[skydhash]

> it is always the CEO or CTOs fault the way it is framed. There is never any accountability on the engineers part.

If we're going with the military analogy in TFA, it's always the general fault for loosing a war. Especially if the soldiers did all they were told to do. He's the one in control making all the major decision.

> CEO/CTO sets the vision. They are not the ones developing the UI or developing the API or writing documentation etc

That's why you need a feedback loop. If a general only stays in a bunker, deciding things based on map and single line reports, then it's a poor general. You have to also have a clear sense of what the product is (dogfooding it if it's necessary) so that you can adjust its course. Vision is all bell and whistle. People wants to pay for solutions, not nice ideas. They may even be willing to invest in such solutions. But you have to deliver it.

[pessimizer]

> If a general only stays in a bunker, deciding things based on map and single line reports, then it's a poor general.

This is a bit of an exaggeration: if he can pull the signal out of the maps and single-line reports and deliver results, then he is a good general. The point is he can't blame his failure on the fact that he didn't know what was happening, because his job is to understand enough to make money. If he failed because didn't understand, then he should have been prioritizing his information pipeline (whether that's personal knowledge or it's finding the right people to deliver the correct information to him intelligibly.)

Otherwise, it's like saying you weren't responsible for the car accident because you were drunk.