>[W]hat I'm asking is that everyone just do their job. >I don't need everyone to just do something. Naked contradiction. Either everyone needs to just do thei

>[W]hat I'm asking is that everyone just do their job. >I don't need everyone to just do something. Naked contradiction. Either everyone needs to just do their job or not everyone needs to just do their job. >Surely "do your job" has to be a reasonable version of this. There are entire fields of research centered around answering why people don't 'just' do their jobs like good little worker bees in exquisite detail. Some terms I'm aware of that you may find useful to look into, in rough order of how general to the problem they are: Agency problems; the Case theorem; malicious compliance; work to rule; collective bargaining; moral hazard; perverse incentives; adverse selection; rent seeking; regulatory capture. If you want to read up on people trying to design actually working systems from scratch, look into the world of mechanism design, starting with auctions and branching outwards. >When we're in a situation where many people want change but no one is willing to fight for that change, then we will just keep doing what we've been doing [...] One could argue that the past ~century of scientific and technological development has probably beat any other 100 year period your could pick hands down along any natural metric. So "what we've been doing" is actually pretty great, and it may not be a good idea to stake such a hugely important enterprise on some newfangled and only theoretical ways of doing things.