4 ms·
What you have described sounds like the MacLeod principle which I read about in the Ribbonfarm posts about the Gervais Principle [0]. I thought it was analyzin
by matt_s 6y ago
What you have described sounds like the MacLeod principle which I read about in the Ribbonfarm posts about the Gervais Principle [0].
I thought it was analyzing satire, then the more I read, it was gospel. Then I found out the author worked where I was at one point (large enterprise) and it all made perfect sense. Internal re-orgs made sense, acquisitions made sense. I didn't agree with how they played out but they were understood.
[0] https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-or-the-office-according-to-the-office/ https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-...
- curiousllama 6y agoThat is a great 101 - the idea of stakes, rational trades at each level, middle management's self-preservation... it's all great. That said, that article should come with a disclaimer: "sociopaths" act unconsciously, not consciously. Purposefully trying to implement the lessons of that series is dangerous.
- matt_s 6y agoI don't think the author of that intended the clinical definition of sociopath, at least when I read it I thought of it as "enterprise corporate person out for themselves."
- curiousllama 6y agoNeither do I - I'm referring to the people the author refers to as sociopaths. Fair clarification