A less generous take on this post is that an elite engineering team drove a perfectly competent developer out of the company by minimizing the perceived value of their contribution. I don't think that was good management, if so.
Fred Brooks, in the Mythical Man Month, identified the value of "toolmakers" to the "surgeons" many years ago. I think that model applies here too.
Seems to me that a better path would have been to ask the developer in question to lead the automation project, and generally push them over time to look for, and implement, improvements across the development chain that increase efficiency. The elite devs get to keep on doing what they do, but now the whole boat is lifted, and the dev gets to put some real wins on their resume.
Fred Brooks, in the Mythical Man Month, identified the value of "toolmakers" to the "surgeons" many years ago. I think that model applies here too.
Seems to me that a better path would have been to ask the developer in question to lead the automation project, and generally push them over time to look for, and implement, improvements across the development chain that increase efficiency. The elite devs get to keep on doing what they do, but now the whole boat is lifted, and the dev gets to put some real wins on their resume.