True, but decentralization is a form of redundancy. It costs money to duplicate services, and there are opportunity costs, too. Parallel and duplicate systems are complex, and complexity is expensive to maintain and to train staff for. Complexity is also prone to failure just because it is complex.

Robustness and flexibility are antithetical, the engineering solution is to work for an optimization of the two. The accountant just goes for he cheapest way to go.

So if you can save money by automating your warehouse and reducing inventory costs, you are at the mercy of having any minor, unexpected supply interruption shutting down your whole operation when a key component suddenly becomes unavailable.

It's easy to say "decentralize", but management is constantly being pressured to "consolidate". And those decisions are never made by engineers. They are increasingly made by MBAs.

I served on a warship where every system was backed up or duplicated and the crew extravagantly large, constantly drilled and extensively cross-trained. It could absorb an enormous amount of battle damage and still fight. I could not only navigate, I could aim, fire and load a 5" gun, help rig for refueling, fight fires, do first aid, paint, cook, clean, operate an M1, , BAR, and .45 Auto, launch a whaleboat, and a host of other tasks, all at 20 years of age. Businesses or government agencies are not organized like that, and they don't invest that much in their staff. The economic pressure is always towards automation, efficiency and economy.