▲ | 9dev 4 days ago | ||||||||||||||||
What do you mean by "needed" here? If leaders weren't needed in some capacity, they wouldn't exist. Teams definitely do need leaders, to simply agree on a direction to move into to begin with. If you're of the opinion that management plays their politics game while ICs run the show, then I pity you for the work environment you're in. That isn't how it's supposed to work, and there are better places. | |||||||||||||||||
▲ | 9rx 4 days ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||
> Teams definitely do need leaders Do they? The entire Agile Manifesto was written about how teams don't need leaders. That doesn't automatically make it valid, of course, but industry was all over it for a time. An entire industry got it wrong? Yes, it wasn't long before "leaders" afraid of losing their job bastardized it into some kind of management framework with nonsense like Scrum[1], granted, but industry support for it also died in that moment. What does that tell you? > If leaders weren't needed in some capacity, they wouldn't exist. False premise. The world is full of all kinds of things that exist but aren't needed. > If you're of the opinion that management plays their politics game while ICs run the show, then I pity you for the work environment you're in. I'm not really sure what this means. It doesn't seem to have any connection to the original discussion. Where are you going with this? > That isn't how it's supposed to work, and there are better places. How is what supposed to work? -- [1] To be fair, Scrum considers itself "training wheels" for Agile. It clearly indicates it is something to use for a short period of time to wean yourself off malformed leadership practices as you transition into Agile. If used as written, it may be a useful tool. But when have you ever seen that happen in practice? In reality, when you find it in use, "leadership" has enforced its use — often modified to their arbitrary fancy — and never let go like it suggests you need to. | |||||||||||||||||
|