| Maybe I am just "on the cool-aide" or something, but I want to believe this is actually a communication issue. Firstly, I have to assume that people at these senior levels operate in the best interests of the company (at least most of the time). So, feel free to tell me this is my problem :) With that assumption called out, their action (at least statistically) is expected to have a better outcome for the company. This applies to all decision - Return to office, technology selection, etc. So, why is this communication - well because the approach for senior leadership is typically still - "Trust us" - rather than "Here is our logic, and know there are other perspectives, but this is what we are doing and to what end". That communication can increase trust in leadership, and even build confidence when done well. Of course, if/where my assumption is wrong, the author could we right. As a side note - I have NOT worked for a companies with competent technical competencies in senior leadership in well over 10 years. This typically (almost always) leads to mass blind adoption of the Microsoft stack. And I generally see that pattern and will use it to help select where I go work next. |
I don't think it's that simple though. My personal belief is that leadership rarely has a good reason for obtuse decisions and following the leader seems more likely. Even if the first company has a good reason that makes sense for them, I'm not convinced the same (or any) reasoning applies to all the followers.
I also believe that the majority of the leadership at companies I've worked for are poor downwards communicators :)