Seventh law of worker entropy: Difference between revisions

Seventh law of worker entropy (view source)

Revision as of 10:14, 1 September 2020

129 bytes added , 1 September 2020

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,882

edits

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 In support of the theory, we cite {{author|Peter Thiel}} — who has had the odd small success with tech innovation — whose operating assumption when considering whether to invest is that, to displace competitors and have a reasonable chance of success, a tech product should be ''an order of magnitude'' better than its competitors. Not just a ''bit'' better, but ''ten times'' better.<ref>{{br|Zero to One: Notes on Startups, or How to Build the Future}}, {{author|Peter Thiel}}</ref>
-If you want to change how people do things, ''make life easier for them''.
+If you want to change how people do things, ''make life easier for them''. Not ''harder''. Any innovation that, for example, injects a new [[dialog box]], however well-intended — was there ever a [[dialog box]] that ''wasn’t'' well-intended? — into an existing process makes life harder, however exciting the prospect of enhanced MIS that comes from having the [[user]]s repetitively click it may be.
-This law is routinely ignored, at great cost to the poor [[subject matter expert]]s on whose heads attendant [[tedium]] inevitably then rains down but also, gratifyingly, on the [[software as a service]] vendor whose bright<ref>Not bright.</ref> ideas they hawk to [[middle manager]]s in the legal [[chief operating office]].
+The seventh law is routinely ignored, at great cost to the poor [[subject matter expert]]s on whose heads attendant [[tedium]] inevitably then rains down but also, gratifyingly, on the [[software as a service]] vendors whose bright<ref>Not bright.</ref> ideas they hawk to [[middle manager]]s in the legal [[chief operating office]].
-Any innovation that, for example, injects a new [[dialog box]], however well-intended — was there ever a [[dialog box]] that ''wasn’t'' well-intended? — into an existing process violates this principle.
 {{sa}}