> Risk is much more tolerable in the last mile than the first one
Is that objectively true? I think you could also make the argument the other way that things compound when you innovate at the root.
I think it's your opinion that that's the case, and it generally makes sense to me as well, but I'm still saying it's a judgement call.
There are a lot of things / decisions at a company that don't strictly matter for the customer immediately but they still eventually matter for the customer - because they have a downstream impact. In this case, maybe you save that money and spend it somewhere else.
You make a good point I think the blog post still works.
"The real estate team should not be a risk center." - Why not? Sure, I agree with you it doesn't make a ton of sense _to me_ to fire 90% of the janitors.
Satya said he wants his team to be "Intellectually honest".
I'd argue that a plan to fire 90% of the janitors today is not that realistic, but if some real estate exec thinks they honestly have a plan that could be successful, are tracking data, and change their plan if they're wrong - what's the problem?
Maybe they're crazy enough to have figured something out we don't know....or not in which case Satya says you'll be gone if you make it a habit.
Is that objectively true? I think you could also make the argument the other way that things compound when you innovate at the root.
I think it's your opinion that that's the case, and it generally makes sense to me as well, but I'm still saying it's a judgement call.
There are a lot of things / decisions at a company that don't strictly matter for the customer immediately but they still eventually matter for the customer - because they have a downstream impact. In this case, maybe you save that money and spend it somewhere else.