Dilbertian Vs Merit View

(Based on a discussion under MathForProgrammers)

I tend to have a Dilbertian view of the work world. Hiring and promotions are based on shady office politics, brown-nosing, and favoritism. However, some seem to think that the work world is actually more merit-based: that technically smarter people do rise to the top and/or get the big bucks. That is the way I hoped it was after graduating from college, but found out otherwise. In short, "people math" is at least as important as real math.

Dilbert selects the extremes. It's not a world view it is a caricature. In practice such decision are influenced by a multitude of factors including dilbertian factors. But for your average joe, being more like PHB and giving up on competence cannot be recommended as a viable life/career strategy because it may just not work in the next place or other guy may beat you to it. Basic competence and some level of political awareness tends to work more reliably and is less dependent on external factors.

Yes, but us geeks tend to focus way too much on the merit side in my observation. At least I can say in my experiece that the world caught me off guard.