It's interesting, actually... that's definitely more concise, but I find myself wondering if it's better. What I mean is - I don't argue against being concise, but wonder "is there a point where you're so concise that you've reduced your message to a platitude that doesn't actually say anything"?

For example, we could reduce it further by saying:

"Make things better".

But I don't think that would be a very useful message.

So this, to me, is the struggle... to figure out how to be as concise as possible, while not being overly concise.

I freely admit that I'm not great at this, but it is something I hope to get better at - distilling the message to its essence, without losing the essence.

In this particular case, I will say that "Give workers the information they need so they could spend more time thinking/building" probably does strike that balance fairly well. I may have to crib that from you. :-)

Anyway, the point in saying all this was just to point out that while conciseness is a virtue, it can - I think - be taken too far if one isn't careful.

I agree, but it depends on the context. In this case, they were just asking what the problem is, not to prove that it is indeed a problem.

True. :-)