It's true that someone needs to be in chagre. The question is whether people who don't actually know what's going on and who are instead (supposedly) experts in organization itself ought to be calling the shots. I can't say I have ever seen that work before, and in fact I can't recall anyone who really understands what's going on having a different opinion.

Let's take this out of the software arena for a moment. Let's say we are organizing a hospital. There's certainly a role for pure managers to do budgeting, handling legal issues, accounting, and so on, but when it comes to treating patients it would be murder to place organization people in charge of a surgery. A lead surgeon of a major surgical team might well end up doing a lot of organization stuff and might even put down the scalpel for good, but he couldn't do a good job of making the decisions without knowing a hell of a lot about details that someone who only knew how to shuffle paper could never have enough perspective on. You tell me, if you were going to have brain surgery would you prefer a team led by a top surgeon or one led by someone who only knew how to push paper? How about a flight crew on a plane? What if you were on the battlefield? Would you rather be led by a great soldier or a great bureaucrat?