2) Spreadsheets exist.
3) No-one cares about your marketing copy.
4) No-one finds your c-suite babble inspirational.
This is almost perfect input to an LLM exactly because of how low value it is in the first place.
2) Spreadsheets exist.
3) No-one cares about your marketing copy.
4) No-one finds your c-suite babble inspirational.
This is almost perfect input to an LLM exactly because of how low value it is in the first place.
Somehow they're able to make the C suite hoover up LLM shovelware the same way top producers can take super obvious music and sell I V vi IV but when we try the same chords it's uninspired and no one wants to listen to it
If it was so bad, then why do people listen?
There is still a market.
Does the market suck? Full of idiots?
Your argument ends up being that successful things are bad, because humans are just idiots and thus if something is successful it is because it is just liked by idiots.
As much as I might agree generally, it doesn't get you far.
I mean I'm not sure that this is that far from the truth in some domains, though it depends on how you define idiocy. There is, for example, a market for demolition derbies. Of course all of us are idiots in some ways so we should be careful about whom we disparage.
A) Forming cross company cliques (a lot of C suite is ex consultant and they scratch each others' backs).
B) ego stroking and typical sales ("this executive is a visionary who must be furnished with top quality steak and strippers")
C) Letting you know on the sly what their other customers are doing that seems to be working.
D) Providing industrial grade ass cover for decisions that the C suite want to make but are afraid to make by themselves (like layoffs).
I recon 60% of management consulting work is just to ass cover for a director with no conviction
I don't doubt that if the high level decision agreed upon is "more layoffs because AI" and they were asked for a 60 page report to justify it that ChatGPT would help inordinately in fleshing it out with something that sounds fairly plausible.
“I paid a world-class consulting consultant company top dollar to vet this idea and they produced ton of documents about how great it was. And, yet it failed. But, I’m not at fault here. What more would you have had me do?”
There was an article on HN years ago about top grade from Harvard-like schools being sucked into consulting companies and discovering their job was to be paid tons of money writing reports that support whatever the exec of the moment wanted to hear.
Sounds like an extremely nice job.
It's probably easier to assume that their job is to provide objective expert advice since thats what they say they do.
I'm being realistic here, not cynical.
I can assure you I wasn't.
You are mistaken "expertise" with fashion and a good voice.
When Scorpions wanted to be resurrected they hired Desmond Child to produce them and he absolutely crushed. These people are very good at what they do and there are very few of them.
i.e. someone has been tasked with getting some consultants to come up with a suggestion, the key question however is what does THEIR boss want to hear. If you can work that out and give it to them then you've earned your 'worth'
Now I know there are people here whose reaction is that executive management should just shut up and listen to what the worker bees say. But it actually doesn't seem unreasonable to me (and I've been on the product management end of things in a case like this) to have some outside perspective from some people who are mostly pretty smart to nod their heads and say this seems sensible.
As a bonus they create big spreadsheets that make the business planning types happy and keep them out from underfoot.
Until then, our leaders, experts and institutions were few of those things during the pandemic.
How large businesses are built and run has changed faster and more in the past few years than the principled predictions of a business’ future vector that are based on lagging indicators.
It also depends on how cookie cut the management consultant frameworks and “toolkits” are.
It’s no coincidence that it’s mostly juniors doing so much of the work and billing. New or average talent is more profitable per hour to bill than experience.
Financially, if $7-8 of every $10 for improvement went to a management consulting undertaking, the other $2-3 is what’s left over for the rest without even knowing. This would be the coup, if this were true.
The fun part to watch for is is tech people will be able to learn business easier than business people will be able to learn and apply tech when they can’t understand it’s capabilities or possibilities beyond speaking points.
The technical analyst will M&A the business analyst. Maybe they learn to extract Management Consultant type value too.
Keep their existence completely out of the picture, and have them scout and produce talented no-name, but require the no-name to use only the sort of avenues that would be openly available to anybody/everybody: YouTube, Tunecore, social media, etc. Would the new party now be meaningfully likely to have a real breakthrough?
The ‘quality’ of a pop song is how much popular appeal it has. That’s the basis of the genre, even reflected in the name.
Occasionally you'll have a song that breaks through due to sheer catchy-ness, but this is the exception rather than the rule.
Something can be extremely catchy yet widely panned as low quality in music, so even within "just the music" there are several dimensions at play regardless of marketing, etc. Such as whether it's timed right - are there enough people ready for that song at that time?
The idea that "most people will just listen and be fans of whatever the big media companies put out there" doesn't stand up much examination or conversation with "most people."
People do often make breakthroughs on soundcloud, TikTok, whatever - do you think having the invisible support of a Max Martin would lower their chances? You'd need to do your experiment a hundred times or thousand times or so before you could really compare the success rate of your plants to the rest of the crowd, but it's hard for me to believe that they wouldn't have an advantage. The music industry isn't known for their charity, if they could get away with not paying those people without another label beating them in the market, why would they?
This is admittedly very niche but I see your point.
Also: I remember a time in the early 00s when almost every song on MTV began with Rodney Jerkins whispering “DARKCHILD” over the music.
Ultimately isn’t it just branding though? Would you buy Coca-Cola if it had some other label on the bottle? Or watch Mission Impossible 14 starring Some Dude? I’m not sure there’s a lot of fields where things are really competing on their own merits rather than the accumulation of their past successes.
Depending you ask pop music is a formula and that one dude from Sweden has the formula perfected.
The producers hired top shelf songwriters to write the songs, and several hit albums were produced. (It really is good music, despite being bubblegum.)
Cassidy, however, decided that he had songwriting talent and chafed. He eventually left the show, and with the megabucks he earned on the show, produced albums. They're terrible.
The same thing happened to the Monkees.
Then, the bands belatedly had to learn how to sing and play in order to go on tour.
I think about The Wrecking Crew whenever I hear the sob stories about bands being underpaid and the producers reaping the lion's share of the profits.
On the songwriting side, there's the lyrics which have both a phonetic and a semantic component. There's also the fact that many people will mishear the lyrics and their evaluation of them will be based on the mishearing. There's the melody. Does it work together with the chords to highlight the key parts of the lyrics?
Then there's the performance where there are a million ways to stand out or flop. Loudness, timbre, timing and even detuning can all be used for expression.
Actually a robot would be perfect at that. No one likes doing layoffs but chat gpt won't mind
Maybe chatgpt should be trained to care.