Good things come in sets of three — but so do disasters and remarkable deaths

The difference between competent business management and bureaucratic behavior disguised as business management manifests as profitability versus insolvency.

Unless you’re trying to get away with fraud, you want your employer to succeed. Your employer has a lower chance for success, though, if you or your coworkers behave like bureaucrats amid the artificial hierarchy which bureaucracy implies. Those firms which appear to succeed despite their bureaucratic tendencies do so only as a complicit corporatist component of an overarching bureaucratic fraud which Ludwig von Mises termed a zwangswirtschaft economy.

To achieve genuine success, entrepreneurs and employees and contractors must eschew corporatist siren songs coming from without, address bureaucratic fiefdom-building agendas coming from within, and acknowledge individual merit everywhere. Three things, each easier said than done.

Concentrate on the self, and the work environment will improve. Concentrate on the self enough that the work environment improves, and the very existence of markets guarantees that society itself will improve. Only bureaucratic intervention can preclude such progress, with the most totalitarian interventions actually undoing previous societal milestones.

Informational silos reflect insecure entrenchment more than self-assuredness. Personal insecurity engenders agendas. Agendas necessitate underhandedness. Learn to avoid the underhandedness by recognizing the insecurities and defying the concomitant silos. Again, easier said than done — you don’t want to compel yourself or your coworkers to think only in terms of some nebulous collective, or else innovation dies by committee (which is to say: the evil twin of an evil zwangswirtschaft economy is an evil command economy exemplified within the former Soviet Union).

What about digitized silos? Well, if your employer doesn’t have contingencies baked right in to its IT strategy, you and your fellow managers will founder within a shop filled with insecurities and their related agendas of butt-covering underhandedness. Monolithic IT infrastructures will become single points of failure. Employees and managers and owners will become lost amid all the finger pointing.

Even a microservices architecture can suffer from siloed information (e.g. insufficient inter-service communication or uncooperative members of one or another team building each microservice element of the overarching solution), although individual microservice failures tend to be easier to fix while keeping the rest operational. Learn some strategies for designing & maintaining robust microservices orchestration without depending too much on end users being okay with clicking a Retry button.

https://www.infoworld.com/article/3254777/application-development/3-common-pitfalls-of-microservices-integrationand-how-to-avoid-them.html