this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2024
450 points (98.1% liked)
Technology
60332 readers
3618 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yeah, then they lose all their best and brightest who are disappearing off to work on their own things.
All these idiot C-suite trash will wind up holding is a bag of yesterday's technology, a mass of obsolete infrastructure and a bunch of brands they've helped destroy.
It is by design. Pool a bunch of money, buy companies to bleed them dry. Wait for new companies to take their place, rinse and repeat.
Eh... You can run a company without the best or brightest nowadays. Mediocrity gets the job done, mostly.
It's always been that way. Otherwise General Motors wouldn't exist. Neither would Microsoft.
Do you think every company out there is stacked with the best and brightest? By definition, only a minority of employees can be considered that. Many companies run just fine on mediocrity, it all depends on how they intend to make money. Mediocrity can in many cases be an advantage for a company, if that allows one to set aside any shred of integrity at a shot of accomplishment and praise from executing on the many bullshit and unethical things many corproations bring in cash from.
Every company has this you think?
So a lot of times those C-levels will be pretty average people eh?
The thing that's not average about them is their social position and consequent connections. I've met a lot of them, from firms whose name you'd know, and they're the types who would have been B students at competitive universities. Not stupid by any means, but not brilliant. But their network of acquaintances is aways extensive and elite.
The best and brightest in an area for the pay the companies are willing to pay is not the same as the best and brightest (you are adding a lot of constraints). A lot of times those people will be quite average (or mediocre). By definition, most people are average or close to it. If a company is not willing to pay to attract and retain the actual best and brightest (as many will not), they are left with mediocrity. The companies will often still be able to make a lot of money, because companies in general do not need the best and brightest just to avoid failure and bankruptcy.
Will once innovative companies become worse companies and provide worse services/products? Absolutely. Will they be left behind by better companies who do attract the best and brightest? Sometimes, depending on the industry and the depths of the moats they have built and the number of aligators guarding their monopolies (e.g. regulatory capture and other monopolistic behavior). Will they go bankrupt? Sometimes, but in general it takes more than to just settle into a mediocrity.
Yeah, I’m not reading that. This isn’t worth the effort.
Have a good one!
Edit: Salty, huh.
Ever heard of the term "Code-Monkeys" ?
It's generally used to refer to programmers by people who have no idea of what programming entails.
Yup & honestly that should be changed
Lmao what?
Thousands of companies are out there doing just fine. Maybe 10% if people can be the best and brightest. It's impossible for every company to have them.
The math just doesn't math.
Average performers are just fine.
Ah I see what you're saying. Yes I agree, with the caveat that innovation requires the best and brightest.