> On your team, if someone didn’t follow a process properly but still produced results, do you really care? Are you trying to dictate the steps your team takes, inserting things like AI in places you think it makes sense because you read it in a white paper or McKinsey told you to? If yes, you’re a bureaucrat, a sad excuse for a manager …
> On your team, if someone didn’t follow a process properly but still produced results, do you really care? Are you trying to dictate the steps your team takes, inserting things like AI in places you think it makes sense because you read it in a white paper or McKinsey told you to? If yes, you’re a bureaucrat, a sad excuse for a manager and focused on the wrong things.
Bureaucrats care about *how* things get done, not *what* gets done. It's been true forever, but over the past 20 years in tech it's been too easy for bureaucrats to manage to "how" and end up with a good "what" because of macro market trends they had nothing to do with. That's getting exposed now.
> On your team, if someone didn’t follow a process properly but still produced results, do you really care? Are you trying to dictate the steps your team takes, inserting things like AI in places you think it makes sense because you read it in a white paper or McKinsey told you to? If yes, you’re a bureaucrat, a sad excuse for a manager and focused on the wrong things.
Bureaucrats care about *how* things get done, not *what* gets done. It's been true forever, but over the past 20 years in tech it's been too easy for bureaucrats to manage to "how" and end up with a good "what" because of macro market trends they had nothing to do with. That's getting exposed now.