3 ms·
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 fr
by 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 agoI 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.