4 ms·
Not ELI5-able (by me atleast)! It's essentially MBA level, or generally organization building as a topic. Pickup any of the classic management books (Andy grove
by unified101 2mo ago
Not ELI5-able (by me atleast)! It's essentially MBA level, or generally organization building as a topic. Pickup any of the classic management books (Andy grove's high output management). They can probably give an idea of how you measure performance in lage organizations.
- oliculipolicula 2mo ago[It goes without saying that I'm neither an expert at people, nor an MBA. But let me _try_ to unpack you for PP like _I_ am 10 or 15. Looks like I should be interested in what both of you would say in response, so it might be worthwhile to think as I write] In general there's a sort of arms race between Technical Direction Setters (TDS) and Arbitrarily Omniscient expert Consultants (AOC) But this is _not_ the race that both of you (& I) seem to be concerned about The tech exhaust is a KPI of, for, and by, like PP says, "these people": middle managers whose job is to shepherd AOC-- whom, btw, could well be made of silicon. These middle managers most likely do not "inspire people", even if they have the capability or potential to. If they did they wouldnt _need_ these KPIs. Are they TDS? They could be, but it's _not_ their job. The responsible ones, though, realise that they need to hit those KPIs in order to be good TDS (absent of native ability to not overly indulge in "inspiring people", which is rare in any org, and rarer in large ones) Does this help? Did I manage to capture some essence of the logic?