You didn't, and you didn't leave the impression of having done so; it's just me poking to understand.
> like who is in charge of performance reviews for who
These are the kinds of things I'm trying to challenge: Are performance reviews useful? Would performance reviews actually be more useful in some other structure than a classic hierarchy?
In other words, I'm not convinced beyond all reasonable doubt that the classic hierarchy is the optimal structure for the limited, but useful purpose you describe it having. Obviously the standard thinking is that it is.
> It is not sufficient in the slightest to describe how a company makes decisions, yet too many people treat it as if it is all you need to know.
You didn't, and you didn't leave the impression of having done so; it's just me poking to understand.
> like who is in charge of performance reviews for who
These are the kinds of things I'm trying to challenge: Are performance reviews useful? Would performance reviews actually be more useful in some other structure than a classic hierarchy?
In other words, I'm not convinced beyond all reasonable doubt that the classic hierarchy is the optimal structure for the limited, but useful purpose you describe it having. Obviously the standard thinking is that it is.
> It is not sufficient in the slightest to describe how a company makes decisions, yet too many people treat it as if it is all you need to know.
Completely agreed.