A New York Magazine article titled "Boss Science: the psychopathology of the modern American corporate leader" asks: Is there some law of office life that dictates that jerks rise to the top? Here's the introduction:

Possibly, your boss is a truly fine person—wise, kind, perceptive, capable, understanding, the all-seeing director of the office sitcom, the sort of individual one might like to have, in an ideal world, as a parent or a confidant. Or not. In the real world, bosses are known to suffer from a long list of social pathologies: naked aggression, credit hogging, micromanaging, bullying, you name it. According to one report, 60 to 75 percent of employees—it doesn’t matter the organization—say the worst aspect of their job is their boss. It’s not difficult to believe, as one office expert concludes, that “every employed adult will have to work for a bad boss for some significant period.”

It's an interesting read. One section describes office psychology experts attempts to engineer an efficient and harmonious workforce via evaluation of personality traits and choosing employees accordingly. Brave new world stuff.

Other sections describe narcissistic tendencies and the hauntingly familiar descriptions of demeaning, belittling, aggressive behavior as a means of control:

“Leadership research shows that subtle nasty moves like glaring and condescending comments, explicit moves like insults or put-downs, and even physical intimidation can be effective paths to power..."

You see, the problem is that fast-rising personalities rarely make good leaders in the long run - that long-term success of a team requires a completely different personality.

The irony is that when work was just work, a 9-to-5 kind of thing, one just assumed that it was a fact of life that the boss was kind of an asshole, and that it didn't matter - you went home and spent time with the family or doing other things that really mattered.

Now, in the New York Magazine article author's view, the office has become a place to seek (and find) personal fulfillment, an expectation that is responsible for the rising dissatisfaction with the sad state of managerial skills.

Other fascinating stuff that I've seen in my career, but have rarely seen discussed: the trick used by some climbers, whereby they find that shared personal interests with VIPs in the company is the best way to get ahead--racquetball, tennis, hockey, or some other extracurricular activity, for example--becomes more important than actual performance in the office.

And so the guy with the narcissistic instincts, with personal command and an ability to fill up a room (especially a leaderless one), gets the tap on the shoulder. And that’s where the calamity begins.

Hear hear. Often it seems that those with no shame, who seem to be focused upwards in the organization, rise the fastest regardless of actual ability or how the rest of the crew feel about him.

And that is the essence of the problem: promotion based on appearance and charisma, and not reality.