An episode of Yes, Prime Minister, The Bishop’s Gambit (about a bishop appointment) captures this dynamic very well.pic.twitter.com/qmKLAnbRfk
This is the legacy version of twitter.com. We will be shutting it down on June 1, 2020. Please switch to a supported browser, or disable the extension which masks your browser. You can see a list of supported browsers in our Help Center.
This is my conversational account. For my work follow @ribbonfarm, @breaking_smart, @artofgig. Tweets are 90% vacuous views, apathetically held. Mediocritopian.
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more
Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more
By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.
| Country | Code | For customers of |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 40404 | (any) |
| Canada | 21212 | (any) |
| United Kingdom | 86444 | Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2 |
| Brazil | 40404 | Nextel, TIM |
| Haiti | 40404 | Digicel, Voila |
| Ireland | 51210 | Vodafone, O2 |
| India | 53000 | Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance |
| Indonesia | 89887 | AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata |
| Italy | 4880804 | Wind |
| 3424486444 | Vodafone | |
| » See SMS short codes for other countries | ||
This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.
Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.
When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.
The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.
Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.
Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.
Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.
See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.
Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.
An episode of Yes, Prime Minister, The Bishop’s Gambit (about a bishop appointment) captures this dynamic very well.pic.twitter.com/qmKLAnbRfk
Venkatesh Rao Retweeted Jorge Camacho
Yes, they’re born bureaucrats too
https://twitter.com/j_camachor/status/1208203663262519297?s=21 …https://twitter.com/j_camachor/status/1208203663262519297 …
Venkatesh Rao added,
Romantic institutionalism otoh, which goes what —> why —> how, is seen most often and most effectively in sociopathic cult orgs. The what and why are very very clear and make up for a shit ton of chaos in the how. Often though the stated and actual what/why are miles apart
If stated what/why = actual what/why and the leaders are not in some sort of denial about their real motives (cf: tyranny of structurelessnes) you get an interesting stress test of the “reducibility to praxis” of the governing missionary ideology.
Such cases are very rare and most fail the test, but in a good way and for the right reason: the ideology is not reducible to praxis (note deliberate distinction from reducibility to *practice*) for reasons like incoherence, utopianism etc.
The praxis-practice gap is the medium-message gap. The reason not to address how before what/why is medium-message concordance. Most missions worth pursuing require a degree of innovation in medium. So locking in how while what/why are loreipsummed short-circuits co-evolution
This co-evolution translates to a very specific constraint on the “how” — it specifies what pattern of risk to take on and why. So it short-circuits the default process of picking from off the shelf design patterns on the basis of what fits your psyche rather than the problem.
Resetting a bureaucracy that has already locked on to its risk preferences is very hard. But at a founding moment, you have a lot of leeway to set defaults in a place principals are not used to, and force mechanism design to a new corner of risk space, innovating if necessary.
Resets require an external shock proportionate to the inertial mass of the processes already locked on to old risk profile. Aka a Trump-like shock (or natural disaster or radical technical idea etc)
Note that even apparently high-risk orgs with an aggressive posture can be very risk averse on particular fronts, with process inertia there (a tell: surprisingly incompetent people in high-paid roles in otherwise competent orgs) and strongly resist shifting risk exposure there
Yes, I’m subtweeting an anonymized composite of a dozen client orgs from the past decade 
And surprisingly, this is not restricted to big orgs. Orgs as small as 4-5 people show this pattern of bureaucratization. It’s not a function of the scaling staircase but the founder mindsets.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.