My partner was let go after 15 years working tirelessly for one of the big five. She s probably the most resilient, rewarded and liked person that has survived and fought through this part of the business in the past decade, and while I am clearly biased, all her colleagues would most certainly agree.She was let go not because of her own incompetence, failure or not fitting in, but purely out of rushed budget cuts (budgets were finalized, finalized again, and then they realized it s still not good enough).The reason for those cuts, in this particular instance, was not the overwhelming rise of AI and/or getting more firing power for data centers, it was very clearly a long-visible path of failure two levels above, where one particular person continued to wreak havoc up over the past few years, and, ultimately, caused this cul-de-sac disaster.The person at the center of this all is an older dude who consistenty has been on the wrong side of any decision he s made. I ve only heard of a few things as it is (literally) none of my business, but it s been nothing but chaotic and ill-advised choices. He moved into this role from failing elsewhere, leaving the chaos there behind him, and over the past two years, now has caused yet another disaster in this new role.My question is, and sort of the point of this post (which I understand is entirely philosophical): why do these people consistently survive disaster? While her entire team (30+) has been let go now as a result of it all, the person who ran this into the ground continues onwards in the business?I used to work for a big five too, but have been self-employed for over a decade now, so I may be too far out to understand, but it just puzzles me how they always manage to survive their self-inflicted disasters at the cost of everyone else. This used to be a thing I ve heard over and over again from friends at Google, but it really seems to be very consistent thing elsewhere, too.