[cmp0]

You make a good point I think the blog post still works.

"The real estate team should not be a risk center." - Why not? Sure, I agree with you it doesn't make a ton of sense _to me_ to fire 90% of the janitors.

Satya said he wants his team to be "Intellectually honest".

I'd argue that a plan to fire 90% of the janitors today is not that realistic, but if some real estate exec thinks they honestly have a plan that could be successful, are tracking data, and change their plan if they're wrong - what's the problem?

Maybe they're crazy enough to have figured something out we don't know....or not in which case Satya says you'll be gone if you make it a habit.

[avidiax]

Because real estate innovation is not something that the customers care about, and the real estate team's outputs effect everyone else's outputs.

How does the rest of Microsoft perform if there's not enough office space or DC capacity is far below needs?

Risk is much more tolerable in the last mile than the first one, much more tolerable in the leaves of a dependency graph than the root.

[cmp0]

> Risk is much more tolerable in the last mile than the first one

Is that objectively true? I think you could also make the argument the other way that things compound when you innovate at the root.

I think it's your opinion that that's the case, and it generally makes sense to me as well, but I'm still saying it's a judgement call.

There are a lot of things / decisions at a company that don't strictly matter for the customer immediately but they still eventually matter for the customer - because they have a downstream impact. In this case, maybe you save that money and spend it somewhere else.