Results (Don't) Speak for Themselves: A Case for Documentation
population.fyi
population.fyi
Pretty sure this happens all the time those days. Big corps being happy with status quo, and not doing X until a small motivated competitor does.
More importantly, "Pfizer rejected GLP-1s in the 1990s because they would eat into their other product lines" is not an accurate reflection of the article it links. If you read the (rather lengthy) article then it seems more corporate politics, tunnel vision, and a small startup not being able to "sell a story" on this to investors such as Pfizer.
Having read the entire article, I fail to see how anyone can come away with that conclusion.
I do recognize that sometimes interests align broadly enough that taking action shouldn't need a fight over interests. The hand sanitizing example is one such case. This is where laying out the case and winning hearts and minds could be enough.
Anyone can pat themselves on the back for pointing to the worlds problems and saying "this could be better!"
you document what you can now in hope someone down the line uses it like the German guy and nightingale
If you observe people in their daily work, you will see there are many reasons why people do not document things. Time constraints, incentive structures, liability, general trade-offs and ambiguities. This is true not just in software/engineering but in any line of professional work.
There's plenty of grandstanding about the importance of documentation, but not much interest in understanding why people don't document in the first place.