Critical point, and absolutely true in my case. With change in management all past successful projects are "failures" now. Instead of using x, y, z projects uses a, b, c so leadership is kind to dismiss me with prejudice.
How will you do anything different if you don't ignore/brush-aside past successes and focus on replacing them with new things?
How will you replace them without funding i.e. more budget, more power?
How will you keep moving up if you don't repeat this cycle?
How will you get bonus if you don't do anything different? You won't crash the money-maker.
How will you do anything different if you don't ignore/brush-aside past successes and focus on replacing them with new things? You won't. That discipline is it's own value.
How will you replace them without funding i.e. more budget, more power? Your maintenance budget pales in comparison to the R&D budget, so funding should be a non-issue. You're not asking to recreate the boat, only replace discrete known quantities.
How will you keep moving up if you don't repeat this cycle? Because the momentum was set at ship launch, not at ship improvement.
I honestly don't understand how this all breaks down in modern times once you introduce shareholders. Is it that shareholders literally get spooked by stagnation?
Yes, 100% they do. Look at what happened to Instant Pot.