I have a theory.
There is a relationship between the number of people involved in a project and it's overall success, and it goes like this: I think a small group of people can improve their work through cooperation and the energy inherent in a dynamic situation. However once the number of people jumps up above 6-7 or so, I think that it's a detriment.
Too many cooks spoil the pot, the mediocrity of the majority, design by committee, there are plenty of names for it. I heard of an advertising account today where they've spent 1.2 million dollars on creative work and none of it has seen the light of day. Too many people changing their minds, not enough people actually making decisions, political infighting as usual. This is just gross and would never have happened if their weren't 52 people intimately involved in the process.
And even when decisions do get made, good ideas have been so watered down that you can't even tell what the original flavor was supposed to be. It's just terrible and a waste of manpower and good ideas.
This is all well and good in the case of a business. If they squander that much cash on nothing, then the market will sort them out in due time. But I for one am sick of working hard only to see a project end up in "mediocrity the musical" just because of people's stupidity and ego. Let's all just stop trying to justify our position by making a big stink about every little thing and get something done. That goes for everybody.
|everything here is ©2004-2005 Bill Wadman All Rights Reserved | RSS with podcasting|