Quote:
Originally Posted by davidthefat
Thirdly, I believe the leader should be good at their position. Honestly if you can't even program, why do you even bother being the programming leader?
|
I realize this is a little out of context, but the best leaders are NOT subject matter experts (SMEs). The traits necessary to be an excellent worker are vastly different from those necessary to be a good leader. This is especially true in Engineering.
In an FRC team, maybe not so much.
One of the wicked truths of Engineering is that after a certain point your salary stops growing, or doesn't grow by much. Engineers, being the logical folks they are, realize that the bigger money lies in management, so they become supervisors and managers.
Some are good at it and succeed, their workers like them.
Most are awful at it, making their workers and themselves miserable in the process. Engineers like to solve problems with Things, but People are not like Things: A Thing is invariant; it is the same tomorrow as it was yesterday, so any problems you're solving are standing still.
People are variable, maddeningly so.
So when an Engineer sets out to solve a problem, a Thing problem is attacked methodically and eventually solved. A People problem constantly changes, and cannot be solved using typical Engineering methods.
There are people who thrive on People problems; they are intuitive and can understand these behaviors. These are our best Leaders.
Most engineers head in that direction because they are not good at People. Most engineers don't make great leaders, instead they are great workers.