Incompetence & Mediocrity In Politics & CEOs

"There are few things more dangerous than a mixture of power, arrogance and incompetence." ~ Bob Herbert

"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." ~ Napoleon Bonaparte

"Always assume incompetence before looking for conspiracy." ~ Niccolo Machiavelli

"Incompetence is certainty in the absence of expertise. Overconfidence is certainty in the presence of expertise." ~ Malcolm Gladwell

If a politician is rated as incompetent or below par, the term can have various meanings depending on context.

It can mean absence of policy understanding, poor communication skills, deficiency in leadership, or inability in ethics, moral perception, or coping with institutional and societal complexities and thus becoming a liability.

This is unlike incompetence of a CEO of a big software or manufacturing company, where fault is measurable such as failed plans, financial mismanagement, or incompetent operations and personnel management, again rendering the individual a liability to the business.

In general, incompetence refers to a general deficiency in ability, knowledge, or judgment sufficient to do a job or role effectively. It typically involves repeated mistakes, poor judgments, and inability to meet standard expectations. An incompetent individual is likely to continue making errors, be unable to recognize their own errors, and cause more problems than they solve, typically requiring constant correction by others; basically, "a bull in a China shop."

Conversely, mediocrity exists in a state of vague middle ground.

Mediocre leaders possess a modest level of ability; they can handle routine tasks and grasp common concepts but do not necessarily exhibit initiative, intellectualism, or adaptability. They can produce output that meets minimum standards but is lacking in depth and interest. Once these individuals become entrenched in an organization, they can slow down progress and stifle overall growth.