Anytime I work with people who are top of the world ar what they do, I’m struck by how enormously overburdened they are. You could clone then 10 times and still not hit diminishing returns on their time. In the short term, innovations that increase the leverage of the top people is way more valuable for societal throughput than raising the floor for everybody else.
Making a Steve Jobs 1% better at being Steve Jobs has instant >1% improvement on world. For a while.
This is incidentally why consulting for execs is about 10x more lucrative per hour than say career coaching. In fact 90% of the world does not even merit individualized improvement effort from others. 9% offer modest returns, 1% leveraged returns.
This is why self-improvement is a DIY field. If more people were worth individual attention, other-improvement books would be more common. The only other group that’s positive net social utility for individual attention is... babies!
@vgr I would phrase that as people who are in such a position rather than people who are "top of the world at what they do". Before Steve Jobs went back to Apple he was busy failing at NeXT, and before he got fired at Apple he was busy getting into pissing matches with John Sculley. So one's time might be better spent finding and developing better people than in trying to improve the people who already happen to be in positions where they're bottlenecks.
@vgr I trust what you're saying, but how can this actually be true?
That is - what was Steve Jobs actually doing with his day to day?
So far, 95% of the "Executives" I've met and worked with have been unimpressive, unwilling or incapable of keeping complex systems in their head, and lacking in any real useful vision.