What a ride. I really disagree with almost everything that's written there. So many things are even factually wrong, or with such a limited perspective that the

What a ride. I really disagree with almost everything that's written there. So many things are even factually wrong, or with such a limited perspective that they are very likely missing the point. For instance, what he describes is not project management (limited timeframe, specific end result) but constant, ongoing product development. He describes a development management job (might also be called team lead), not a PM job. His conclusion seems right to me, though. Team management doesn't need fancy processes. The overview of activity and backlog needs to be there and the manager has the responsibility to enable syncing between activities and to the outside world. If one calms down after that conclusion, one realizes that managing a single team of developers is trivial. Maybe that's why people are not talking about it so much (in contrast to "nobody gets it")? The art is in reprioritizing existing tasks when new ones come in (because usually something needs to get dropped), and additionally there's art in handling the meta level when single processors of a team are not just people but subteams.