The Folly of Counting Heads
I’ve always found it a bit absurd, the corporate obsession with size. For decades, the prevailing wisdom was that a bigger company, with more staff, more offices, and more layers of middle management, was inherently a better, more successful one. It was a simple, almost primitive metric. More people must equal more output, right? Well, that particular piece of orthodoxy is now looking rather tired, and frankly, a bit foolish.
Let’s be honest, we’ve all seen it. The sprawling conglomerates that move with the agility of a tranquilised elephant. General Motors, for instance, needs over 150,000 people to run its show. Compare that to some of the newer players on the block, companies that generate staggering revenue with a team you could fit in a decent-sized pub. It strikes me that the game has fundamentally changed. The new measure of success isn't how many people you employ, but how much you can achieve with as few as possible. It’s about efficiency, not sheer mass.