> Lazy production line worker Because of your inclusion of the assumed 'lazyness' of the first I assume that you think it's the first? why do you think it's m

> Lazy production line worker Because of your inclusion of the assumed 'lazyness' of the first I assume that you think it's the first? why do you think it's more likely that the line worker is lazy and the one that screwed up? why not the 'lazy' designer who thought it would be strong enough, or 'lazy' supervisors that forget to supervise, or the lazy quality-assurer that forgets to assure quality? Everyone makes mistakes. If your whole organisation relies on nobody ever making a mistake, then your organisation isn't at risk of failing, but is certain to fail. Or alternatively the organisation has already failed in its duties, but the consequences of that failure just haven't popped up yet.