I waited to comment so I would not hijack the more pertinent conversation.

I recently received a bill from a well known rental car company 8 months after I had turned in my rental. The bill was for $450 b/c I did not clean the car before turning it in. Customer service explained to me that the contract stated that I must "return the car in the same condition". Oh! Well, ok. LOL. After I appealed, they reduced the bill, but I was "over a barrel" as they say. Just thought I'd share with the community that when renting from the Avis/Budget group, I'll be washing / vacuuming my car in the future as well as getting a signature at drop off.

Until that experience, your analogy made perfect sense (and still does in context).

Thanks again for sharing your wisdom so freely.

Expand full comment

Nicely written.

Expand full comment

How do we know or maybe why does this plan work for organization under survivorship pressure and with weak field leader talent?

This was actually the opposite of what I thought st first, that this is when you might want leaders to hand hold and guide and take tight her reigns.

I see some of the reasoning in the article that the folks on the front lines might have better local information and more motivation but in and stay if they feel and take more ownership.

On the other hand, their decisions and move matter that much more when things are going bad and the organization might already be close to some edge, so it can feel that there is less room for error.

It seems to me there might be a few different reasons for each and still trying to wrap my head around it.

Expand full comment