SFor almost a hundred years there has been a critical sociology of social success that strives to demonstrate that modern society, especially in its organizations, rewards the vocal self-portrayal – at the expense of its capable, but more cautious, and with the Consequences of mass misplacement, especially from top positions. Flattery from the supervisor, theft of ideas from colleagues, micro-political skill, combined with a sense of staging questions – such tricks would have given the successful ones their success. It goes without saying that such claims are spoken from the heart of the unsuccessful. That is why they are now being distributed in new bestsellers, regardless of all sociology, which then become outraged by “rivets in pinstripes”.
But of course this is not just about resentment. A structural explanation of the undeserved successes, which is predisposed to allegations, could look like this: In a society with a strong division of labor, all essential services are first performed by specialists in a specialty area, then assessed and selected by its laypersons. Since the layperson cannot properly assess the specialist, they orientate themselves instead to any symptoms that often have little to do with their abilities: the best doctor, not the nicest doctor, has the most patients. So the impostor’s sociology is probably not wrong, but it is one-sided. This is shown in a recently published literature report, which for a change reminds of the advantages of deep stacking.