[closeparen]

Instead of management by mushy human judgement, hold people accountable for KPIs.

Instead of letting teams invent and adapt their own processes, dictate a unified JIRA workflow based on the needs of your BI tool.

Demand that your org's microservices architecture be simplified until it fits neatly on one Google Slide.

Confuse investment in a report with investment in the subject of the report.

[coldtea]

>Instead of management by mushy human judgement, hold people accountable for KPIs.

So it mostly advises for tired, old, worst practices?

[homonculus1]

Exactly, legibility is an explanation for why such practices are adopted. They kill morale and productivity yet they must be optimizing for something or else nobody would do them. That something is legibility.

[jrochkind1]

This is a very confusing conversation with a lot of ambiguous referents.

I think Scott's theory, as outlined in the OP, is for why the sorts of practices closeparen listed (KPI's etc) won't work well, will have problems. Scott does not advocate for them, but against them.

Whereas closeparen's comment may have implied the opposite. I'm not sure if it's (eg) "KPIs" or "mushy human judgement" you are calling a "tired, old, worst practice".

[juped]

It was a pretty unambiguous and clear reply to its parent asking for a "tl;dr on the concept", giving examples.

[jrochkind1]

Apparently it is me that was was still ambiguous and unclear.

> > [closeparen]: Instead of management by mushy human judgement, hold people accountable for KPIs.

> [coldtea]: So it mostly advises for tired, old, worst practices?

I believe closeparen meant that (and the other examples), of what Scott's legibility theory is _critiquing_, not advising for. Using KPIs instead of human judgement is an example of what Scott's theory says will have problems, not examples of what Scott's theory calls for or advises people to do. (I agree with that read of Scott's theory).

But I believe coldtea was calling (eg) KPIs a "tired old practice", and misreading to think closeparen was saying Scott's theory advised for them. (Although I may have this backwards?)

Perhaps it is me who is misreading? It is hard to be sure, because closeparen wasn't clear on if those were examples of what Scott was calling for or critiquing (I can see how it would be 'unambiguous and clear' to read it as saying Scott's theory called for using KPIs instead of "mushy human judgement", but since I am familiar with Scott's argument, I doubt closeparen meant it that way, since it's not Scott's argument); and then coldtea wasn't clear on whether it's the left or right clauses in the sentances they were calling "tired, old practices".

And this is now entirely too many words about this.

[juped]

>Instead of management by mushy human judgement, hold people accountable for KPIs.

This is a distortion caused by management's desire for legibility

>Instead of letting teams invent and adapt their own processes, dictate a unified JIRA workflow based on the needs of your BI tool.

This is a distortion caused by management's desire for legibility

>Demand that your org's microservices architecture be simplified until it fits neatly on one Google Slide.

This is a distortion caused by management's desire for legibility

>Confuse investment in a report with investment in the subject of the report.

This is a distortion caused by management's desire for legibility

[coldtea]

>But I believe coldtea was calling (eg) KPIs a "tired old practice", and misreading to think closeparen was saying Scott's theory advised for them.

That's correct.