebody who has a hard time saying what he means. Something gets lost in translation between brain and mouth and it makes him sound dumber than he actually is.

With how many stupid people put themselves out there on sites like Twitter I'm impressed people think Karl is stupid. Not always educated or fully-informed & he misremembers things but not outright stupid. I would argue Ricky can be much worse since he's so smug & self-assured in his basic Reddit opinions.

 

[74164978231]

And in the end the whole subject is just copium "everybody in higher position than me is just dumb/psycho while I'm the one keeping the business afloat".

From the outside that seems pretty spot on once you reach a certain level in large organizations.

Hollywood is a great example, think of all the retarded shit that is produced by it. Who are these people approving absolute dogshit like the recent Resident Evil show? How many meetings, approvals etc. where required for that to get the greenlight? How many people reviewed what was being produced and continued to give it the ok?

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

From the outside that seems pretty spot on once you reach a certain level in large organizations.

Hollywood is a great example, think of all the retarded shit that is produced by it. Who are these people approving absolute dogshit like the recent Resident Evil show? How many meetings, approvals etc. where required for that to get the greenlight? How many people reviewed what was being produced and continued to give it the ok?

In the current corporate world the source of the issue is academia. The people on top hire people who've been indoctrinated on retarded ideas in elite universities and they just blindly trust those people to make decisions, and in their defence, those usually come well. "Go Woke Go Broke" might as well be "Go Complain on Woke, Go Cope".

It's not really even a case of corporate advancement discussed here, it's basically an entire strata of society none of us will be able to go into no matter how hard we work. It's the new aristocracy.

 

[NOT Sword Fighter Super]

I think Karl is real, and not stupid, but he's somebody who has a hard time saying what he means. Something gets lost in translation between brain and mouth and it makes him sound dumber than he actually is.

So autistic?

 

[Lemmingwiser]

Look into Karl Pilkington's career. He co-wrote and starred in a sitcom, he wouldn't be doing that if he were "just" a skilled working class man who doesn't realise how funny he is. He's as much of a comedian and writer as Gervais or Merchant. I'm not saying he's playing a character necessarily, he's not doing a Keith Lemon, but he's definitely more canny than he lets on.

If this happened before the whole gervais thing it would have been proof. But him trading on his celebrity isn't much of a stretch after.

Idiot abroad in general seemed to fundamentally change him, as he became much more worldly and understanding of the breadth of human experiences in different cultures.

But the last sentence is definitely true. Merchant even commented on it when he got angry over being Karl taking shots at his looks "you know he has been planning this!".

And it's also trademark Gervais style, as he thinks things are funnier if you present them as truthful (the show extras has a lot of his meditations on what it is to be funny).

Conan seemed to copy Pilkington success by creating the character Jordan Schlansky, though the act is more transparent.

I think it's a little from column A and a little from column B. But ir'a not really possible to stay that unaware with being that well known for it.

-------

As for the gervais principle it's a really insightful is depressing lens through which to view office politics and I have no idea whu it is called that because it seems to havr nothing to do with the show. It's like the old kung fu masters that named things "cat stance" and "monkey punch". It's a superficial name given as a result of genuine observation and insight.

 

[Netizennameless]

In the current corporate world the source of the issue is academia. The people on top hire people who've been indoctrinated on retarded ideas in elite universities and they just blindly trust those people to make decisions, and in their defence, those usually come well. "Go Woke Go Broke" might as well be "Go Complain on Woke, Go Cope".

i'm not sure that I agree with this. Sure, they hire people who have been indoctrinated on retarded ideas but they don't immediately put fresh college grads in executive suite or hand them the keys to the codebase. Most of the "diversity" positions are make-work and those department heads are quitting because they realize no one actually cares about their role.

I think the bigger issue is that companies fall apart once the original founder(s) leave(s) the company. The replacement CEO very rarely has the same passion for the long-term success of the business that the founder does. This leads them to make short term decisions to prop up the value of the stock they have while they hold it. Then they sell it off for cash and they have a golden parachute if the company goes belly up so why should they care?

It's not really even a case of corporate advancement discussed here, it's basically an entire strata of society none of us will be able to go into no matter how hard we work. It's the new aristocracy.

I also don't agree with this. Yes, if you try the good boy well-worn path of going to college and getting a job and working your way to the top of someone else's company, you will never get into that strata of society. But if you ignore the conventional wisdom and start your own business you absolutely can in less than one generation.

 

[TracdacianTortoise]

Have read it, and it's an interesting premise, and offers a useful tool to look at the world through, but I wouldn't get too stuck on the ideas espoused. For one, the concepts early in the articles only make sense if you define value solely monetarily, it really only works within a corporate system. In addition, it's a bit too hung up on it's divisions of people. The idea of "Sociopaths", "Clueless" and "Losers" is useful, but not necessarily realistic. It's extremely relevant to large organisations, in both governments and corporations, but at a larger scale it has it's issues. As for it's heavy reliance on The Office, it's probably because the writer is absolutely a weird autist, and I don't think they have much experience in typical organisations. It's also likely used because "The Office" is well-known, and is useful for the author as a tool for illustrating examples of what he's talking about.