I sympathize with the anti-management sentiment overall, but I’ve yet to see anyone address alternatives to designating someone, new hire or otherwise, as a “manager”.

This article doesn’t really touch on it other than to say “do a bunch of things right and folks can self-manage”, which is a retort to a narrow use-case for management. Not all managers are intended to be people managers, nor do they want to be.

I can’t help but think the management vs non-management paradigm is 50% due to anti-management stereotype, and 50% due to actually toxic management practices. And I imagine half or less of that latter 50% are toxic because of a bad manager. Everything else is likely due to overbearing leadership, poor company goals, a bad process that management would too like to change but can’t, etc etc.

Generally, I agree with the article’s sentiment. Don’t force a process, find what works for your employees. Get company buy-in. Set clear rules and goals. Hold folks accountable, and tell them to hold you accountable too.