Also, if someone is good at the job why does it matter if they don’t believe in the mission? If they’re a grifter looking for more money you can just fire them right?
People who aren’t interested in the mission will optimize their actions not in favor of the mission but in favor of what advances their own power. Most institutions are disfunctional because of infighting and it’s important that this one doesn’t go that route.
Why is this problem better solved by systematically underpaying everyone as opposed to firing people who act “in favor of what advances their own power” or who promote infighting?
I think the essential point is that you’re actually not underpaying them—in terms of their own utility gain (if they believe in the mission). You’re only ‘underpaying’ them in terms of money.
It’s still not obviously the correct approach (externalities are an issue too), but [money != utility].
People who aren’t interested in the mission will optimize their actions not in favor of the mission but in favor of what advances their own power. Most institutions are disfunctional because of infighting and it’s important that this one doesn’t go that route.
Why is this problem better solved by systematically underpaying everyone as opposed to firing people who act “in favor of what advances their own power” or who promote infighting?
I think the essential point is that you’re actually not underpaying them—in terms of their own utility gain (if they believe in the mission). You’re only ‘underpaying’ them in terms of money.
It’s still not obviously the correct approach (externalities are an issue too), but [money != utility].