3 ms·
1 is not a particularly good explanation in my mind for two reasons: (a) people are great at working not in their own interest, together, on something greater
by kqr 4y ago
1 is not a particularly good explanation in my mind for two reasons:
(a) people are great at working not in their own interest, together, on something greater than themselves. In fact, I've observed a negative correlation between this and management, in that the spirit of being "in it together for the greater good" seems to be weakened in organisations with more management.
(b) if people inherently only work out of self interest, then so would managers and the whole thing would break down anyway.
- zozbot234 4y ago> people are great at working not in their own interest, together, on something greater than themselves. Only really true of small, tight-knit groups of people engaged in very similar kinds of work, where everyone knows that their contribution will be evaluated by everyone else. Hence small partnerships, co-ops or very early startups probably don't need management. These roles start to appear as scale increases.
- banannaise 4y ago> (a) people are great at working not in their own interest, together, on something greater than themselves. In fact, I've observed a negative correlation between this and management, in that the spirit of being "in it together for the greater good" seems to be weakened in organisations with more management. This is entirely true, and almost nobody with either corporate or government power agrees with it. They're putting in massive effort to keep people in line because they're afraid of what happens when they aren't kept in line, despite evidence that people accomplish things just fine without constant threat of external discipline.