Why is it that whenever a company happens to be successful, and does meetings/goals differently than most (also successful) companies, the success is attributed to the lack of meetings/goals, and not, y'know, the business?
I think there are a few reasons for this. The primary one is that it's a visible signal, and people make attribution errors almost constantly so it gets fixated on. I think the other reason might be that it's unpopular (and not actionable) to say "this company succeeded because the people there are better than you" or "this company had great product market fit, and the employees efforts really didn't make the difference"
