3 ms·

This kind of finger pointing / blaming is not helpful. Basically, the reason why big organizations are a lot less efficient than smaller ones is the communicati

This kind of finger pointing / blaming is not helpful. Basically, the reason why big organizations are a lot less efficient than smaller ones is the communication overhead; and the resulting miscommunication. Small groups of people don't even need managers because they can figure out between themselves what needs doing and in what order. Management is introduced when small groups become larger and point to point communication breaks down. Point to point communication works great with 3 people, a lot less with 30. Forget about it with 300 or 3000. And so on. Big hierarchical organizations get bogged down in management structures and there's a lot of communication that starts happening via multiple hops. So, a lot gets lost in translation. That kind of collective stupidity is very hard to deal with. Add politics to the mix and now you get intentional miscommunication, selective communication, and very biased communication as well where people work against each other. All that result in a lot of wasted effort, unnecessary meetings, and other non productive work. It's not fake. But also not all that valuable.

netbioserror 3y ago
Also, the communications overhead of large corporate hierarchies often serves and sometimes incentivizes the reduction of work. Most people are not driven by a vision of a great product, a desire to create real value, or a desire to improve one's own value; there is a reason this is the exception, not the rule. Most people want to skate by on the absolute minimum required of them, and large hierarchies have all the leaky cracks that create opportunities to avoid, defer, delay, delegate, and generally abstain from work. In my own personal experience, if your desire is to work on something that has value or if you'd like to increase your own value, you should probably work at a small company, where the hierarchy is relatively flat and where you are as directly responsible and answerable for tasks and projects as possible.
lupire 3y ago
That's exactly the problem that obscenely highly paid leaders are supposed to be solving. And when they don't, they still get paid obscene sums.

netbioserror 3y ago

Also, the communications overhead of large corporate hierarchies often serves and sometimes incentivizes the reduction of work. Most people are not driven by a vision of a great product, a desire to create real value, or a desire to improve one's own value; there is a reason this is the exception, not the rule. Most people want to skate by on the absolute minimum required of them, and large hierarchies have all the leaky cracks that create opportunities to avoid, defer, delay, delegate, and generally abstain from work. In my own personal experience, if your desire is to work on something that has value or if you'd like to increase your own value, you should probably work at a small company, where the hierarchy is relatively flat and where you are as directly responsible and answerable for tasks and projects as possible.

lupire 3y ago

That's exactly the problem that obscenely highly paid leaders are supposed to be solving. And when they don't, they still get paid obscene sums.