4 ms·
You are right about what I said being an opinion. My point was to shift the burden of bureaucracy to management instead of allowing them to use bureaucracy as
by _8j50 4y ago
You are right about what I said being an opinion.
My point was to shift the burden of bureaucracy to management instead of allowing them to use bureaucracy as a tool. If you think you need a person for liability/insurance reasons, well as a low or mid-level manager, you don't get that authority anymore in my proposal. You have to jump through pro-agility bureaucracy and ultimately justify every small decision like this to upper management and shareholders. So, if like you said the loss of agility is intentional, you make sure every single decision like that goes through almost unbearable scrutiny because it does add up. Your perspective as low/mid tier manager almost never looks at the overall loss of agility or risk appettite of the company. But C-suite gets paid to have that perspective.
Naturally, incentives have it so that this is inverted. Low and
Mid tier management have too much discretion with their limited perspective where they implement bureaucracy that burdens their workers instead of themsleves. Often, the risk aversion is for individuals and teams and when that becomes a culture then every team and manager implements needless inefficiency that brings the whole system to a halt when you scale up. That's why upper management at big companies, including google, just buys and integrates new companies to the most part. That's easier for them than working through the inefficiency of their own org.