Great point - I've experienced similar issues in business. A process, procedure or tool is set up for your team that doesn't work. Rather than following the pro

Great point - I've experienced similar issues in business. A process, procedure or tool is set up for your team that doesn't work. Rather than following the process, the team simply finds the quickest route from point A to B (completing the task) and uses that rather than communicating that the system doesn't work. I imagine it's for similar reasons - they expect the response from management to be a slow and sub-optimal alteration to the process, to be ignored outright, or in some way punished for providing feedback. It's easier to just get the job done, right? On the flip side, a lot of the time you can't simply copy their A to B process to replace the one they ignore as it often misses some annoying yet essential minutiae that needs to be covered from a management perspective. Just as a government might have good reasons for making you tick a bunch of boxes on a form to do something simple - what's not clear to the end user is that they're there to prevent disputes, avoiding treading on a very small minority of people etc. But to average Joe, it's just more work with no clear justification.