The biggest source of waste is untapped skilled pragmatists
Many commenters resonate with the idea that a large, undervalued group of “skilled pragmatists” quietly keep organizations running while avoiding conflict and office politics, but argue that incentives and culture often push them toward disengagement or “quiet quitting.” The thread explores how vague notions of “ownership,” misaligned reward structures, performative busyness, and politically savvy underperformers lead to wasted talent and resentment, especially in large corporations. Others question the article’s unproven claims about how many such people exist, but broadly agree that better trust, autonomy, recognition (including pay), and technically competent management are crucial to unlocking more of this latent potential.
Scope of “Ownership”
- Disagreement over whether “ownership” is a “mushy” term.
- Some see real ownership as legal equity and decision power; otherwise it’s scapegoating: responsibility without authority.
- Others report strong non‑equity ownership: feeling pride, being recognized as “the person behind X,” and getting career and emotional rewards.
- “Ownership” is seen as toxic when it means blame and unpaid extra work, with no real control.
Work Ethic, Quiet Quitting, and Fake Work
- Several commenters say they now do the minimum (e.g., 1–2 hours of focused work) after being burned by layoffs or politics.
- Others argue this is unethical or self‑sabotaging: promotions and growth require going beyond the bare minimum.
- Counterpoint: in many orgs, extra effort yields little reward beyond more work; raises/promotions often track politics, not contribution.
- Widespread sense that much corporate work is low- or zero-value “box‑ticking” or misdirected projects.
Recognition, Politics, and Promotions
- Repeated stories of quiet high performers passed over while visible self‑promoters advance.
- Advice: explicitly communicate impact (“wins” docs, regular check‑ins), or you risk being invisible even with strong metrics.
- Some see this as structural: managers don’t understand the work deeply, so they reward performance theater.
Layoffs and Motivation
- Many report being laid off despite deep expertise; selections often felt random or driven by location/organizational charts, not performance.
- This pushes some from “change agent” to disengaged pragmatist: why take risks for an employer that won’t reciprocate?
- Others caution against overgeneralizing from single bad experiences, but concede large layoffs rarely distinguish finely among contributors.
How Common Are “Skilled Pragmatists”?
- Skepticism about the article’s claim that they are ~75% of staff. Estimates in discussion are far lower.
- Distinction drawn between raw intelligence, brilliance, and pragmatic judgment; commenters note these are orthogonal.
- Even if a minority, such people are seen as high leverage when supported.
Management, Incentives, and Structure
- Many see big-company bureaucracy, misaligned metrics, and aversion to bad news as the real blockers, not individual apathy.
- Untapped pragmatists often hit walls: decisions and priorities are set elsewhere; “glue work” and cleanup are undervalued.
- Suggested levers: trust, autonomy, clear recognition (including pay), and managers with enough technical grasp to see real impact.