Shouldn't free market reward companies that go the other way and where people don't "fail upwards"? It is kind of demoralising to think otherwise, but it seems it is true.
We see it everywhere. Bad companies making bad decisions keep surviving, and actually the vast majority of companies are like this.
One implication is that MBAs in suits that make bad decisions are actually right and their decisions are not bad. The other implication is that there is no free market, no meritocracy and the truth is, game was rigged from the start.
Edit: I should add that most of this is anegdotal evidence and a general feeling I have. It is not a very powerful argument I'm making.
I don't understand the analogy with the Mexican cavefish. They don't have eyes because they don't need them, and companies don't hire competent people because they don't need them? Is that the take?
As I read the blog post, I thought that it was released today. Maybe point out that it is almost a year old. It feels like it is manipulating HN users.
Like the example with the doctors and how to find actually good ones, you can add this essay to the list of enterpreneurship tips you can compare and decide for yourself what is useful and what isn't.
I suppose not getting a layoff email and instead getting it delivered face to face would be more human, but that's American capitalism for you in all its glory
We see it everywhere. Bad companies making bad decisions keep surviving, and actually the vast majority of companies are like this.
One implication is that MBAs in suits that make bad decisions are actually right and their decisions are not bad. The other implication is that there is no free market, no meritocracy and the truth is, game was rigged from the start.
Edit: I should add that most of this is anegdotal evidence and a general feeling I have. It is not a very powerful argument I'm making.