• surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    5 days ago

    Eh… You can run a company without the best or brightest nowadays. Mediocrity gets the job done, mostly.

      • cyberwolfie@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        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.

          • cyberwolfie@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            Stacked, no. But they have several people who are best and brightest.

            Every company has this you think?

              • nomy@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                4 days ago

                So a lot of times those C-levels will be pretty average people eh?

              • cyberwolfie@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                4 days ago

                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.

                • AtariDump@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 days ago

                  Yeah, I’m not reading that. This isn’t worth the effort.

                  Have a good one!

                  Edit: Salty, huh.

      • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        4 days ago

        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.

        • Moc@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          Ah I see what you’re saying. Yes I agree, with the caveat that innovation requires the best and brightest.