Thing is, when you're young you're invincible. We have all said to ourselves when our elders explain things, "silly old sod what do you know!" However, as you age you realise that you are not the oasis of knowledge you thought you were. You realise that the more you know, the more you realise you know nowt (in the scheme of things).
I suppose it takes a little of the wisdom of age to understand how vast knowledge is and how, as much as anyone can experience, we represent but a single drip in an ocean of understanding.
IMHO a lot of this is due to no one having succession planning - that thing where you work with someone who's done the job and who passes on their collective knowledge.
By simply dumping that accumalated knowledge (cos it costs too much!!) it means that every new person has to start literally from scratch. Every single new person goes through an identical learning curve which is, ironically, extrememly wasteful, ineffecient and stressful and therefore far more expensive than succession planning could ever be.
The most wasteful aspect of it is that, over time, historic knowledge gets lost which of itself means that things like product developments end up cycling too. Seen and experienced that!
All in all, to not put too finer point on it, it's an absolute crock of sh1te and bosses need their bloody heads banging together. As a shareholder, I'd be holding them to account and demanding to know why they never ever learn from what has gone before, from previous lessons? That might make the wassocks sit up and review!