Aside from the hyperbolic "Kill your heroes" heading, the whole article is about management error. It doesn't even advocate firing the hero if they emerge, just

Aside from the hyperbolic "Kill your heroes" heading, the whole article is about management error. It doesn't even advocate firing the hero if they emerge, just recognition of this emergence as a warning signal that things are going wrong for the organization. I think the topic of the article is analogous to a military situation familiar from pop culture and current events. Let's focus on the human dynamics and ignore any technical baggage that might confuse the issue with 10x or rockstar developers and such. You can have regular infantry and special forces. The pathological situation would be expecting special forces levels of performance out of an infantry group, embedding a few special members to magically elevate them. It will deteriorate morale for all involved and produce unpredictable results, since they do not have the training and methods to work together effectively. But, don't get distracted into thinking that this argues that no regular infantry can be heroic. It's a metaphor, not a moral judgment. If properly managed, special units would have different missions which might complement the regular units. The special unit members are held to higher standards and still must cooperate. Self-serving cowboys typically get washed out, as the special teams demand high unit cohesion in order to accomplish their missions. But, the special team can excel together, not being limited by the roles, capabilities, and methods of a regular unit. It is not good for one member to try to stand apart from his unit. He can mentor and motivate from within, but members of the unit need to be able to rely on each other and to some degree substitute for each other. It would be a mistake to let him try to create his own special grade informally within the regular group, lacking the proper logistics and management support for that role. Another failure mode, not discussed in the article, is when an organization tries to be "all special". Lacking missions aligned to their preparation, they will eventually lose their skills and morale. They will start to perform unpredictably as they lose cohesion and focus. Also, in an attempt to grow a large special force, you would eventually run into supply problems and lower your entry or retention standards. Then, you might end up with forces special in name only, returning to the original scenario with a general infantry with some special members embedded in a toxic brew.