While work was required, any worker with the right skills could have done it.
While money was required from someone, anyone’s money would have sufficed.
Switch any piece of the whole enterprise out for another, and as long as the pieces fulfill the same function, the enterprise still succeeds; remove the engineer, and the enterprise never happens in the first place.
I don’t see why this is true. What if the skills are actually rare, such that the worker or workers cannot be replaced? What if the materials are also rare?
On the other hand, what if building a bridge there is fairly obvious, so much so that, if this specific engineer doesn’t build it, instead of the entreprise never happening, it just happens one month later, the time for another engineer to randomly notice this bridge building opportunity?
You seem to arbitrarily separate between the character finding the idea—or, as you put it, having the vision—from all the other characters, and I neither see why nor believe that this particular character deserves that much credit.
I suppose the point I’m gesturing towards is that the person with the combination of (idea + follow-through) is the one we associate with the credit for an endeavor, usually; that’s a large part of their share of the reward and their incentive for completing the project. The people who do the work are compensated with wages, and the people who invest are compensated with shares.
I don’t see why this is true. What if the skills are actually rare, such that the worker or workers cannot be replaced? What if the materials are also rare?
On the other hand, what if building a bridge there is fairly obvious, so much so that, if this specific engineer doesn’t build it, instead of the entreprise never happening, it just happens one month later, the time for another engineer to randomly notice this bridge building opportunity?
You seem to arbitrarily separate between the character finding the idea—or, as you put it, having the vision—from all the other characters, and I neither see why nor believe that this particular character deserves that much credit.
I suppose the point I’m gesturing towards is that the person with the combination of (idea + follow-through) is the one we associate with the credit for an endeavor, usually; that’s a large part of their share of the reward and their incentive for completing the project. The people who do the work are compensated with wages, and the people who invest are compensated with shares.