Lack of accountability and careless approvers who take an “it’s not my money so I don’t care” approach exist, just as you say they do. I always encourage everyone to treat the DAO funds as their own, because they do belong to us. As CKB investors, these are our funds and how they are used can greatly influence the performance of our investment.
In the past, I’ve worked with large corporations and Fortune 500 companies. I’ve been an employee, and I’ve also worked on the other side as a sub-contractor. Everything you are describing exists, but it is not the only possibility, and to suggest so is an oversimplification of business processes.
It is not uncommon for agencies to form and use sub-contract developers. Yes, they take a cut. However, they are taking a cut for providing a service. They develop a network of contractor relationships that they have vetted and then manage projects to ensure success even if some of the developers do not perform or choose to leave. Developers may also prefer this relationship because they can focus on their work without dealing with business process.
I understand that you would prefer, in the most pure sense, that the developer apply themselves and elimate any other party. I also think this is the best scenario, when they are fully capable on their own. However, I have watched this exact scenario have very poor results far more times than I have seen it succeed. Usually the project fails because the developers were good at writing code, but not at marketing or business development.
When evaluating a DAO proposal, we should be looking at the qualifications of the team, the value provided by their ask, and the accountability that is built into the proposal. It is far outside of the scope of the DAO to restrict how teams should be structured or operate.