For those of you who are not familiar with the "Gervais Principle", it stands along the Peter Principle and the Dilbert Principle in the satirical yet accurate enough theories aiming to explain the human social structure. In short: - Peter Principle: employees are promoted based on their success in previous jobs until they reach a level at which they are no longer competent. - Dilbert Principle: companies tend to systematically promote incompetent employees to management to get them out of the workflow. - Gervais Principle: people are promoted based on their innate structure into the layer of the company hierarchy that fits them. Now I don't have objections to the names chosen for the top and the bottom level, I think they accurately reflect the individuals. I'm not so sure about "clueless" as explained here: https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-or-the-office-according-to-the-office/ Apparently the middle layer (management) is "clueless" because they are aspiring to promotions into the sociopaths layer and sacrifice their time / pledge loyalty to the company in the hope their work will be recognized and rewarded (spoiler alert: it won't). What I'm thinking is this situation doesn't accurately depict my observation of the management layer, there are a few - very few - that fit the description, but most are what I've describe as FAILED SOCIOPATHS - since the top layer cannot, by definition, comprise but a very small percent of the population, they settle more or less temporarily for the next best thing - anything to avoid the nastiness of having to do the actual work - which the bottom layer can't escape. So what better name to give them to reflect that mostly, the middle layer is a refuge for incompetent sociopaths?