I had a really really nice manager. He's technical but he admits he isn't catching up with the current technology landscape quickly, especially in his role he d

I had a really really nice manager. He's technical but he admits he isn't catching up with the current technology landscape quickly, especially in his role he didn't have to be hands-on at all. From time to time he'd said to me "I don't see myself adding any values" because he felt "he didn't know what he should be doing". However, he was a very nice people manager. He listens well, and he treats his team well. He would protect me even when I disrespected and frustrated the whole chain of commands (well they all respected my history of great contributions but they just weren't happy with the way I was acting - probably due to my mental illness). But my manager kept me under his arms, and would rely on the engineers to run the technical show as he sat in the backseat listening during meetings (he would step in if needed to keep "politics" out). Often you don't get both "very technical + very good people manager" type of manager, so if it were up to me I'd pick a people manager who is great at communication and have respects for his/her engineers to do their jobs without tight oversight. If the team isn't able to resolve a technical decision, then it is the manager's time to become an arbitrator: let people cool down, break down the problem and then discuss options. SJ's advice on not micromanaging is probably the only thing I can agree on. Don't micromanage, but make sure everyone knows you are the manager, and everyone on the team deserves to be kept informed by one another. There shouldn't be a "I am working on a ticket but I will update you when I am done in a week." That was me. Don't be the old me. It was toxic, no matter how successful I was technically.