I don't think you know what that fallacy is, or alternatively didn't actually read my comment.
That fallacy would apply if I was claiming bad managers aren't managers.
I'm not claiming that.
I'm saying not all managers are bad and the job does not inherently mean a lack of creativity or skill.
As for you cynical follow up question: Shareholders benefit from low turnover and high productivity in an environment that rewards creativity and risk taking. Building that kind of environment requires substantial management talent. Again, the coach metaphor is very apt, here.
As an aside: cynicism and nihilism might be fashionable but it's shallow and lazy.
That fallacy would apply if I was claiming bad managers aren't managers.
I'm not claiming that.
I'm saying not all managers are bad and the job does not inherently mean a lack of creativity or skill.
As for you cynical follow up question: Shareholders benefit from low turnover and high productivity in an environment that rewards creativity and risk taking. Building that kind of environment requires substantial management talent. Again, the coach metaphor is very apt, here.
As an aside: cynicism and nihilism might be fashionable but it's shallow and lazy.