If an organization contains sub-competent people, it’s traditions and protocols need to ensure those people are quickly and reliably thrown out themselves.
Unskilled and sub-competent are not synonyms in this context; even a ditch-digger can be competent, it just means they dig quickly regularly and with a minimum of fuss. And not arbitrarily throwing out protocols for momentary convenience is a matter of both maintaining regularity and minimizing fuss, so I shouldn’t have to worry about the ditch-digging committee making a mess of things so long as they all have their heads screwed on straight.
Well designed traditions and protocols will contain elements that cause most competent people to not want to throw them out.
No. If an organization contains sub-competent people, it should take this into account when designing traditions and protocols.
Corollary: all organisations eventually contain sub-competent people. Design protocols accordingly.
If an organization contains sub-competent people, it’s traditions and protocols need to ensure those people are quickly and reliably thrown out themselves.
Therefore, a reliable method for evaluating competency needs to be part of the traditions and protocols. Otherwise it’s just a question of time...
Not necessarily, sub-competent people can still be useful, e.g., unskilled labor is a thing.
Unskilled and sub-competent are not synonyms in this context; even a ditch-digger can be competent, it just means they dig quickly regularly and with a minimum of fuss. And not arbitrarily throwing out protocols for momentary convenience is a matter of both maintaining regularity and minimizing fuss, so I shouldn’t have to worry about the ditch-digging committee making a mess of things so long as they all have their heads screwed on straight.