|
|
|
|
|
by OhMeadhbh
147 days ago
|
|
When I was in the Marines, we had a rule of thumb that every Marine needed to know their own mission and the mission of units two or three echelons above them. So individual Marines needed to know their mission, their platoon's mission and their company's mission. Company commanders needed to know their mission, their battalion's mission and the division's mission. More specifics for echelons closer to you. This is complicated by the fact that Marines deploy as MEUs, MEBs and MEFs [1] which aren't "pure" echelons, but it's a rule of thumb and guiding principle more than a hard and fast requirement. I've ALWAYS been annoyed by engineering organizations that don't think developers at the leaf nodes of the org chart need to know what's going on. Devs may not do anything with the info, but letting people in on what's happening seems to send the message that "management thinks you're important enough to hear what we're working on" and every now and again, individual devs need to make decisions that depend on these more abstract / higher-level goals. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_air%E2%80%93ground_task... |
|
Servant leadership works really well when you have high agency individuals, and can grow high agency individuals. I have definitely been on the other side of that with control freak machiavellian / nearly adversarial leaders as well.