I don’t think it’s even possible to define - and it’s certainly not fair to summarily dismiss - typical managers. If you’re just talking about managers that ar

I don’t think it’s even possible to define - and it’s certainly not fair to summarily dismiss - typical managers. If you’re just talking about managers that are bad at their jobs, call that out. If you’re advocating for a change in the actual management structure itself, call that out. Maybe “typical” narrows the net ever so slightly, but the definition of typical is “having the distinctive qualities of a particular type of person or thing”. Either “typical” is applied to managers broadly and then the negative characteristics you find fault with are inherent to the management role itself (and not necessarily the manager)… Or “typical” is used to describe a specific type of manager, either characterized by certain common negative traits, job duties assigned to the manager, etc. In either case, there’s something critically missing from a dismissal of “typical” managers without proper classification of “typical”.