Steve Jobs was a megalomaniac abusive asshole who routinely blamed others for his own bad decisions, and all this ideology here espoused does is serve as a pseudo justification for it.
You are never going to have some kind of objective way of determining who the ‘rockstars’ are that takes into account the fact that a /lot/ of people are very necessary but do work that can really only be seen as fundamental to some other idea.
Those kinds of underlying robust systems only get noticed when or if they fail, and then those people are blamed. They never get praised or recognized for doing something new and innovative if it isnt flashy amd easily noticeable.
The people who imagineer grand ideas who have their whole team tell them they need to be more realistic, and then get screamed at, and then get screamed at again when the unrealistic idea doesnt work because of problems they were screamed at for pointing out…
Those are the kinds of people that arent ‘rockstars’
This cult of personality bullshit around Jobs in particular is disgusting.
Whilst I agree with you, just focusing on the point made by the headline… yes we need process people in an org, because of compliance, procedures, procurement etc.
But… I believe that you need the people who can spot when processes are damaging outcomes and product, and that process should be subservient and mutable to prioritise for outcomes.
This may make some people think of process disruptors as ‘rockstars’, but they aren’t really, it’s just another helpful but different perspective, and who do they have to work with to establish and onboard the new processes with but the process-oriented.
Steve Jobs was a megalomaniac abusive asshole who routinely blamed others for his own bad decisions, and all this ideology here espoused does is serve as a pseudo justification for it.
You are never going to have some kind of objective way of determining who the ‘rockstars’ are that takes into account the fact that a /lot/ of people are very necessary but do work that can really only be seen as fundamental to some other idea.
Those kinds of underlying robust systems only get noticed when or if they fail, and then those people are blamed. They never get praised or recognized for doing something new and innovative if it isnt flashy amd easily noticeable.
The people who imagineer grand ideas who have their whole team tell them they need to be more realistic, and then get screamed at, and then get screamed at again when the unrealistic idea doesnt work because of problems they were screamed at for pointing out…
Those are the kinds of people that arent ‘rockstars’
This cult of personality bullshit around Jobs in particular is disgusting.
Jobs fucked over so many people. So many people.
Whilst I agree with you, just focusing on the point made by the headline… yes we need process people in an org, because of compliance, procedures, procurement etc.
But… I believe that you need the people who can spot when processes are damaging outcomes and product, and that process should be subservient and mutable to prioritise for outcomes.
This may make some people think of process disruptors as ‘rockstars’, but they aren’t really, it’s just another helpful but different perspective, and who do they have to work with to establish and onboard the new processes with but the process-oriented.
TL;DR, you need diversity of thought.
I agree with all of what you’ve said here, no arguments!
Thank you for your comment, sir.