Live data from Hacker News

Transparent leadership beats servant leadership

entropicthoughts.com

81–90 of 258 posts

Re: Transparent leadership beats servant leadership

#81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a multiple time ground force commander both in Iraq and stateside for CI operations, I can firmly state that there is literally zero to be learned about leadership from corporate or political worlds. When I left the USG because it’s fundamentally corrupt, I went into private business thinking there were technical/business leaders that had pro-social incentives, and their heads screwed on. Man was I wrong. The US m…

It sounds like you have been burnt, badly. There is surely a business out there that does fit your world view, though the pay and conditions might not. In my view, the need for growth at any cost is toxic and leads to all sorts of horrible behaviours.

There are no good organizations, only ones that aren’t completely corrupt yet. Consider that to start and maintain an organization takes significant capital and energy expenditures upfront, which means you need to fund them from somewhere and ask sources of funding are corrupted. Consider: there are no long lasting egalitarian, distributed power, grassroots organizations that can compete at a level of social influence that can overcome or resist the existing power structure.

I’ve looked at every possible organization that could theoretically fit including; MSF a.k.a. doctors without borders, swords to plowshares, goodwill industries (who employ significant numbers of disabled people for sub min wages while the CEO makes 3M+), Mondragon etc… and they all have exactly the same fucked up incentives

why? because there is no way to survive as a structure, if your org is made up of people who want to eat and don’t want to be a monk.

unless your organization is the lead maximalist resource dominator you will be overrun by some organization with no ethics

Ultimately it comes down to the fact that people have to trade physical and mental work for money to survive. So there is no alternative to do the “right thing” without also risking your own safety and stability in your chosen society. 99.99999% of people are completely unwilling to risk their life on behalf of any particular philosophy - if only because those people don’t feel strongly enough about any particular philosophy to actually put themselves on the line for it.

So whoever has the most money, has the ability to get the most people to work for their goals.

Unfortunately the people with all the money/power do not care about anything other than growing their own personal power

Re: Transparent leadership beats servant leadership

#82
Between the article and the comments in this thread there is actually some pretty good advice here and reasonable and nuanced takes to management.

Bit surprised by this. Has the hn community aged into management or something?

I guess we are not as young and naive as we used to be...

Re: Transparent leadership beats servant leadership

#83
post #25

Just wanted to provide a useful link on the topic of leadership. The US army publishes its doctrine for free and updates it somewhat regularly: https://talent.army.mil/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/ARN20039_... The doctrine is a no-nonsense, no-fluff document based on 200+ years of military tradition where the effectiveness of the leadership is actually life and death. Definitely worth a read if you are interested in le…

> no-nonsense, no-fluff document

> Links ~100 pages pdf

> US army

Yeah that checks out...

I kid. Thanks for the share though!

Re: Transparent leadership beats servant leadership

#84

This is actually not such bad advice for a manager who manages other managers, though I can see why ICs find it very frustrating. If you are giving high level platitudes and counseling-disguised-as-coaching to a junior new hire, they can rightly ask WTF. But managers, especially those recently moved from IC tech roles, often do benefit from this kind of forced introspection. If they have an underperforming employee,…

Why is forced introspection good for managers but not for ICs?

I’m not saying that the extreme “I do nothing except act as a sounding board and tell my team to solve their own problems” is a good approach. But pushing people to solve their own problems does help them grow. It needs to be a balance.

A good manager should be able to see what someone is capable of solving with zero, a little, or a lot of help and engage accordingly. And sometimes they can’t solve it at all and the manager has to take it in directly or pull in someone else who can.

Re: Transparent leadership beats servant leadership

#85
post #7

From the post: "The middle manager that doesn't perform any useful work is a fun stereotype, but I also think it's a good target to aim for." This is the kind of argument that makes people come up with middle manager stereotypes in the first place. In fact, the whole post is a great example of why middle manager stereotypes exist: it starts with a straw man argument and comes up with a "better alternative" that makes…

>Look, boss, sometimes empowering me is just what I need, but sometimes I need you to solve a specific problem for me, so I can keep solving all the other problems I already have on my plate. One of the reasons I really like my current manager is he spends a lot more time reminding us he can/offering to "take care of any blockers." His whole management style can be summed up as "Why is it blocked? Ok, leave it to me.…

Reminds me of something Joel Spolsky wrote about on his blog. The best managers were those who "moved the furniture out the way". Basically clear the way for the people working on the problem to do so.

Re: Transparent leadership beats servant leadership

#86
post #69
post #50

My first few years as an engineering manager were heavily influenced by my idea that I needed to be a "shit umbrella" - I needed to protect my team from all of the shit raining down around the organization so they could focus on getting stuff done. I eventually realized that this is a terrible management philosophy! Your team would much rather understand what's going on, why things are happening and why certain proje…

There's a big difference between protecting a team from all the shit and hiding it from them completely. It's good to be a transparent shit umbrella. The team should absolutely have visibility into what's going on, and understand why certain decisions are being made, but a good manager does need to step in to avoid the shit hitting them directly.

"Transparent shit umbrella" is indeed a much more useful metaphor.

Re: Transparent leadership beats servant leadership

#88
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you ever want to quickly destroy an organization, just separate the ability to control with the responsibility to control. Burnout, infighting, and chaos will ensue.

Being responsible for something while having little/no control is so demoralizing & infuriating.

Ah yes, the need for "influence without authority", i.e. "the real challenge of this project is that you have been organizationally set up to fail, and we expect you to find a way to succeed in spite of that."

Re: Transparent leadership beats servant leadership

#90
I've come to define Leadership as

"The ability to smooth things out for everyone while helping them accomplish their goals"

I think it helps differentiate the "authoritarian" leader or the "Servant leadership" from the "legitimate" one. All kinds of leadership (sports, education, business, relationships) come from understanding people's needs and providing more efficient strategies to meet them.

Post reply on HN