[dsugarman]

I don't know nearly enough to make a firm claim here but I don't think what you're describing sounds like a definitive counter example. There's a big difference between giving lower level employees creative freedom and letting c level executives have free roam over their domain with little oversight or Founder involvement.

[trunnell]

...letting c level executives have free roam over their domain with little oversight or Founder involvement.

I agree with you, I think. pg's point was that "Steve Jobs Mode" is the opposite of founders letting their C-level execs roam free. I don't agree.

I think the improved model is "free roaming managers with lots of transparency and accountability."

"Free roaming" and "no accountability" are a recipe for disaster.

But a CEO/exec/manager who reaches 2, 3, or more levels into their org and gives specific direction is a recipe for mismanagement. It violates the golden rule: don't create a role with two bosses.

[gwd]

> It violates the golden rule: don't create a role with two bosses.

Right, but on the other side, in the military they told us: "You can delegate authority, but you can't delegate responsibility." If part of the CEO is to be a manager for the C-suite, then he needs to be able to evaluate how the CxO is behaving as a manager; and that would seem to imply looking 2 or 3 levels down to see what's going on beneath them.

That's not to say the CEO should go around randomly countermanding orders and giving new ones. The CxO can't do their job that way. But it does mean that the CEO should have a clear picture about what's going on, form their own opinions, and either give guidance / constructive criticism or fire where appropriate.