> 1) Poor management (broadly defined) creates misaligned incentives, busy work, etc. that "gets in the way" of good talent executing well. > 2) Management, wh

> 1) Poor management (broadly defined) creates misaligned incentives, busy work, etc. that "gets in the way" of good talent executing well. > 2) Management, who "doesn't really do anything," is overpaid relative to the IC's who "Do the work." > These two ideas, though, are in contradiction I don't see them in contradiction. They're also neither mutually inclusive nor mutually exclusive. They are separate observations and both may be valid or invalid for a given set of management. I happen to think that there's a lot of good "management" but not a lot of good executive teams. Sure there's definitely a lot of bad management too, but IMO there's a far bigger pie taken from poor (or outright employee-hostile) C- or S-level executives.