Interesting way to frame the question for leadership roles.

Interesting tips to reduce the power dynamics in organisations.

It's indeed not easy to go from individual contributions, to team level leadership, to organisation level leadership. Many things need to be learned or relearned at each step.

There's clearly a tension on that topic and the expectations from engineering managers tend to change over time. I like the proposed answer here and the distinction made between writing code and being in the code.

The proposed three traits are definitely spot on. Too much confidence is a red flag, some balance needs to be found.

A couple of interesting ideas. This fluid focus concept definitely require communication around it when applied.

Interesting exploration on the difficulties to switch a team to XP. I'm not fully aligned with some of the fine details pointed there... That said there is a core truth that "XP is about social change" so if you mandate it as a managerial decision it can't be XP anymore.

Interesting ideas about leadership lacking in impact. Indeed it should be seen as a communal function, it's not about individuals leading each in their own directions. Think about it in a systemic way.

Good points, this is indeed often where we are struggling when we move to a leadership role. This changes the nature of the work at least in part and we need to adjust to it.

Nice example of organization to foster more autonomy and ownership in engineering teams. Clearly needs to be adapted to the project context but gives quite a few ideas. It strikes a nice balance at keeping both an individual and a team view of the responsibilities.

Interesting tips to keep learning on the technical side of the job as you get more managerial responsibilities.

A bit biased toward stable product teams only. Still, there are good tips which are more widely applicable here. This gives a good idea of the management of a distributed team of remote workers.

Lots of open questions which are left unanswered. That said it shows how difficult it is to evaluate knowledge workers in general and that we're often grasping to the wrong metrics.

Transparency and fairness are definitely important to keep people motivated across an organization. That doesn't make it easy to deal with of course, but that's where managers should focus.

We should definitely be more wary of metrics indeed. They help for a while, but at some point you'll necessarily get unfortunately burnt by them. The only fallback is "good judgement"... do what you can with this.

Nice tricks to help the team jell. I should try this more.

Aligning people with differing core values in a team is indeed necessary but difficult. It can kill your project for small teams, for larger teams you will likely need to think your organization keeping the misalignment in mind.

It's bloody hard to build a strategy. This article is full of good wisdom to make one. This won't make it really easier, but at least you won't start in the wrong direction and will be able to know if what you produce is any good.

This is an interesting framing of the question. We often talk about the scope, but how thorough are we when handling it? Should we even be that thorough? Might make some of the trade offs more explicit.

Interesting concept of task relevant maturity. I should probably take it more into account myself.