Hello, sorry if this has been asked before, but a quick search in the forums didn't turn up anything.
I was wondering what people thought about a ''playing manager'' versus one who performs exclusively leadership and advisory roles. In one seminar I heard that leaders prepare for the future, so accordingly time invested needs to be not about solving immediate problems, but preventing others before they happen...be it recruiting, mentoring, improving work environment, contributor education, etc.
My experience in practice is understaffed or poorly managed projects get behind schedule, problems arise, so upper management says "OK, this time we are in a bind so pull back on the leadership and start coding so we can make this deadline." In doing so management and communication suffer, and the company doesn't grow, it stagnates as team cohesion degrades.
I personally am an advocate for leaders doing dedicated leadership (including design review, peer review, self-education of course), and I believe there is always more that can be done in those management areas that will pay off down the line. However, in looking at career opportunities on a lot of software companies' sites, I see "we want a director that will also make significant technical contributions/coding".