Moving from Headstrong Opinions to Collective Ownership

A common challenge for young engineers is the tendency to champion a single approach or technology without fully understanding the broader context.

"We need to use this library. It just works." "MongoDB is perfect for document storage. It worked well in my last job." "Elastic is the best for full-text search. It'll solve all our problems."

Any of these statements could be right—or completely wrong. The reality, as experienced engineers often say, is: "It depends." Any choice of technology or approach is not just a bet on the tool itself but on an understanding of the specific context in which it will be applied.

Less experienced engineers often become deeply attached to their preferred solutions, especially when they see senior engineers championing ideas with the same certainty. While passion and confidence are valuable, this approach doesn’t serve the individual, the team, or the organization in the long run.

In this piece, I’ll explore how this behavior often stems from a certain type of organizational culture and, more importantly, how we can foster a healthier, more collaborative approach that ultimately builds a stronger team and culture.

Passion and Headstrong Opinions: Ingredients for a Bad Broth

We’ve all seen it: senior engineers or influential team members pushing a solution until any opposition is steamrolled. This approach can feel particularly common in certain organizational cultures, but it’s a pattern that transcends borders. I’ve observed it frequently within groups of engineers in France, though it’s not unique to any one country.

When you're surrounded by this kind of behavior, it’s easy to follow the same path. However, this style of communication often stifles healthier, more thoughtful approaches. In individualistic cultures, this might be driven by a desire for ego-boosting wins, but whatever the root cause, this "I am right" mentality tends to lead to poor outcomes.

In the short term, it blocks productive discussions and stifles the exploration of alternative options. In the medium term, it risks jeopardizing the success of the project itself. And in the long term, it can alienate team members, driving them toward other opportunities.

This approach aligns with what Westrum categorizes as a "pathological" organizational culture, where dissent is suppressed, information is hoarded, and innovation stalls . Even if an engineer is technically correct in their chosen solution, they’re not the only one responsible for building or maintaining it. The success of any project relies on the collective effort of the team.

A typology of organisational cultures -- R. Westrum https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1765804/pdf/v013p0ii22.pdf

To truly support both individuals and the organization, we need to adopt a different approach to preparing, building, and sustaining projects.

Fostering Collaboration and Growth

It’s often said that a manager directs people, a good leader encourages them, and a great leader inspires them to find the answers themselves. The best way to lead isn’t to dictate, but to provide the context and tools for others to make informed decisions.

Agile methodologies and leadership styles like those used by Captain D. Abrashoff on his ship follow this principle: provide the team with the context, set a clear goal, and ensure open communication. The team will figure out the details.

However, this shift doesn’t happen overnight. It requires ongoing effort, attention, and a nurturing environment.

Instead of giving orders, I prefer to lead through a series of questions and comments, guiding people toward their own conclusions. It’s one thing to hand someone a template and say, "Here, use this," but it’s another to inspire them to develop something they fully understand and own.

For example, rather than simply stating, "We need a comprehensive proposal," you might say, "Let’s ensure that our proposals compare multiple technologies and consider all relevant prerequisites." Then, as the team works on their approach, offer constructive feedback:

"Okay, we have a list of things that won’t work—can you explain why they don’t meet our project requirements?" "Could we outline the implementation steps for this solution?"

Step by step, the team takes ownership of the proposal, refining it with their own insights and language. Over time, this fosters a culture of thoroughness, where engineers instinctively compare technologies and consider all angles before making decisions. Code reviews become more collaborative and less judgmental, shifting from a mere critique to a productive exchange of ideas.

Navigating Different Team Dynamics

Of course, not everyone will thrive in this environment. Some individuals are more comfortable following instructions and working within predefined frameworks. These team members might not take naturally to the independent, problem-solving approach, and that’s okay. Every organization consists of a spectrum of individuals with different strengths and inclinations.

The key is balancing these dynamics. As more independent team members grow into leadership roles, they can guide and support others, creating a more cohesive and productive team overall.

Building Foundations for Stronger Teams and Leaders

One of the most valuable outcomes of fostering this collaborative culture is that it multiplies the effectiveness of your team. When engineers begin looking beyond their immediate tasks, considering the broader context and exploring alternative approaches, they lighten the load for others.

For example, if an engineer presents a one-sided proposal without addressing potential alternatives, it forces someone else—perhaps the CTO or another senior leader—to dig into those options to make an informed decision. However, when senior engineers bring forward consolidated proposals, complete with a comparison of different technologies, trade-offs, and how they align with the company’s context, it empowers others to make educated decisions without duplicating efforts.

As companies grow, engineering leaders must spend less time at the tactical level and more time guiding teams at a strategic level . By fostering a culture where thoughtful, generative discussions are the norm, you create a sustainable environment for long-term growth.

Levels of war -- https://journal.pier22.eu/levels-of-war-and-technical-leadership/

In conclusion, encouraging engineers to adopt a more holistic, context-aware approach to problem-solving not only leads to better technical outcomes but also builds a stronger, more collaborative team. Leaders who nurture this type of culture will ultimately see their teams thrive—not just in solving today’s problems, but in preparing for the challenges of tomorrow.