3 ms·
The key word here is "Lead". I believe (metaphorically) that, in matters of sight, the blind cannot truly lead the sighted. Yes, someone may be able to "lead"
by iancmceachern 9y ago
The key word here is "Lead". I believe (metaphorically) that, in matters of sight, the blind cannot truly lead the sighted. Yes, someone may be able to "lead" a camping trip for scouts to the local campground without event, but that is a far different skill set than leading an expedition to climb Mt. Everest.
I believe that the analogy holds true. Yes, a non-technical "leader" can manage a group of technical folks to deliver something that is pre-existing, something that has a clear path to completion which if you follow, you will be successful. Civil projects are a great example of this. Repaving a road for example.
Now onto what I've worked on my entire career - highly complex engineering driven technical projects - "cutting edge". I have worked for both types of leader in this environment. I have never seen the non-technical leader be successful, nor the project being directed by the non-technical leader be successful. To make the right decisions the leader needs to be able to intimately understand all the trade offs (technical included) involved to be able to lead the project to success. If this person doesn't personally have the knowledge, understanding, wisdom or ability to seek such out to understand these fundamental trade offs they are required to rely on the information they are given, to rely on trusting the folks telling you things. This is difficult because on the most challenging projects there are always different opinions and the leader must find the thread of truth between them.
This is why Mr. Musk has been so successful with Tesla and SpaceX - he intimately understands what he is making at the most technical level - and is passionate about it.
- monknomo 9y agoMusk is not an engineer. Leading engineers without being an engineer does not mean leading engineers without being technical. Of course a leader must understand, at some level, what their followers are doing, but sufficient technical knowledge != is an engineer. Take Kennedy + LBJ and the space program, for instance. Two leaders, less technical than Musk, and they still made the moonshot happen.
- iancmceachern 9y agoWonderful discussion - thank you. I think Mr. Musk could be called an engineer being technically trained in Physics and being a self taught programmer - while not technically under the engineering umbrella I've grown to accept the folks who are technically Physicists (especially applied), Mathematicians, Computer Scientists, Chemists, etc. but whom work together with engineers to develop new products (including software) as all under the same umbrella. Doesn't everyone? They all require similar systems approaches the the management and understanding of complexity. There is a great book on this - "The Decision to Go to the Moon" by John M. Logsdon. Kennedy's great contribution wasn't really technical leadership, but political. To call for and fully support a totally Civilian Moon Landing program. To this day I am amazed by his honesty and the vision it must have taken to take such a large step and commit several percent of the Federal Budget to such a long term, risky and public program. He stood up trying to sell it and said "we will have to invent metal alloys that do not yet exist". Beyond the political support to go do it (which is truly amazing in it's own right), it was really the technical leaders at NASA that made it happen (Mueller, Von Braun, etc.), I would credit them with truly leading the program. Sadly Kennedy really only got to kick it off...
- matttheatheist 9y agoI read Musk's biography. He's an applied physicist and a software engineer. Plus he also studied business. Fantastic technical education if you ask me.
- matttheatheist 9y agoI read Musk's biography. He's an applied physicist and a software engineer. Plus he also studied business. Fantastic technical education if you ask me.