In my experience, the passive aggressive has a formidable advantage over the capable, talented, educated, and even experienced people. I have seen candidates work their magic of manipulating the interviewer into believing that they are one mind. Many unqualified executives have not only been hired but they easily climbing the ladder, with their once superiors dazed and left on the side of the road. A ladder built on bodies, bodies that were utilized by them for upward mobility.
This is an observation of many decades, over several dozen companies of various sizes and cultures.
Personality, or rather the ability to clone a personality to match that of the Interviewer and hiring person trumps all other attributes. These people are masters of the Peter Principle, exceeding their level of incompetence.
I know of one person, who was a mediocre performance in the hi tech field that rose from worker to VP over the course of his employment. He didn't have a college education, and he was a fair programmer. Using his personality skill set he became a manager in several companies. The projects that he managed were either poorly done, or failed but that didn't hurt his advancement. Later he moved onto Directing hi tech groups. He dazzled the upper management with his ideas. Unfortunately, he never successfully implemented them. Yet, that didn't stop him from becoming a VP. It just meant that he failed at bigger projects.
I use this as an example of my point, and it is by far not uncommon. Upper mgmt is filled with many weak people that can be controlled by this personality. And they are undetectable to most of the senior mgmt. You would think that poor performance, or inadequate education or experience would rule them out upward mobility, or even getting the foothold in the company, but not in my experience.
As we have seen in the presidential campaign, competence and performance are not the prime attributes for the voters.