For a possible sociology: the hiérarchologie!

The Peter Principle (1969) was laid by the great Laurence J. Peter (and Raymond Hull, who pushed the first to give life to his research as a book). It is a satirical principle (although ...) indicating a new science: hiérarchologie, which helps explain why everything is so bad in the business world in general.
According to this principle, "every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence." The corollary of this principle is that "over time, any position will be occupied by an incompetent unable to take responsibility."

Peter then proceeds analysis that says a competent employee is necessarily promoted to a higher level and, conversely, an incompetent will never be promoted to a higher level (but will be ejected as it is grossly incompetent or too competent ...).

The logical consequence: no employees remain in a position of competence. And he who is promoted and who discovers his level of incompetence will no longer be promoted, so stagnate his level of incompetence.

Ultimate consequence of the principle: all positions end up being occupied by incompetent employees for their work, the majority of the remaining work happily performed by employees who have not yet reached their level of incompetence.
Peter notes that there is more of steps, the greater the chances of reaching his level of incompetence one day and living the desolate "stagnation Peter".

There are roughly no escape, except maybe the "creative incompetence" (I do not say any more, but that is simply awesome).

Twisting, smart, and a little depressing because very evocative of life situations. It usefully read the extraordinary Bd Scott Adams: Dilbert Principle, which is a welcome update (and much more satirical) to that of Peter.