This relationship to self worth is a big piece of it. Valuing competence in a company is a cultural value. It's not professional, it's basically a craft/academi

This relationship to self worth is a big piece of it. Valuing competence in a company is a cultural value. It's not professional, it's basically a craft/academic orientation or aspirationally so. The products I have seen them release were exceptional in their novelty. There are upsides and downsides to the mysteriousness piece. The upside is rapid decisions based on group deference to demonstrable expertise and competence. The downside is a bottleneck where you can't delegate competence, so everything needs the guru blessing. Ultimately, this figure only gets a veto, and you get the global veto anti-pattern in the org. It's a basis for alignment that doesn't scale as well as dynamic collaboration. To me, the quality of thinking part has an effect on the culture is expressed as the cost/benefit and scaling aspects of fast hierarchies vs. the optionality of dynamic collaboration. (viewed negatively as command/control vs. political solutions.)