I don't think trans-disciplinary inquiry is arrogance - the intellectual fields are somewhat arbitrary relative to how human expertise relates to real world problems. But, effective trans-disciplinary inquiry requires awareness of philosophical commitments, and familiarity with existing literature/theory.
The bigger challenge might be that people with ML expertise need to solve problems of human-AI interaction and alignment because the training for the former is uni-disciplanary while the latter is trans-disciplinary.
Maybe an investment in "A-players" for streaming stifled cultural diversity and kept engineers from being able to innovate on novel media formats where they are losing engagement of the younger demographic to TikTok and other social media video formats.
The same corporate strategy and culture that hired "A-player" engineers for streaming is hiring "A-player" studios for content.
Defining A-players as such means you've set the rules of the game instead of building a culture of adaptive success criteria to meet customer opportunities. The label itself is a function of organizational ossification. This is the likely legacy of our tech giants; innovative in only one direction and not able to change fast enough to avoid becoming a brittle, mediocre institution over time.
As consumers, we can all feel this ossified mediocrity every day.