And in your example they’d both be wrong. Such folks shouldn’t spend as much time worrying about their job description as about what will make the company successful?.
Companies don’t become great by everyone waiting around for only managers to decide when new roles or practices should come online. Employees at any level are allowed to consider the big picture. Why do they sometimes feel they’re not allowed to or would be discouraged from doing so?
If you carefully and thoughtfully put some time into slowly baking your opinions in a way you best guess helps your company end to end to achieve its most strategic goals with dev/ops as one part of that, your opinion will be more respected and influential.
It’s also a management test. Walk into your VP’s office, dispassionately and without self emphasis, make your case about how you should be doing xyz because it makes sense within the big picture.
Most times you can’t lose, even if the plan isn’t rolled out you’ll gain credibility. If you get your hand slapped, it’s a clear signal to switch departments or companies because leaders like that have low success rates, as well as usually not being much fun to work for.
IMO 90% boils down to that, regardless of what technology one side or other wants to use. If Ops is trying to push Dev to use a particular technology or vice versa. This happens whether you're talking Docker or a particular programming language.
Either side will see their preference as solving the problem of doing their job in the best way possible. If both sides are deaf to the problems seen by each other, it becomes a problem.
Honestly, the place where I see this stuff more than anything is when developers want tools that make them more productive, because the technological merits are harder to convey.