> It is a massively self-evident fact that a lot more money was made during the “principles” period than after.
Is it though? I've seen a lot of claims about this or that management style or company structure to be responsible for huge profits and growth. It's usually a more simple explanation, such as market timing + smart people. Ultimately it's survivor bias. It could be argued that if this were really the case, all top companies would be using it by now.
But that last sentence is the Creo supporters whole argument - self interested management get much more out of rent seeking in a nice profitable company while seeing their hierarchy position reinforcing their social
Status- in short as long as everyone keeps being “performative hierarchical management” and looking like they do a good job, there is no incentive to actually do a better job
Is it though? I've seen a lot of claims about this or that management style or company structure to be responsible for huge profits and growth. It's usually a more simple explanation, such as market timing + smart people. Ultimately it's survivor bias. It could be argued that if this were really the case, all top companies would be using it by now.