These analogies are great for demonstrating a deeper nuance, I like them! So for 1) though, the sidewalk construction company is only incentivized to do monito

These analogies are great for demonstrating a deeper nuance, I like them! So for 1) though, the sidewalk construction company is only incentivized to do monitoring and continuous improvement to the extent that a) they do it to compete or b) the client asks for it. And for 2) stumbles are likely to be quite obvious failures - but the obviousness of the failure doesn’t invalidate your example. To strengthen your point we could target something subtler than stumbles - let’s say 30s is lost to incomplete nutrition plans. In both cases only organizations that value excellence would consider these initiatives. Which actually aligns with the article, apart from a key difference that both examples given describe top-down searches for near-misses rather than bottom up flagging of them. I think ultimately this is about operational excellence - an org that really cares will actively look for near misses, but flagging them from the bottom up won’t make an org care unless it already did, because maybe they don’t have an incentive to care, or maybe they don’t see the value of that work or maybe they do care but haven’t addressed bigger issues yet or are too low margin of a business to afford to address them so it’s a yes-we-know-but-not-yet type of thing. And if bottom up flagging doesn’t work the best you can do is address it locally.