The issue with that is, distilled, the strategy comes across as "be exceptional". The most impressive people are rarely using strategies that would work for an average member of the crowd. The ones that are using standard strategies are generally so extraordinary in motivation and talent that they're going to achieve exceptional success through raw out-competition of rivals.

Technically I can imagine a world where every member of a software team sets themselves up as an adviser and productive support for the management team through sheer force of personality and mastery of soft skills. But practically it seems a bit utopian. Firstly, there are cases where the manager is just more canny than the report and a please-the-boss strategy would be best for everyone. Then there are the cases where the manager is low-empathy or not great at taking advice once they've made a mistake which covers 80% of the managers I know (most of whom are nonetheless pretty good and capable managers). Then the cases where the manager is incompetent technically and will fall for persuasive gibberish from someone who spends more time talking than coding.

If management is ideal and the employees inspired then everyone pushing for what they think best is great. But the moment the cracks of reality intrude I'd bet on yosefk's cynicism. It just asks too much of an employee that they have to be technically competent enough to chart their own path, business savvy enough to correctly place themselves for the needs of the organisation and be capable enough at soft skills to sell these truths to people with more power than them. The best of us might. Most are going to do what they get rewarded for instead.