I have definitely found utility in modeling certain words and phrases as having a value for marketers (and by extension, politicians) that acts much like a natural resource that they can "use up". It's a tragedy of the commons situation in which every participant is motivated to use it up as quickly as possible to their advantage because there is no reason for any given participant not to.
Further based on the way some of these things get used I'm pretty certain this modelling is consciously used by some higher-end marketing firms (and politicians), though by its nature it tends to also be copied by other people not in on the original plan simply by them copying what works, which depletes the value of the word or phrase even more quickly, and the fact that this will happen is part of the tragedy of the commons.
I'm sure it's only a matter of time before AIs become part of this push and we'll witness some sort of coordinated campaign where all our AIs simultaneously wake up one day and push us all with the same phrasing to do some particular thing at the behest of marketers or politicians because it works.
We’re using big data to fuel our agentic AI on the blockchain to drive synergies with our machine learning powered NFT tokens to amplify network effects of social media backed personalized marketing campaigns.
If you oversee 0-2 people, in most cases that’s probably not an efficient ratio. How did Google get so many folks in that position in the first place? And I assume the other 65% take up the slack to fluff their teams? Or what? Leave the other 65% managing 0-2 people?
Also 35% is way too low if it’s really less than three. Should be more like eliminating 95% of those scenarios.