Hi @galenkp, I understand the idea you convey to us. Moreover, I have known bad coordinators unable to delegate or with bad manners at the time of addressing any of his subordinates. I think that in jobs related to social issues, where reports are usually manipulated at the end of the year and where it is easier for incapable people to achieve tasks of responsibility, it is easier for incapable people to succeed. In these cases the team environment is not good. I am a witness of this.
I don't like to lay blame on the leader all the time, I am one after all, however I believe there's so many leaders/managers that are ill-equiped for the role and are only promoted due to favouritism or longevity with the organisation; it's bloody ridiculous really. Promotion should come to those most suited to, and capable of, doing the job.
It's (general) human nature to try and avoid blame but it takes a stronger person to accept it; leaders need to understand what's going wrong (even with themselves) and make the changes so that the team can succeed. To do otherwise makes them a bad leader. Of course, I always expect ownership from my teams and have guided them all down that path. I'm pleased to say it's mostly worked and with those who have resisted...well, they tend to cull themselves from the flock naturally.
My experience is limited to the world of NGOs and public projects. And I believe that here leaders with leadership skills are more likely to take on management roles. When I did my first volunteer work, I saw how the annual reports of the activity of the association I was in were falsified. If the objectives were presented as achieved, then the subsidy arrived. In such an ecosystem, it doesn't matter if the leadership is good or bad. I was not trying to generalize.