The things done by people described in the article is not the same as what the work of managers is. These are not managers, and as the article says, these can b

The things done by people described in the article is not the same as what the work of managers is. These are not managers, and as the article says, these can be more junior people who will "boss around" senior developers too. And besides that their self-promotion can be seen as unfair, i have seen some actual damages materialize as consequences: As they are focusing on perception, effective real work done becomes less. If the client once chooses to evaluate real progress and the paper-pushing becomes evident, the project might be cancelled. The bullshitter can transform the project itself. Instead of pursuing the original goal of delivering, they will invent new goals, and unnecessary work items. They will shape what the project does, so that they can deliver. If the project were to go in its original direction, they could not contribute anything useful. So now they invent administrative tasks or superfluous technical tasks, where they can deliver. Their toxic behavior can become accepted even by the management. This is when the real project manager accepts that its more profitable to bullshit, than to actually deliver. The project will fail at some point, but its easier for the whole team to bullshit until that time, than to deliver.