To try and give you a quick answer on the above. I expect that when something is not working or there is a screwup or you are not achieving results, that you come up with corrective action.
You can deep dive, root cause analysis, ask for more tools or support, make a case for more $$ or headcount, make personnel changes with *justification, but present a corrective action, execute and provide results.
*If you choose to make a personnel change, I want to make sure you set that employee up for success and gave them the tools they needed to prosper and it was a performance issue despite of all that.
However, if you as the Head of a Department have not taken appropriate corrective actions, not set your Teams up for success and choose to blame subordinates for your failures, that to me becomes an integrity/personality trait I have a hard time getting past.
I saw JS fall on the sword after game 2 and talk about organizational approach. I truly thought that today, we would see the same corporate dribble we have seen the last 6,7 years and just talk about the org as a whole and processes etc, basically put us to sleep in their Canadian Thanksgiving weekend press conference (eye roll). OR, to hear Ross say that at the end of the day he is the GM and he is accountable.
I did not expect and was honestly shocked for Ross to deflect from the organizational processes and say it was John.
The loyalty and professionalism is not flowing both ways between JS and Atkins IMO when you say that. Atkins didn't have to answer like that. He could have deflected like he has for the past 6 years and say organizational decision.
He sold JS down the river and demonstrated his beta male core by not saying at the end of the day I am responsible. (Since he can't say Shapiro really is).