Running an organization like a VC fund is a bad idea.

The VC logic is clear: invest in a diversity of bets, and then push each to have blockbuster-or-bust results.

As long as one turns out to be a blockbuster, it doesn't matter if the rest went bust.

But a hidden assumption is that each bet is independent.

This logic is a terrible idea when you have lots of interdependent bets.

When you're inside of a given org, the various products support and improve each other; a suite emerges that is greater than the sum of its parts.

This happens even if you didn't intend it to or optimize for it.

And if it doesn't, why are you building them under the same roof? Presumably there's at least some reason they are better or cheaper together.

Under those circumstances, pushing each individual product to be a blockbuster-or-bust will end up killing off many of the things that made the whole significantly stronger.