> This is something we can possibly solve by not punishing state servants as harshly if they make a decision and something goes wrong The way things are going

> This is something we can possibly solve by not punishing state servants as harshly if they make a decision and something goes wrong The way things are going over here in the EU the reverse is true, as in state servants are incentivised to not walk even a millimetre outside of the chosen, legal path for fear of prison time. Now, one would think that the "legal path" is a very large and broad one, but the truth is that it is all in the eye of the beholder, that assessment all depends on who holds the reins of power and if that state servant is on the "good" side (with "us") or on the "bad" side (with "them"). At least that's how things happen in the Eastern part of the EU. More exactly, and as a hypothetical example: one cannot just choose the best tool for the job (or the best services for the job) as a result of a public procurement process because it all depends on the offered price. Doesn't matter if the the opportunity cost savings generating by choosing the slightly more expansive tool/service are an order of magnitude larger compared to said price difference (i.e. between the cheaper but worst model, compared to the more expansive but better model) a state servant in my country can get actual prison time for choosing the more expensive (but better) tool/service. So what happens for state servants that do actually want to get something done while avoiding prison time is to precisely "manicure" the technical requirements that are part of the public procurement process so that the better but the more expensive product wins. It's borderline illegal (and some other public public servants are using this same tactic for really nefarious reasons) but that's how things are.