(2025-06-22) Cutler Tbm363 Is Matt A Loser

John Cutler: TBM 363: Is Matt A Loser? I've come to the conclusion that the only thing standing between Matt's company achieving a huge multiple in terms of effectiveness is that there is a cadre of senior executives who 1) are incentivized to ignore Matt's advice to get their bonuses, and 2) would need to consume a large serving of "humble pie" if Matt's advice turned out to be effective. (see also (2025-06-14) Cutler Tbm362 How And Why We Help)

They are "in the room," which has a massive impact on shaping narratives within the company. When layoffs were floated internally, these leaders "had the ear" of key executives and could collectively offset blame onto a layer of middle managers, many of whom had been at the company for a long time.

Matt could tell this was happening based on the types of reports requested from his group. It was far easier to rationalize a layer of inexperienced managers than to face the fact that the strategy (strategic context) was scattered and shifts in the technology landscape threatened the core business model. "It isn't our job to raise the flag that teams are overloaded! That's middle management's job. We want to do ambitious things here at Acme!"

Matt is pretty sure his role is next on the chopping block. The company has decided that the "product operating model" is the answer. In that model, people like Matt don't have a job unless they transition to product leadership or fight their way into the newly formed product ops team (which was a consolation because someone read an article saying product operations is a crutch).

Matt's prior work is considered "process-focused," which is a bad word now. (process person)

People talk about not getting anything done for a month while waiting on overloaded teams (bottleneck). The 'golden child' teams get rewarded for being so effective when actively throwing other teams under the bus. It makes me angry."

How did you personally react to Matt’s story? Does Matt disgust and annoy you? Do you relate to Matt? Is Matt a “loser” or “low agency”? Or a normal personal navigating their company?

Is there objectively such a thing as "low-hanging fruit?" In Matt's mind, everything could be more effective if leadership could "just ________." But maybe that is an illusion.

Should Matt accept the situation's limits and spend more time working on things he directly controls? Should he play the game and try to get into that product operations group?
Are companies rational entities? (Most Successful Companies Get Just One Thing Right)