When I read the hn title I thought the direct reports wrote a readme about the manager. That made a whole lot more sense to me. How many coffees does (he/she) need to drink before it’s ok to approach their desk. How much detail do they require when explaining an issue. These are the features I’d like documented for new hires.

> painfully self-absorbed

Generally, when someone suffixes their name in a non-scholarly context with "PhD" that's usually the first clue that it's going to be pretentious and/or self absorbed.

For this guy, it’s at the end of the article. By the first paragraph you have all the clues you need. In fact, even by the title. Putting himself into that circle of “best managers” via logical fallacy: the best do this; I do this; I am the best.

Ditto. I'm from Scandinavia and I've seen developers snicker at much less self-absorbedness from management.

I also cannot understand the obsession with 30 minutes of 1:1 every week.

I consider that an extreme version of micromanagement. Give us developers the big picture so we know what we need to work on and can see what's important in which way, and we will find out how it's done.

If you don't trust developers to be able to communicate and plan complex jobs without 30 minutes of 1:1, how can you write "excellent communication skills" in the job posting?

It seems you imply there are imperfect managers but there can only ever be perfect developers. I would be the happiest person on this planet if that would be the case. Excellent communication skills don't help if the listener is sub-par.

No, I just don't see a 1:1 being better at communicating goals etc for the company compared to a group beeting.

Why is a meeting with a single developer so much better than a meeting with the full group? In group meetings you get more view points and more easily find out if somebody are talking past each other.

What is it that needs 30 minutes of personal time every week and that cannot be communicated at the meeting with the other developers in the group?