Does the Bell Labs example match the claim, though…? My reaction upon reading that one was the same as yours on reading the other anti-examples you listed. OP writes:
The same pattern emerges when looking at successful research institutions such as Xerox PARC, Bell Labs, or DARPA. Time and again, you find a crucial figure in the background: A manager who deliberately shielded researchers from demands for immediate utility, from bureaucratic oversight, and from the constant need to justify their work to higher-ups.
So… there was one specific person—that “crucial figure”—who was accountable to the higher-ups. He “shielded” the researchers by taking all of the accountability on himself! That’s the very opposite of the “accountability sink” pattern, it seems to me…
Does the Bell Labs example match the claim, though…? My reaction upon reading that one was the same as yours on reading the other anti-examples you listed. OP writes:
So… there was one specific person—that “crucial figure”—who was accountable to the higher-ups. He “shielded” the researchers by taking all of the accountability on himself! That’s the very opposite of the “accountability sink” pattern, it seems to me…