3 ms·
Bingo. I find that limiting headcount is a great forcing function for only doing what's important. The classic example is Google making X different chat apps. T
by matwood 3y ago
Bingo. I find that limiting headcount is a great forcing function for only doing what's important. The classic example is Google making X different chat apps. That doesn't happen unless a company is severely overstaffed.
- stuff4ben 3y agoTo me that really just screams lazy and incompetent management. Being overstaffed is just a coincidence. A good mgmt structure would have prioritized that roadmap and gotten the cats herded to work towards a singular goal/chat app. I say this as a "cat" myself who has to be reminded to not get distracted by the next shiny thing.
- marcosdumay 3y ago> Being overstaffed is just a coincidence. I'd say it's not. But causality is the reverse of the GP's. Being overstaffed is a consequence of not prioritizing the work. Either the staff grows until the important things get done, or the organization shrinks because the important stuff doesn't get done.
- matwood 3y ago> To me that really just screams lazy and incompetent management. 100%. Why make hard decisions when you can just hire? A company flush with cash simply hires and lets decision makers avoid decision making.