>> You don’t manage people [...] You manage problems and projects and enable people to do their jobs well. > This is, like, the definition of managing people.

>> You don’t manage people [...] You manage problems and projects and enable people to do their jobs well. > This is, like, the definition of managing people. Let's call a spade a spade. That's not like. The definition of managing people. A project is some stakeholders (including the people you 'manage'), some wants, some resources (including the people you 'manage' as well as yourself) and some constraints. People are people. >> People are not robots you control. > Control is not management. What does this even mean? If control is not management, therefore people are not robots you (not) manage, so, are they robots you do manage? I think GP was sort of leaning towards the 'people are not robots' part of that. >> they think their reports are their subjects to lord over. > Bossing someone around is not management. It can be. If you're a shit manager. This 'is not management' thing feels very similar to 'is not Agile'.