I think I agree with you —- phrases like “irrelevant issues” and “more critical work” are so subjective, that everyone can read along with this and agree with it, but it’s not actually saying much, since the agreeing on WHAT is relevant or critical has always been the hard part
The point is the sabotager probably has a pretty good idea of whats irrelevant and what's critical for the purpose of the organisation they are trying to prevent (or at least the former, which is all that's strictly necessary to do this).
"Irrelevant" and "critical" are far from subjective in a business organization. The goal is clear: make more money. Everything either contributes or detracts from that goal.
Far from subjective, but when they are based on speculation about how particular fixes and features will be received by customer and market, and ultimately affect the bottom line, "irrelevant" and "critical" can be uncalculable.
