site banner
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I think in his worldview, the FDA will think “Now that we have fewer bureaucrats, it would take forever to complete our current process, so let’s simplify the process.”

This is not an unreasonable take, except the FDA will never think that, they will have to be told that. "Your HR budget is now 50% of what it was and you cannot sneak in additional headcount through contractors. Here's a list of non-negotiable KPIs you have to meet. I want a new cost allocation for 2025 that reflects both these facts by Tuesday. The first slide should show the biggest roadblocks we have to get the Congress to remove"

It is an unreasonable take, precisely because the FDA is a government agency that respond to political and legal forces, not market ones. The whole point of the article is that it fundamentally misunderstands what drives government waste. If you sack half the staff of a private firm, they'll respond by reducing the scope of their activities. Government agencies don't really have the latitude to do that. They have some ability to alter their internal processes, but their legal incentives and political directives push them towards slow, restrictive processes over fast, permissive ones, and they generally can't just say "we're not doing X anymore".

Here's a list of non-negotiable KPIs you have to meet

Or what? Like, what happens when FDA staff slow-roll you because they know you're not going to abolish the FDA, or because your non-negotiable KPIs are delusional?

Or what? Like, what happens when FDA staff slow-roll you because they know you're not going to abolish the FDA, or because your non-negotiable KPIs are delusional?

Fire more of them and replace with new recruits?