These leaders seem to want two things: to at least appear as if they have ultimate control or authority over the direction of their company, down to the nooks and crannies of its culture, and to constantly make news with their management decisions. The control part is straightforward—they’re the visionaries, after all! They ought to be in charge! But the publicity bit is key. Staking out controversial positions on zeitgeisty issues is a good way to keep one’s name relevant and to further craft a cult of personality. In the case of someone like Musk, the constant news-making creates a kind of fandom among supporters, many of whom marvel at Great Business Visionaries and/or think workers these days are too coddled or too woke, or that organized-labor movements are misguided, or that there’s no place for politics in the workplace. If you hurl hot takes and piss people off, the intuition seems to go, you’ll deepen the bond between you and your true believers (many of whom are also your industry peers), and they will praise your bad management as radical candor.
I don’t know if I’d say I enjoy reading Charlie’s “Galaxy Brain” as it’s often frustrating and disheartening to read about how much influence these men have over an entire industry and the general public, but the newsletter is often well-written and illuminating. The most recent edition is very much a good example, with the above quote being just :chefs-kiss:.
Addendum: It’s not just “visionary leaders” in Silicon Valley that make the tech industry less-good. It’s a specific kind of man.
We live in an era that has been profoundly warped by the headstrong impulses of men who are technically sophisticated but emotionally immature.
That’s from The New Yorker piece by Patrick Radden Keefe about the accused CIA leaker Joshua Schulte.