So you claimed "total effort equal orgs size times the speed you wanted change in?" And that that was equivalent to F = m * a?
That's not mind-blowing so much as jaw-droppingly wrong. Org size is an exponential factor for things like that. And speed of change isn't the issue for orgs so much as changing direction under the current momentum, if we're using a physical model. No wonder it wasn't met with widespread acceptance.
It was a vast oversimplification that mapped badly to the situation but delivered, no doubt, with confidence, so of course it was adopted by copycats. Simplicity and overconfidence sells.
That's not mind-blowing so much as jaw-droppingly wrong. Org size is an exponential factor for things like that. And speed of change isn't the issue for orgs so much as changing direction under the current momentum, if we're using a physical model. No wonder it wasn't met with widespread acceptance.
It was a vast oversimplification that mapped badly to the situation but delivered, no doubt, with confidence, so of course it was adopted by copycats. Simplicity and overconfidence sells.