> The term the author needs is 'diseconomies of scale.'"

diseconomies of scale, like economies of scale, are systemic characteristics that change (somewhat predictably) with size.

stagnation resulting from bigness is a self-inflicted dysfunction that is independent of size (that is, it doesn't only happen when companies get big).

and multiple groups working on the same product might not be a dysfunction at all. it could just be risk mitigation (that only a large company can afford).

my point isn't so much to disagree, but to redirect. organizational dysfunction increases as companies get larger because of "coordination neglect" (it gets harder to keep all the initiatives pointing in the same direction as communications channels necessarily multiply with size).

but risk socialization strategies at large companies leading to things like "too big to fail" bailouts really chap my hide. those companies should go bankrupt--not out of business, but reorganized, with the execs replaced, their compensation clawed back, and possibly sued for malfeasance.

the bigger you are (or equivalently, the more power you have), the bigger the consequences and the more important it is to face justice from wrongdoing, the exact opposite of the direction we're headed right now in the US (e.g., recent presidential pardons).