Dear Bob ... I understand your point about how sometimes we think we are right when maybe we aren't, but too many times I have seen where someone could be proven to be right and yet it didn't matter. I tell people quite often in corporate America that ego matters as much or more than right or wrong. I have seen millions spent to cover up mistakes. In the end, one such effort to make something that cost $210 Dear Bob …I understand your point about how sometimes we think we are right when maybe we aren’t, but too many times I have seen where someone could be proven to be right and yet it didn’t matter.I tell people quite often in corporate America that ego matters as much or more than right or wrong. I have seen millions spent to cover up mistakes. In the end, one such effort to make something that cost $210 appear to cost $180 actually lead to the REAL cost being around $1000 per unit over thousands of units. All to protect the fragile ego of a couple of VPs. This is what scares me about business decisions. I think that if people could really do like many companies say and try to do the best thing for the customers and the health of the company, business would run much better. Instead, politics, egos and inertia seem to rule the day most of the time. At my current job, I watch us throw money to prop up a badly broken system because our CIO is a big supporter of it. And I know that people who have tried to seriously talk about alternatives have their jobs threatened and feel that there is no real recourse with the company. Heck, I’m here in a large part because I chose to tell the truth in my last job.– Tired of the gamesDear Tired … It isn’t entirely games. As I said in the posting you referenced, few of us have easy access to the truth. This might sound like a trivial difference, but it isn’t: You and I have access to facts; we both are capable of reasoning. Couple the facts we can agree on with logic we both agree is sound and we still can end up with different answers – the result of starting with different underlying assumptions.That’s the nature of logic.Which isn’t to say you’re wrong – there is a lot of corporate decision-making that has nothing at all to do with what’s best for the corporation. That isn’t entirely surprising, nor is it entirely wrong, either. In a capitalist society, as I’ve pointed out many times, we’re each supposed to look out for our own self-interest first. Sacrificing our own self-interest for the good of our employers is a chump’s strategy. How many companies would return the favor these days, do you think? So in a highly political company, and there are many, managers have to take the politics into account in making their own decisions. Take for example, the CIO you describe. I’d bet a lot he (or she) has his/her name on the project and would be terminated if it was to fail. In a healthier environment, the CIO would acknowledge that this one didn’t work out as planned, pull the plug, and move on. But it isn’t a healthier environment, and blaming the CIO for responding logically and self-interestedly to the business culture as it actually is just doesn’t make a lot of sense.It’s up to the CEO, and ultimately up to the board of directors to create a work environment in which the interests of the business, its executives, managers and employees all line up. In a few rare companies this is actually the case. In most … well, it’s as you describe.– Bob ——– Technology Industry