Business
Rulers with sudden resource wealth have wide freedom at first in how to spend it. But each payout creates people who depend on it, and those obligations pile up until the rulers can barely change course. This loss of room to move is strongest in authoritarian systems, where buying loyalty replaces other ways of governing.
A reform's chance of success depends on its width (how many organizations must cooperate) and its depth (how far down the bureaucracy it must reach). Reforms that one body can carry out alone can work very well. Reforms that cut across many agencies or depend on the lower ranks tend to stall, even when everyone agrees on the policy.
When money is plentiful, leaders can create a new body for every new problem instead of fixing or merging the old ones. The result is a state made of separate fiefdoms, each with its own history and its own group of clients. These parts barely talk to each other.