> It becomes difficult to distinguish the finger pointers from the ones that are genuinely trying to overcome the bottleneck. Which is precisely why senior le

> It becomes difficult to distinguish the finger pointers from the ones that are genuinely trying to overcome the bottleneck. Which is precisely why senior leadership needs to map out the value streams in their org first, identify bottlenecks second, get a sense of vision about what the area should look like without a bottleneck, and lead people in that direction. The question about who to fire has nothing to do with who's at "fault" for the bottleneck, because generally, nobody's at fault, it's just the way things organically got to that point. Firing is not a response to fault for the current situation, it's a response to a failure to respond to leadership's direction, so finger-pointing has little to do with it. > Are we assessing not just on talent but also the type of personality traits we want to see exemplified in our organization? This is nigh impossible to do without incurring prejudicial bias, not to mention that the devils of our nature (sloth, toxicity, etc.) are never revealed during interviews. Furthermore, this kind of perspective assumes that people cannot adapt to their environment, i.e. companies that hire players instead of problem solvers cannot turn them into problem solvers. Whatever the situation is at an enterprise, if it sucks, it's not because people are "evil". The situation is the sum of the current incentives - how people's roles are defined, how people are rewarded, etc. If the situation sucks, it's because the current incentives at the enterprise have led the enterprise to that situation. A big part of changing the culture is changing the incentives. Do you want people to focus on problem solving? Then reward problem solving. Do you want people to focus on helping each other? Then reward people who look beyond the narrow confines of their job description. The "players" will take note. But rethinking incentives very much requires senior leadership - not just to approve but to drive - and still, requires a willingness to fire those who allow the devils of their nature to get the better of them.