Comment by parineum
2 days ago
> Fact on the ground is that they usually optimize the entirely wrong indicators and never ever optimize for avoiding future problems.
Fact on the ground is they don't optimize for _your_ indicators and have to compromise on what problems can be addressed now or later. They only appear to be optimizing to the wrong indicators because you don't have all the information.
> have to compromise on what problems can be addressed now or later.
9/10 PM's work is literally avoiding any decisions and responsibilities whatsoever.
Concerned dev/ops/po: Dear PM, feature FOO-123 will not be merged before we start activities for Gate 5.2. FOO-123 is required for Gate 6.0 and if we start with Gate 5.2 activities without it, Gate 6.0 will be delayed by at least 5 weeks. Team FOO is projecting verification of FOO-123 being done by the end of week, which would delay Gate 5.2 by a week. Shall we delay our activities until FOO-123 is merged or start regardless?
PM: Gate 5.2 is extremely important for the project timeline and no delays are acceptable.
<- few moments later ->
PM: I was informed by Compliance that FOO-123 is mandatory, does that affect timelines for Gate 6.0?
Disgruntled employee: Either we start over Gate 5.2 activities with FOO-123 included, which would delay Gate 6.0 by at least 9 weeks, or you get team FOO to backport FOO-123.
<- few moments later ->
PM: gets promoted for successful handling of stressful situation with FOO-123, limiting project delay to 15 weeks and only overrunning projected costs of Gate 6.0 by 30%.
I'm waiting for the disruptive startup that revolutionizes corporate heirarchy by getting rid of PMs since they're so useless.
Since successful businesses continue to employ them, I'm going to err on the side of they do serve a function I don't always understand rather than they must be stupid.
Let me introduce you to the glory of Valve and Lord Gaben.
On a less snarky note: Depending on organization type PMs might do a ton of paperwork on behalf of the teams and act as some sort of central point for business-product communication, however that has exactly nothing with management in any typical definition.
I so wish I would agree with you, if my career has not been a string of them _never_ compromising on anything and only pulling the blanket to their side of the bed.
Your balanced take is nice and I wish I inhabited that reality. So far I have not. Maybe it's the region market or maybe my marketing sucked.
The reality in most businesses is constant roll from fighting one immediate crisis to another and handwaving future risks on "business environment may change" and "not important right now". The more crises one "mitigates", the more competent they are seen, even if they have directly caused the crisis in question.
If you talk about an upcoming shitshow you are generally seen as not entrepreneurial, if you mitigate a risk before it becomes a crisis that crisis is not viewed as crisis. However, if you let a crisis happen and "successfully" manage it you are seen as a hero.
Yes, sadly are quite right. I want off this toxic train. Are any aliens in your vicinity hiring? Tell them I am interested.