> there are no stupid projects It seems akin to saying there are no stupid moves in chess. Because every move is vetted by the player, and he has a good reason

> there are no stupid projects It seems akin to saying there are no stupid moves in chess. Because every move is vetted by the player, and he has a good reason to do it. Unfortunately, people do make mistakes and at least, better moves - than the ones you decided to do - happen. > you're effectively telling everyone who has agreed to let the "stupid project" go ahead that they're all wrong and you know best But sometimes you do know best. I didn't say you have to drop work on the stupid project entirely, I just think you should be entitled to be part of the decision too. Speaking about that, what is the theoretical ideal of how the hierarchical decision-making should look like? I mean, when someone decides things on higher level, how can they do that? If they were to made optimal decision, they need all the information that individual decision makers under them have. So isn't the decision they made always suboptimal? Isn't actually the best way how to make decision in a hierarchy at all to let all the deciders on a lower level decide what decisions have to be made on the upper level? There should be a mathematical model supporting how hierarchical decision making works, but I have never seen one. > That is not the best way to further your career If you do what I suggested, you're taking a risk. It may give you a good result or a bad one, as it happens. > No one ever succeeds on their own Even if that is true, which isn't, you can still at least spark a success on your own.