3 ms·

I like your last paragraph a lot, one reason in my experience as to why a problem didn't get reported/fixed is that employees are unfortunately rarely rewarded

I like your last paragraph a lot, one reason in my experience as to why a problem didn't get reported/fixed is that employees are unfortunately rarely rewarded for fixing processes in large structures (or just once, when the fix itself improves the productivity in a lasting manner). So a real blocker in my opinion is that there is no clear incentive structure to even think or care about a fix in the first place. The CEO will care much more about it because their compensation/position is essentially tied to improving this side of the business.

recfab 4y ago
There can also be a lot of what I'll call "political inertia" involved. In my experience, the existing process has a way of appearing invisible such that any change will feel like more work, even when it isn't. It's hard to improve things when your coworkers perceive you as trying to give them more work.
- ethbr0 4y ago
  Agreed. The ideal scheme would be anonymous reporting + objective third party prioritization + financial compensation if benefits realized. The lack of compensation always baffled me. If an employee comes up with a change that saves the company $x, why don't they get bonused <$x for the year? Win/win. Make it subject to approval or somesuch, to prevent gaming and weed out edge cases, but every employee should be incentivized to find a way to do their job better.
  - swagasaurus-rex 4y ago
    You aren't paid based off the value you provide. Companies don't know how to measure that anyways. Your salary is based off of how expensive it would be to replace you.
    - matwood 4y ago
      But in this case the measure is clear. Sales is another job where value is very clear, hence good sales people are often some of the highest paid people in a company.
    - ethbr0 4y ago
      Value > Salary >= Replacement Cost Companies can ignore that for awhile, but eventually it needs to be true.
thatguy0900 4y ago
There can even be an opposite incentive, where fixing an issue that was wasting time means more or different work is assigned to everyone

recfab 4y ago

There can also be a lot of what I'll call "political inertia" involved. In my experience, the existing process has a way of appearing invisible such that any change will feel like more work, even when it isn't. It's hard to improve things when your coworkers perceive you as trying to give them more work.

ethbr0 4y ago
Agreed. The ideal scheme would be anonymous reporting + objective third party prioritization + financial compensation if benefits realized. The lack of compensation always baffled me. If an employee comes up with a change that saves the company $x, why don't they get bonused <$x for the year? Win/win. Make it subject to approval or somesuch, to prevent gaming and weed out edge cases, but every employee should be incentivized to find a way to do their job better.
- swagasaurus-rex 4y ago
  You aren't paid based off the value you provide. Companies don't know how to measure that anyways. Your salary is based off of how expensive it would be to replace you.
  - matwood 4y ago
    But in this case the measure is clear. Sales is another job where value is very clear, hence good sales people are often some of the highest paid people in a company.
  - ethbr0 4y ago
    Value > Salary >= Replacement Cost Companies can ignore that for awhile, but eventually it needs to be true.

thatguy0900 4y ago

There can even be an opposite incentive, where fixing an issue that was wasting time means more or different work is assigned to everyone