3 ms·

Totally concur with the other comments here - you were a great leader. The problem with “leadership” as a concept is that many people think it’s an active thing

Totally concur with the other comments here - you were a great leader. The problem with “leadership” as a concept is that many people think it’s an active thing - pushing people to work harder and forcing your opinions into them. But that doesn’t work. Get out of their way and they’ll work out the most efficient way to get there. Antoine de Saint-Exupéry said, “If you want to build a ship, don't drum up people to collect wood and don't assign them tasks and work, but rather teach them to long for the endless immensity of the sea“

ethbr0 5y ago
IMHO, the core epiphany in "servant-leader" is not about inverting authority, but about understanding that needs for high performing teams come from the ground up. On the one hand, it's about solving problems so your team isn't even aware of them (typically, politics and spec stuff). But on the other hand, it's about listening to your team and working on problems they tell you are problems (e.g. non-coders in stand-ups).
- doctor_eval 5y ago
  Agree 100%. As a manager, I understand that my job is to make sure everyone else has what they need to do their job. It’s not about asking “is it done yet?”. It’s about asking “how can I help you do this?”
jseban 5y ago
I agree, in principle, but I think not only was he a good leader, he also was lucky to have good team members (which probably also became better team members from the trust and respect that his leadership got them). But a large percentage of people simply don't function when they are trusted and left alone, so it's up to someone to make a leap of faith, and not take the "safer" path of command and control. And when your livelihood is on the line, most people don't want to take any risk.
- doctor_eval 5y ago
  I don’t really agree with “a large percentage”, but yeah it happens, and identifying these people is part of being a manager, right? Everyone on the team needs to pull together, and we need to ask non performers to leave. I don’t think there’s any real evidence that “command and control” is actually safer - the world is full of failed software projects - but I agree that it’s perceived to be safer, and the rest follows on from there I guess.

ethbr0 5y ago

IMHO, the core epiphany in "servant-leader" is not about inverting authority, but about understanding that needs for high performing teams come from the ground up. On the one hand, it's about solving problems so your team isn't even aware of them (typically, politics and spec stuff). But on the other hand, it's about listening to your team and working on problems they tell you are problems (e.g. non-coders in stand-ups).

doctor_eval 5y ago
Agree 100%. As a manager, I understand that my job is to make sure everyone else has what they need to do their job. It’s not about asking “is it done yet?”. It’s about asking “how can I help you do this?”

jseban 5y ago

I agree, in principle, but I think not only was he a good leader, he also was lucky to have good team members (which probably also became better team members from the trust and respect that his leadership got them). But a large percentage of people simply don't function when they are trusted and left alone, so it's up to someone to make a leap of faith, and not take the "safer" path of command and control. And when your livelihood is on the line, most people don't want to take any risk.

doctor_eval 5y ago
I don’t really agree with “a large percentage”, but yeah it happens, and identifying these people is part of being a manager, right? Everyone on the team needs to pull together, and we need to ask non performers to leave. I don’t think there’s any real evidence that “command and control” is actually safer - the world is full of failed software projects - but I agree that it’s perceived to be safer, and the rest follows on from there I guess.