[epicureanideal]

I would say the top business leadership is to blame. The CEOs for example. They permit the engineering management class to be mediocre-performing parasites, they don't really understand how to measure their performance or the performance of the teams under them.

It's the cluelessness of the top management that enables this horrible principle/agent problem. It's as if you had a stock broker who would give you reports every month about how well he's doing, but you aren't capable of understanding whether your assets are increasing or decreasing, and you don't know how to add up the numbers for yourself or care to learn how. And it's their own fault for, in tech organizations, not caring enough to be taught how to manage their managers better.

Note: it may even be that some things are difficult to measure, but I don't see even a reasonable attempt to vet the engineering management class.

Another note: I'm not sure top leadership looks for any qualities in "management" other than "seems like someone with a rough attitude that will push people hard", even if they're pushing people hard without knowing what the people are even doing. It's a "whip-holder" role rather than any kind of attempt to make work more efficient.