> What I dislike about the original post is that he seems to think his job is to lead and have them follow.
Can you help me understand what in the original post came across that way?
Sure, managers do have a responsibility to lead their team, and they're held responsible for the results their organization team produces. That's the job. It'll look different company by company, of course. But I definitely didn't have some kind of command-and-control management approach in mind.
> It isn't. His job is to support, to do the things, manage the interactions, that are preventing the team from working effectively.
I agree! Like I wrote toward the end of the post, "The real secret of managing an expert team when you can’t do their jobs is to give up the illusion that you have to be superpowered and all-knowing. Instead, you can be the manager, supporting and directing your team, making sure you deliver results through your team."
That sounds—to me, and I might be missing something—pretty similar to what you're advocating.
Can you help me understand what in the original post came across that way?
Sure, managers do have a responsibility to lead their team, and they're held responsible for the results their organization team produces. That's the job. It'll look different company by company, of course. But I definitely didn't have some kind of command-and-control management approach in mind.
> It isn't. His job is to support, to do the things, manage the interactions, that are preventing the team from working effectively.
I agree! Like I wrote toward the end of the post, "The real secret of managing an expert team when you can’t do their jobs is to give up the illusion that you have to be superpowered and all-knowing. Instead, you can be the manager, supporting and directing your team, making sure you deliver results through your team."
That sounds—to me, and I might be missing something—pretty similar to what you're advocating.