News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Leaderless Teams by nlstitch on Tuesday November 08, 2022 @05:00PM (#33524902)
This is an empty, hollow article and its not like how I experienced groups for 20+ years.

Just like with siblings in families or groups of friends, everyone naturally gets a role in a group; that's just how groups of people let alone animals work. Need to learn how to help others is fine and dandy, until it affects your own autonomy, let alone your identity, let alone the groups' autonomy. Than it will eat at you.

Also what happens in groups is that if there is someone thats is truely not fit for a group, the whole group dynamic will change for the worse and it will try to oust it like a cancer. Until there is someone that speaks up (a leader) things will stay the same because the group will value the "being a group" above all else, even the goal of which the group was founded on.

So? You actually need a good natural leader to guide you through some of the bad stuff. I think leaders are often misunderstood of being only authoritarian, but thats not the case.

Re:Leaderless Teams by calvinmorrison on Tuesday November 08, 2022 @05:14PM (#33525065)
> I think leaders are often misunderstood of being only authoritarian, but thats not the case.

Leaders spend more time thinking about other people than anyone else in a company

Re:Leaderless Teams by scaramanga on Saturday November 19, 2022 @10:22PM (#33677864)
As do sociopaths, since they have a disturbed sense of self.

I imagine lions spend a lot of time thinking about gazelles.

Re:Leaderless Teams by avgcorrection on Tuesday November 08, 2022 @05:51PM (#33525388)
Lot’s justs. Just the way it is. Just-so story?

It’s so just-obvious that it needs no argument. It’s just natural.

> I think leaders are often misunderstood of being only authoritarian, but thats not the case.

Bosses (as in formal authorities, people who have formal control) have been rebranded as “leadership” exactly because “leader” sounds much more voluntary and consensual.

Re:Leaderless Teams by hitekker on Tuesday November 08, 2022 @06:23PM (#33525637)
There’s two “just”s in the GP’s comment so I’m not sure where your snark is coming from.
Re:Leaderless Teams by wahnfrieden on Tuesday November 08, 2022 @10:45PM (#33527309)
Bc it’s reactionary nonsense. Nothing natural about it, just uninformed on modern archaeological and anthro research search as from wengrow, graeber
Re:Leaderless Teams by thom on Tuesday November 08, 2022 @07:33PM (#33526151)
In fairness to the article, it’s not actually about leaderless teams. Leaderless teams were just experiments allowing them to identify better leaders, who then went on to take positions of command.
Re:Leaderless Teams by macfarbt on Wednesday November 09, 2022 @01:00PM (#33535423)
I will agree it's hollow in that it is story of an experiment not a specific real world situation. :-)

You are right that in families everyone gets a role. Unlike business you don't join a family at will, you're born into it and roles are very fixed.

Companies are much more dynamic and our roles (formal and informal) change. We also work "at will" and can change companies, teams and colleagues.

There are different types of leadership roles. As you say, one type gets through the bad stuff. Others do really well when times are good. Some only in certain situations.

In tech, where the nature of work and expertise needed day to day, week to week, can vary a lot at times, a variety of leadership capabilities and styles, along with the universal ability to give a shit about colleagues, makes for an awesome team.