3 ms·
Based on the article, it looks like the fundamental problem is lack of "skin in the game," and the author notes it as a defense against becoming an immoral maze
by pmiller2 7y ago
Based on the article, it looks like the fundamental problem is lack of "skin in the game," and the author notes it as a defense against becoming an immoral maze. But, how can one identify "skin in the game," particularly 2+ levels of the hierarchy above oneself?
- SpicyLemonZest 7y agoA core implication of the article's thesis is that it's very hard in general. Otherwise, the owners of any organization would just issue an order saying "everyone's gotta have skin in the game". (In fact they do try to issue that order; a typical corporate middle manager will get quite a bit of their compensation from performance-based programs and company stock they're culturally discouraged from selling.)
- pmiller2 7y agoThat doesn’t quite get at what I’m saying. I’m claiming that “skin in the game” is not really something an individual employee can identify organization wide. And, if it’s not possible to determine whether your boss’s boss has “skin in the game,” it’s a useless construct for determining whether a given organization is an immoral maze, regardless of its causal role.