3 ms·
> Yet another cost for adding too many parties to something that could be better if it were simpler. But its not a cost from the perspective of the companies d
by dragonwriter 1y ago
> Yet another cost for adding too many parties to something that could be better if it were simpler.
But its not a cost from the perspective of the companies doj the outsourcing: the incentives are the way they are because the result is intended. Its not a cost of adding an extra party, it is part of the reason the party is added.
- ethbr1 1y agoI think you’re overestimating intentionality in bad outcomes. It’s entirely possible for a whole organization to want a good outcome, but construct an org chart where bad outcomes are guaranteed by the misaligned and incomplete incentives for sub-divisions. E.g. the IT support org that is only measured on total spend and time to ticket closure
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago> It’s entirely possible for a whole organization to ... construct an org chart You changed actors mid-sentence. The workers in the organization may want good outcomes but they are near-invariably separate from the people making decisions for the organization.
- ethbr1 1y agoNo, I said it exactly as I meant it. The organization (including the bulk of employees and executive leadership) may want a good outcome, but sub-divisions’ (aka the org chart) may have have their self-interests set to inevitably produce a bad outcome.