I think one of the key points is that you can’t tell if a system needs evolutionary (incremental) or revolutionary change unless you analyze it in depth. “It’s

I think one of the key points is that you can’t tell if a system needs evolutionary (incremental) or revolutionary change unless you analyze it in depth. “It’s not working” as a superficial observation of effect is not good enough - it may be on the cusp of working with a few tweaks, which would be much more efficient than starting over. As with any idea, throwing things out of the window can be good if it’s complemented with a set of clauses (“we’re starting over because of a, b and c”). The concept on its own is likely hubris or misguided based on the false pretense that revolution for the sake of revolution is good.