The impulse for leadership rarely corresponds with the impulse to be a maker of great things. The best leaders arise of necessity, but would rather not, is a phrase I've heard mamy times that somewhat resonates.
How you get as belittling & insulting a turn as "people with woth stronger work ethic" (as though people who like doing work versus being overhead/commanders are all low ethic) is a sheer mystery to me
Agreed - most leadership arises out of a necessity to ensure that the boat stays clear of the rocks. I know (and have experienced) a few managers that were equally hopeless on both technical as well as people management fronts; their proclivity for using the boat's hull as a depthfinder made for some frustrating efforts, so to speak.
Comments
You mean motivated people with stronger work ethics? There’s a lot more to life than being smart.
The impulse for leadership rarely corresponds with the impulse to be a maker of great things. The best leaders arise of necessity, but would rather not, is a phrase I've heard mamy times that somewhat resonates.
How you get as belittling & insulting a turn as "people with woth stronger work ethic" (as though people who like doing work versus being overhead/commanders are all low ethic) is a sheer mystery to me
Agreed - most leadership arises out of a necessity to ensure that the boat stays clear of the rocks. I know (and have experienced) a few managers that were equally hopeless on both technical as well as people management fronts; their proclivity for using the boat's hull as a depthfinder made for some frustrating efforts, so to speak.
I think the concern is that those hoops don’t represent or equal quality management.
Indeed. The biggest shortcoming your manager has may actually be:
1) He/she may not know how to actually manage people.
This is the wrong interpretation of my point