3 ms·
Which largely parallels one of my recent comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14513718 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14513718 Downvoted for n
by adekok 9y ago
Which largely parallels one of my recent comments:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14513718 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14513718
Downvoted for no apparent reason...
In short, managers often don't pay attention to how the products are created. They instead rely on checklists to "prove" that processes were followed.
Nothing beats "feet on the ground". If you know what's going on, you know how to manage it. If you're managing based on summaries of summaries of summaries... it will go badly.
See Jim Sinegal for a real-world example of this success story:
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-leaders/articles/2009/10/22/jim-sinegal-costco-ceo-focuses-on-employees https://www.usnews.com/news/best-leaders/articles/2009/10/22...
- macspoofing 9y agoYou don't know what you're talking about. >Nothing beats "feet on the ground". Except if you're managing a huge global supply chain.
- adekok 9y agoThe career of Jim Sinegal largely proves you wrong. As does the career of Tim Cook. Before he was CEO, he was managing Apple's global supply chain. Which involved a lot of on-site visits. Try to explain how both of these people could have been just as successful while locked in a cubicle, and digesting reports from underlings. If you believe that, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. Cheap. Just read the remote reports, and spend the money without ever visiting the bridge.