Management pressure to produce is coupled closely with practitioner actions are gambles Pt. 10, and these two things lead to less efficiency. I see the functio

Management pressure to produce is coupled closely with practitioner actions are gambles Pt. 10, and these two things lead to less efficiency. I see the function of management at my workplace is to get practitioners to take bigger gambles to produce more favorable outcomes. This is convenient for management because they can capture the upside of a gamble and focus blame on an individual on the downside of a gamble. One of the practitioner reactions I've seen to this in government contracting is to become hyper specialized in one specific job function. Don't be a jack of all trades, don't wear multiple hats. Don't spring up to help someone. This leads to two outcomes. 1. When a practitioner is confronted with a novel problem, they will say that's not their job and that persons X, Y, or Z can help. Person X directs you to person A, persons Y and Z direct you to B, person A also directs you to person B and person B directs you back to person X. You ultimately find that no one is responsible for anything. 2. When an operation does need to be performed, it takes tiny contributions from many people. This leads to long chains of activities that take months to do simple operations, such as purchasing items because there is inevitably someone who is out sick or on vacation for two weeks. This in turn leads to more hiring, and then management hits back with initiatives to streamline operations. It is a fascinating cycle.