[guiriduro]

Maybe the problem is the MBAs and letting them run your company? Surely AI could do a better job than most MBAs? The knowledge requirement is lower, the reasoning and analytical capability lower, just learn a few frameworks and glib vacuous McKinsey-speak, have an AI produce those meaningless powerpoints instead of expensive suits if the C-suite really needs to see it (also candidates for replacement), then instead invest in your IT staffing with local culture that understands the business and its customers and which has a tangible benefit.

[joules77]

MBAs or AI would make the same decisions as these are SYSTEMIC issues, which means its not up to individuals or orgs, but the entire system across the board has to change for fairer solutions to work.

Why? Cuz this is not just about cross border diff in labor rates but also in interest rates, real estate/rent, corporate tax rates, forex rates, regulations, govt subsidies, energy costs etc etc.

Sum it all up and the cost differential can't be swept under the carpet.

MBAs getting drilled to focus on the short term / maximize shareholder value which has created all kinds of issues. But that is not hard to change. Lot of schools exist that don't focus only on that. What's hard to change is the underlying calculus without global coordination.

[bigbadfeline]

> MBAs or AI would make the same decisions as these are SYSTEMIC issues

Correct.

> which means its not up to individuals or orgs, but the entire system across the board has to change... [but it's] hard to change the underlying calculus without global coordination.

That's the hard way, and I mean, the extremely hard way that will never happen. The core systemic issues are local to the US and if they cannot be changed locally, there's no hope for global coordination. The EU is in the same boat but it would be considerably easier for them to change if the US led the way.

Once we cannot hide behind the back of "global coordination", a major question arises, where is the systemic analysis of the US economy and who is responsible for it? If parties and judges cannot agree even on the question "Can the US executive branch regulate the economy", what hope is there for a proper systemic analysis, unencumbered by partisan and lobbying influence?

[FirmwareBurner]

>Maybe the problem is the MBAs and letting them run your company?

The vast majority of companies in the world are run by MBAs. Welcome to the club.

SV companies were an exception to this rule for a short time in history since tech moved faster than the dinosaurs in suits could comprehend or regulate, so it made sense to put engineers in charge to innovate quickly. Having zero interest rate money also helped a lot.

But now that the tech market has matured and consolidated, it's becoming like all the other "uncool" traditional industries, run by MBAs. Except unlike those old traditional industries, there's no credential barrier to entry or unions to protect them, for better and worse.

[stockresearcher]

HP became the company that everyone admired and played a significant role in shaping SV by hiring fresh engineering grads from around the country and then paying for them to take nights and weekends MBA classes at Stanford while they worked during the day (you can read about it in Dave Packard’s autobiography).

It was then torn apart and turned into a joke by a different set of MBAs. So… perhaps it is a little more complicated than just having an MBA

[FirmwareBurner]

You answered your own question. HP took engineers and taught them how to be MBAs, while companies are ruined by career MBAs who were never engineers and were taught in school to see engineering as a cost center that must always be reduced to the lowest bidder.

[stockresearcher]

Nadella was a full-time engineer at Sun while getting his part-time MBA ;)