As long as the system extracts & uses more work than it’s equivalent healthy system—after wastage—then it will outperform it. It doesn’t matter if the system burns through employees every few years, there are plenty of other employees to burn up.
I would think sick systems have less good judgment than healthy systems—they don’t just burn up employees, management is less likely to get information about any mistakes it ’s making.
On the other hand, sick systems do at least persist for quite a while. I’m guessing that they coast on the conscientiousness and other virtues of the employees. It’s conceivable that some fraction of the excess work isn’t wasted.
Why do you think sick systems are highly competitively fit? They seem to get a lot of work out of people, but also waste a great deal of it.
If your hypothesis is that sick systems must be competitively fit because there are a great many of them, I think stronger evidence is needed.
As long as the system extracts & uses more work than it’s equivalent healthy system—after wastage—then it will outperform it. It doesn’t matter if the system burns through employees every few years, there are plenty of other employees to burn up.
I would think sick systems have less good judgment than healthy systems—they don’t just burn up employees, management is less likely to get information about any mistakes it ’s making.
On the other hand, sick systems do at least persist for quite a while. I’m guessing that they coast on the conscientiousness and other virtues of the employees. It’s conceivable that some fraction of the excess work isn’t wasted.