3 ms·
"Superstars are why I don’t try harder and am less engaged. They take all of the interesting ownership and inject themselves into every process and space for co
by jerf 3y ago
"Superstars are why I don’t try harder and am less engaged. They take all of the interesting ownership and inject themselves into every process and space for communication. I wait for these people to burn out and want to actually be a team member instead of a productivity bully hoarding opportunity for themselves."
Are you sure you've got a "superstar" there?
I think the term ought to be reserved for people who truly do a lot of good work, and not the many varieties of people who manage to make it look like they're doing lots of good work. Which absolutely exist, and need terminology to talk about them, and sharing strategies to deal with them is a good thing to do. But while I'm sure there's a non-zero set of people who are both superstars and very good at giving the appearance of doing a lot of work and being very political about it, I doubt there are many. That's a very particular order off the metaphorical menu of attributes.
I would expect a real superstar to be happy to find that you can carry a meaningful portion of the load. There is always more work to do than can be done. Being able to not do some of it allows them to focus somewhere else.
- iwontberude 3y agoThey truly do a lot of good (great!) work and for quite a few years straight, so much so that the rest of the team atrophies as they continue to fill larger and larger gaps.
- reactordev 3y agoI agree, if they are interjecting themselves into everything and taking all the “cool projects”, they aren’t superstars - they’re supera$$høles. A real superstar would empower the team with that extra sprinkle of confidence so they can tackle the cool projects and succeed. They should be SWAT, not Mayor. I’m sorry you feel this way and you should bring this up with your manager.