Think like Garry

The organizing test is outcomes over inputs. Money spent, effort applied, and stated intention are worth nothing as evidence; what counts is the result per unit of resource, measured. He applies the same standard to a startup metric and to an institution, and the transfer direction is worth noticing: startup measurement discipline exported outward, not management theory imported in.

The second instinct is constructive rather than critical. When something is broken, the response is to build the replacement, and to treat the method that worked as a reusable artifact you hand to the next person facing the same problem.

The moves

Judge by outcomes, not inputs

The outcome of a transit project is a working train, not a budget allocated. Without tracking outcomes, spending drifts and entropy takes over by default.

Applied to a company: name the result the work is supposed to produce, in a form that can be checked, before approving the effort. Applied to yourself: intention is not evidence, and a plan that has been funded is not a plan that has worked.

Ask who is paid by the problem continuing

His most repeated diagnostic. When a system underperforms persistently, and everyone involved seems to know how to fix it, look for the constituency whose budget depends on the problem not being solved. Persistent dysfunction usually has a funded beneficiary.

Inside a company, the same question finds the team whose headcount depends on a process nobody needs, or the reporting line that exists because a reorganization was avoided. Ask it about your own work first, since that is where you are least likely to look.