You and I have very different takes on gov't officials (that is, the non-political ones; the SES folks and their direct reports), academicians, scientists and private sector researchers.
In my 30+ years of being at least two of those and working with folks of each classification, I've never come by a situation that mimics "AI implemented by morons" (AIIM) because my professional career hasn't been peppered with morons. What I have occasionally seen is very bright and capable individuals thrust into, and occasionally soliciting, situations for which they are ill or sub-optimally suited and, as a result, delivering merely mediocre results.
I'm not going to say the circumstance you've described (AIIM) doesn't occur, for it must. I'm saying that in may "place" in the world, an "up or out" place populated by high performers (even the ones who are forced out before reaching a the point where it's no longer up-or-out are high performers), it's not at all the norm. What is the norm is that folks rise to the occasion and meet or exceed expectations, personally and professionally.
FWIW, as a footnote, if you will, while there are some academicians, scientists and SES (and whatever is the equivalent in state/local gov't) who are the "worst of the best," even they can't rightly be described as "morons," or even generally inept. I think "disappointing," in a relative context, is a fitting way to classify them. Accordingly, I don't think it's apt to use the AIIM analogy to describe the "it," whatever "it" may be, you mentioned.
