I effectively miss your point, which is quite relevant.
As a Napoleon fanatic , I would temper it a bit: absolute monarchy implies not only hereditary throne, but also the supremacy of the sovereign will upon his subjects according to "divine order" of the society, preserving the interest of the "well-born".
By preserving the central conquest of Revolution - equal citizenship - and adding a rational and comprehensive politicial and legal frame, Napoleon was relatively more advanced on the way to Liberty and Equality than his fellow kings and emperors.
Even to impose is will, Napoleon did not break the legal rules, but had to compose with them. Hence the senatus-consulte, and work with Conseil d'Etat.
Had his son succeeded, he would have had around him some courtisans by birth, but mostly highly skilled statesmen.
Nobody can say how the system would have evolve, but perhaps more towards a Louis-Philippe -like constitutional monarchy (which rehabilitated a large number of bonapartists) than the absolute monarchy which plagued Europe from 1815 to 1830 or 1848.