In custom-made-for-you software case, the programmer spends radically more time than the user, so rewriting the software for each user much more than doubles the cost.
In the custom-made-for-you talk case, the talker spends the same amount of time as the listener and so the effect is doubling.
Sometimes a static explanation is radically better than a tailored one-on-one interaction, instead of slightly worse. In that case I think broadcasting is very useful, just like for software. I think that’s unusual (for example, I expect that reading this comment is worse for you than covering this topic in a one-on-one discussion). Even in cases where a large amount of up-front investment can improve communication radically, I think the more likely optimal strategy is to spend a bunch of time creating an artifact that explains something well, and then to additionally discuss the issue one-on-one as a complement.
In custom-made-for-you software case, the programmer spends radically more time than the user, so rewriting the software for each user much more than doubles the cost.
In the custom-made-for-you talk case, the talker spends the same amount of time as the listener and so the effect is doubling.
Sometimes a static explanation is radically better than a tailored one-on-one interaction, instead of slightly worse. In that case I think broadcasting is very useful, just like for software. I think that’s unusual (for example, I expect that reading this comment is worse for you than covering this topic in a one-on-one discussion). Even in cases where a large amount of up-front investment can improve communication radically, I think the more likely optimal strategy is to spend a bunch of time creating an artifact that explains something well, and then to additionally discuss the issue one-on-one as a complement.
Yes, but in part that’s because being in your company is such a joy. ;-)