Andy Pemberton’s Post

There are costs to efficiency. I was listening to PJ Vogt interview Tony Hall from Carvana on the latest episode of Search Engine, and part of their conversation really struck me. Commenting on the notorious inefficiency of the Dept. of Motor Vehicles, Tony remarked that "what may seem like an innocuous error could be life-changing [for an individual citizen]... anytime you're doing something new and innovative, even when there's a demand for it, inevitably you're going to be introducing new risk." PJ then, offered the reflection: "They'd rather be inefficient than make a mistake... (because, for many people, their car is their most valuable possession)." You can (and should) listen here: https://lnkd.in/gGUfaNhk (Their convo starts around the 39:10 mark.) Blair Enns talks about what he calls "The Innoficiency Problem" (https://lnkd.in/gcqyTdqU), that is, the inverse relationship between innovation and efficiency. As he puts it: "Innovation may result in efficiencies (a form of value, the creation of which is the goal of innovation), but the act of innovating is inherently wasteful and therefore itself inefficient." Many orgs face this challenge — wanting to evolve while also finding ways to streamline. But that evolving and finding can result in trying things that don't work. Often that means adding something new, seeing how it works, and if it doesn't, removing it and trying something else. The addition can introduce risk, but these tend to be "safe to try" experiments that live within the risk tolerance of the org. Musk's approach to innovation varies depending on the example. Most of his ventures were from-scratch endeavors where "leanness" made sense. Twitter was different—he stripped an existing org back to the "leanest viable" version of itself (viability being debatable). As inefficient as it is, the federal government has been bureaucratized for risk mitigation (obviously, there's a case to be made that inefficiency itself introduces a different type of risk). Is it possible that Musk stripping back entire divisions and agencies could be a much-needed streamlining of government bureaucracy? Absolutely. To pretend that it won't have intensely disruptive ripple effects "the likes of which the world has never seen before" in the day-to-day lives of millions of Americans is disingenuous. But Musk would rather be efficient than worry about mistakes... errors that will prove to be life-changing, for better perhaps, but inevitably for worse in many, many cases. "Fools rush in where angels fear to tread,"... and it's the angels that tend to have to clean up after the richest fools.

I say there is often huge misunderstanding between cost optimization and cost reduction/cutting. Brute cost cutting can have the opposite effect, I can cite BP petroleum as a recent 'Cast Study'. Basically, under the stewardship of Sir John Browne 'Sun King' huge cost cutting related to avoiding & prolonging expensive maintenance generally costs many billions to ensure safe running. This resulted in compromised safety and major accident 'Deepwater Horizon' accident, and by the way many expert engineering folks warned and predicted the outcome. The outcome was an estimated $65 billion plus in compensation & clean-up bill. So, the cost optimization is a much better strategy that is (1) hire the very best skilled & competent people not cheap or offshoring nonsense to reduce cost (2) give your very best people the very best tools to save time & delivery the best quality (3) result / outcome that you have a very high probability 95% plus getting it right First Time. Getting it right first time whatever you do always turns out to be more cost-effective rather than doing it cheaply to pretend you are cost cutting. Other examples if anyone interested I suggest read "Toyota's Way" How to achieve Operational Excellence!

LinkedIn Tip: This post is a great model for clickbait and attention. You post something obvious, yet controversial. You quote anonymous sources with polarizing and inciting views, sprinkling in a sensational story that doesn't need to be accurate but is easy to believe. You ask a question at the end that no one can actually answer. The result is hundreds of people will spew opinions about the love or hate they have been forced to adopt based on who they trust or what tv/radio/social network they consume in the hopes of convincing one other person to agree. And the occasional meme or joke. Yet all of these people spent their time getting worked up about nothing, and absolutely nothing productive came of it. LinkedIn, meanwhile, sold some advertising. This is 45% of LinkedIn. Another 40% is "I'm happy to announce I started a job at...". That leaves 15% to anything marginally productive. Maybe our societal priorities are misaligned?

Very interesting perspective especially on whether Elon will want to use his startup/corporate cost saving approach in a government setting and if yes the question is will it work? and if will work, will it lead to intended outcomes or it will cause more harm than good. Time will tell and looking forward to learning from the experience.

Two universal truths are that it is easier to tear down than to build up; and what goes up must come down. Therefore, we must spend more time going up and tear down less than what we build up, and we must be careful about what is torn down. Removing janitorial services at a tech company, is not the same thing as destroying its servers.

During Elon Musk’s first visit to Twitter, he denied rumours he’d get rid of 75% of staff. True to his word, around 80% were laid off. His cost-cutting philosophy is well-known: cut first and fix later. But it’s not just about cost reduction for the sake of it. It’s also a way of driving innovation that would otherwise be impossible. At SpaceX, Musk realised that innovation in the space industry would be hard, because of the regulatory environment and stringent performance criteria. So Musk’s innovation was around cost reduction itself. This forced a return to first principles and paved the way for lower-cost, frequent space transportation. But time is also a cost. A former SpaceX employee once told a story about a presentation given by a government customer: “Six slides into the presentation, 75% of the room had walked out. I had to tell him that if he didn't get to the point, I'd be the only person left in the room.” There is no denying that Elon Musk’s philosophy has paid off commercially. Twitter / X usage is higher than ever. Tesla's share price is up nearly one-third over the last year. And SpaceX now catches its reusable rockets in mid-air with chopsticks. Musk’s next big cost-cutting and innovation challenge will be cutting $2 trillion of spending from the annual US federal budget by 2026. What can you learn from Elon Musk to implement in your business? And what do you think would happen? #Entrepreneurship #Business #CostCutting #Innovation

Elon Musk's vision of "efficiency" as head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) sparks debate, blending cost-cutting zeal with high-pressure management practices. 🏛️ DOGE’s mission: Co-led with Vivek Ramaswamy, the department will advise on cutting $2 trillion in federal spending by reducing government waste. 💼 Relentless micromanagement: Former employees describe Musk as deeply involved and fearless in decision-making, though some view his methods as ruthless. ⚙️ Cost of cuts: Mass layoffs at Twitter and other firms led to chaos, loss of institutional knowledge, and ongoing legal challenges, including claims of wrongful termination. 🔍 Operational trade-offs: Critics argue Musk’s drive for efficiency often comes at the expense of operational stability and employee morale. 📚 Insights from insiders: Walter Isaacson's biography highlights Musk’s resistance to "psychological safety" and tendency for impulsive actions like firing engineers without cause. #Efficiency #ElonMusk #Leadership 🌟 Vision versus reality: While Musk’s bold approach aims to reshape bureaucracy, it raises questions about the balance between ambition and sustainable execution. 🧠 Lessons in leadership: Leaders can draw from Musk’s example the importance of pairing vision with empathetic, strategic workforce management. 🔧 Government potential: DOGE’s success depends on translating private-sector practices to public-sector challenges while avoiding the pitfalls of overzealous cost-cutting. ♻️ Repost if you enjoyed this post and follow me, César Beltrán Miralles, for more curated content about leadership! https://lnkd.in/gUwRy5V4.fastcompany.com%2F91229950%2Fhow-does-elon-musk-define-efficiency-we-asked-his-former-employees&utm_campaign=aga&utm_source=agsadl1%2Csh%2Fx%2Fgs%2Fm2%2F4

#ElonMusk's Vision of Efficiency: What Does It Mean for the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)? Elon Musk’s approach to efficiency has always been a mix of high expectations and controversial decisions. As he prepares to co-lead the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), his past actions offer insights into what "efficiency" might mean under his leadership. Musk’s cost-cutting strategies have often been dramatic, as seen during his Twitter acquisition, where he laid off 80% of the workforce within weeks. While aimed at trimming expenses, these cuts led to operational chaos, highlighting the challenges of balancing austerity with functionality (#Efficiency #WorkplaceTransformation). Musk’s leadership style is described as intensely involved and fearlessly experimental, driving innovation but sometimes at the expense of employee morale and stability. For example, former SpaceX engineer Jim Cantrell recalls Musk’s relentless focus on outcomes, a hallmark of his ambitious projects like Tesla and SpaceX (#LeadershipStyle #Innovation). However, his critics, like former Twitter data scientist Melissa Ingle, point out that Musk’s drive for results can dismiss organizational knowledge and undermine workforce stability, as witnessed by the haphazard layoffs and subsequent disruption (#EmployeeMorale #OrganizationalChaos). For DOGE, tasked with reducing $2 trillion in federal waste, Musk’s methods could mean aggressive overhauls of government processes. While his track record suggests transformative potential, it also raises questions about sustainability and inclusivity in decision-making (#GovernmentEfficiency #CostCutting). As Musk steps into this advisory role, the question remains: Will his vision bring much-needed agility to bureaucratic systems, or will it replicate the disruption seen in his corporate ventures? Only time will tell.

Elon musk journey in last four years , and How he turned the table : • Four years ago, Elon Musk was not involved in politics; he was focused on engineering and building innovative projects like cars, rockets, and tunnels. • A Congresswoman from California tweets “F*ck Elon Musk,” prompting Musk to move his companies to Texas as a response. • Twitter de-platforms a sitting President, raising concerns about free speech. • After Biden’s election, an EV summit excludes Tesla, despite being the leading American electric car company. • Government agencies start increasing their scrutiny on Musk’s ventures. • Musk purchases Twitter for $44 billion, symbolically walking in with a sink. • Releases the Twitter files, revealing Democratic involvement in media censorship. • Musk fires 80% of Twitter staff, retaining a smaller, highly skilled team. • Advertisers pull out, causing Twitter revenue to drop by 80%, resulting in a $20 billion loss for Musk. • The state revokes Musk’s $56 billion pay package, despite meeting all metrics, due to a lawsuit from a minor shareholder. • In response, Musk supports Trump, investing time and money into his campaign. • Musk becomes an unpaid volunteer, holding town halls, speeches, and facilitating Trump’s appearance on Joe Rogan’s show. • The strategy is based on “The Elon Method”: 1. Identify the most existential problem. 2. Pinpoint the key leverage point (e.g., a swing state). 3. Commit entirely, taking substantial risks. • Musk views the potential 50/50 outcome as an opportunity to shift the odds in his favor. • If successful, gains include: 1. A significant favor owed by Trump. 2. A government that supports pro-tech and pro-business policies. 3. Satisfaction of overcoming critics. • The investment of $150 million is strategically aimed at potentially generating billions in returns. • Musk is seen as a risk-taker, willing to sacrifice likeability for credibility. • A chess analogy encapsulates his approach: victory is achieved by unexpected, bold moves. With Focus and determination , Things can be achieved in unfavourable situations too !!! #Bravo #elonmusk #entrepreneur #Negotiator

Elon Musk has fired 80% of Twitter (6500 people) since acquiring the company in 2022 🤯 Now, he's been hired to do the same for the US Government leading the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) 🐶 The way he’s running the company is very particular (to say the least), but there’s so much we can learn from it. These are some of principles behind his management: 👇 1. Small, Strong, Technical Teams What It Means: Focus on lean, highly skilled teams that deliver results with agility. Lesson: Quality > Quantity. Empower capable individuals to drive innovation without the bloat of large teams. 2. Parkinson’s Law What It Means: Work expands to fill the time available for its completion. Musk pushes for tight deadlines to boost productivity. Lesson: Challenge teams with ambitious timelines to unlock their maximum potential. Efficiency often comes from urgency. 3. Creating a Vibrant Workplace What It Means: A fast-paced, high-energy culture can inspire employees to perform at their best. Lesson: Inject passion and purpose into the workplace. Employees thrive in dynamic environments where they feel connected to a greater mission. 4. Removing Bottlenecks Fast What It Means: Quickly address and eliminate obstacles that slow down progress. Lesson: Identify inefficiencies ruthlessly and act decisively to maintain momentum. 5. Super Connection to the Engineering Team What It Means: Leaders should have hands-on involvement and deep technical understanding. Lesson: Bridge the gap between leadership and execution by being technically informed and present. 6. No Meetings Rule What It Means: Avoid unnecessary meetings that waste time and energy. Lesson: Communication should be swift, clear, and actionable. Replace meetings with asynchronous updates whenever possible. If Musk were to apply these principles to the US Government through DOGE 🐶, the implications would be fascinating—and probably controversial. While some inefficiencies might be eliminated, the approach could face pushback due to the scale and complexity of government operations.