Why outcomes are different in large vs smaller environment?

In larger environments such as public gatherings, large companies the stakes are low for speaking out. There is a rush to make macro predictions, environmental impacts, company culture, and business outlook at a broad-based level. Sweeping statements promise to bring radical changes and magical performances.

In expansive environments, you are mainly focused on luring the populace to listen to what you have to say. They also need someone who can provide them glimpses of what is happening around them. Just knowing what is on is usually enough.

Such environments lack a tight communication network that works to create an understanding, amplify messages or open up a debate. Nor do they care about the commitment and accountability of a speaker or the listener. So no one bothers about what actions it means for them.

This is one of the primary reasons why large organizations begin to struggle to keep up their early appeal. Because nothing that was said gets done. The status quo is felt by the ground troops.

Smaller environments, on the other hand, can be daunting. What you say reaches people instantly. It reverberates many times because there is a tight local mesh of the communication network. People will want every bit of information sliced and diced. Opinions will form and spread. There will be questions about why, what, how, and when.

This is the main reason for smaller environments to thrive. They hold a very high bar of what is being communicated and followed through on.