|
|
|
|
|
by prmph
1279 days ago
|
|
You're conflating "guidance" with lack of trust; the two things are entirely separate, and I'm not sure why they are being confused. I'm leading a small (4 person) team working on a large multi-year greenfield project, and I sometimes schedule the entire team to meet with the client, who is a domain expert, so that we can hash out some fine decisions that he has unique insight into. My insights, as someone who bridges the technical and domain sides are also key to the success of these meetings. Would you say I don't "trust" the team by not allowing them to work in a silo? |
|
Yes, this means you don't trust them.
As I've already said, I've been doing this for roughly 25 years now. I can tell the difference between a technical decision and a business decision.
Even the wording ... "by not allowing them" implies both that you don't trust them and you don't have enough respect for the authority you wield to avoid using it cavalierly. I mean "by not allowing them to kick kittens". Sure, if they're about to start kicking kittens, #savethekittens. Otherwise, let them work.
Because here's the thing. Shitty managers don't know they're shitty, if they did, they would stop being shitty because recognition is the first step to becoming a non-shitty manager.
Because it's one thing to tell me all of the developers are inexperienced and don't have these skills so you don't trust them. It's another to claim you DO trust them and treat them as if they're inexperienced developers.