[fivre]

being politely hostile isn't not being hostile, it's just being hostile while maintaining decorum. there aren't meaningful consequences for a CEO breaking decorum in negotiations with those under them; maintaining it is just a nicety

while prior context is absent, at least in this email zuck isn't offering assistance or asking what he could do assist, it's just a politely-worded "get it done, fucker"

i find a servant leadership approach far more effective, and better able to acknowledge that said team problems were quite likely caused by previous "stop complaining and get it done" leadership whose only skill is cracking the whip

[K0balt]

I mean, it’s a bit beyond polite I think, and in the lack of proper context we have, get it done seems like enough to me. (I’m assuming he is speaking to someone who is supposed to have a capacity for management and leadership)

If the PM needs resources, she should just ask for them, in this situation. If a PM needs handholding or niceties to do their job, they probably shouldn’t be a PM.

Making sure priorities are clearly aligned seems like an appropriate conversation.

[K0balt]

On servant leadership, serving the greater good is the only legitimate form of leadership. But that doesn’t mean being servile to incompetence. That goes against the greater good. A leader defining what represents competence in this situation seems appropriate to me.

You can’t serve your way to success you are serving people with misaligned agendas or whom are not capable of doing their job. You serve the people who are serving the organisation. You don’t ask “what do you need” to a person who is apparently not even working on the same goals that the organisation needs to address. That is just fuelling the misguided path.