There is a related concern I have about costs piling up due to corporate or managerial mandates. I have the impression that people above us only think about what will make their jobs easier -- what else do they need for us to supply them with so that they will be able to achieve predictability, manage or reduce costs, and generally manage the company better. When they come at it from this angle, it always seems reasonable that they ask us to do more -- provide more reports, track time against projects, report metrics -- when in fact most of what they ask actually interferes with us being able to get real work done. Since they/we do not have adequate productivity measurements in place already, the resulting reduction in productivity is never noticed, hence an invisible cost has been added without a conscious decision or cost/benefit analysis. Since I think most individual contributors recognize that this is taking place, it acts as a disincentive.
In the end I think the solution to both the article's and my concerns are the same: It is always better to ask the members of the team that experienced the problem firsthand what they think the solution would be or what they would do differently next time to avoid the problem. Especially if you phrase it as "what could you or your team have done differently to improve the outcome" and urge them to avoid proposing major process initiatives if at all possible, the improvement will be more practical and lower cost in all senses.
In the end I think the solution to both the article's and my concerns are the same: It is always better to ask the members of the team that experienced the problem firsthand what they think the solution would be or what they would do differently next time to avoid the problem. Especially if you phrase it as "what could you or your team have done differently to improve the outcome" and urge them to avoid proposing major process initiatives if at all possible, the improvement will be more practical and lower cost in all senses.