Is Matel Stalinist?

[Tyler Durden]

Well, I wouldn't apply the word "oppressive" across the board to the 
cultures of big companies, but the fact is that modern American coporate 
culture more often than not imitates a top-down, 'statist' culture that is 
so universal we rarely recognize it.

For instance, high-level strategic decisions are made almost entirely in the 
vacuum of power. And often, that's appropriate. But many times, the actual 
people who do the work and know the most about the subject are completely 
out of the loop. Silicon Valley at its best operates in a very different 
way...companies are far more driven from the product/technology/service 
perspective, instead of imagining that balance sheets can make a Lucent into 
a Cisco. (And at its best, if some hot engineers along with a couple of 
useful management types feel strongly enough about a missed opportunity, 
they just split off and start doing it.)

But the best of Sillicon Valley is a rare exception. Most of the time "they" 
make decisions and people who are the technical experts must merely quietly 
implement those decisions. It's interesting to imagine what would have 
happened to Lucent if, for instance, the employees could have voted on the 
acquisition of Chromatis. They would have quickly realized that they were 
getting a raw $3B deal on a mediocre product, AND that they already had 
something equivalent ready in-house.

Retail is the absolute worst. FOr whatever reason (and I don't believe it 
has anything to do with competitiveness), big CD or Book chains never 
empower or reward employees on their ability to purchase books for their 
store that sell well. In fact, almost zero real purchasing decisions are 
done locally.

But nobody seems to notice...we're completely used to being passive cogs in 
a big, fat machine-state. So in a sense, it's gone way beyond 
'repression'...no need for that rat-cage around our heads anymore.

-Tyler Durden

>From: Declan McCullagh <declan at well.com>
>To: "James A. Donald" <jamesd at echeque.com>
>CC: cypherpunks at lne.com
>Subject: Re: Decline of the Cypherpunks list...Part 19
>Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 09:45:33 -0600
>
>On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 04:27:38PM -0800, James A. Donald wrote:
> > Everyone agrees that big corporations are oppressive,
> > bureaucratic, inefficient, etc.   No one more so than the
> > management advisers to big corporations.
>
>I'm not sure I'd agree that big corporations are oppressive. How?
>I once worked at Xerox and had a splendid time. Didn't feel "oppressed"
>at all.
>
>As for bureaucratic and inefficient, perhaps, but I've seen 50-people
>organizations devolve quite well. I suppose it all depends on your
>frame of reference. If you mean, "I can find perceived
>inefficiencies," I'm sure you can. But if they become too inefficient,
>well, over time competitors will rise to take advantage of those
>inefficiencies. Xerox can be an example here as well. This is just
>common sense.
>
>-Declan

_________________________________________________________________
Take advantage of our best MSN Dial-up offer of the year  six months 
@$9.95/month. Sign up now! http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup