5 ms·

Good project management is invisible. They just make projects happen. They make sure everyone is talking. They make sure decisions are made. Everyone knows what

Good project management is invisible. They just make projects happen. They make sure everyone is talking. They make sure decisions are made. Everyone knows what to do when to do it. Etc. I seen good project management. It is magical. Then the manager left. Everything slowed down to a crawl.

bfdm 8y ago
Yep, it's the thankless job that when done well nobody notices.
JMTQp8lwXL 8y ago
Invisible makes it sound intangible. If you can't quantify the value you're adding to an organization, are you adding any at all? Making sure "the right people are talking", "decisions are made", etc. do sound like things that can be tracked to confirm if a PM is indeed adding value.
- kamaal 8y ago
  >>If you can't quantify the value you're adding to an organization, are you adding any at all? At some point in time recurring wins can look like a perpetual machine. The problem is when you get there, people think like, Now that we got what we want why do we need this person? It's only after the person goes and a few months down the lane you begin to see things falling apart. Of course by then things just become the new normal.
- crispyambulance 8y ago
  > If you can't quantify the value you're adding to an organization, are you adding any at all? The problem with that line of thought is that it's not at all easy (or even possible) to quantifiably measure performance on an individual basis. This is especially true for roles like PM's whose job is to enable the labor and talent of others.
  - JMTQp8lwXL 8y ago
    Many roles are difficult to quantifiably measure. The same is true for software engineers-- suppose two developers are shipping code, but one writes 2x as many lines of code. Do we say they're twice as productive, or delivering twice as much business value? Not necessarily. But there should be something that can be measured, even if it's imprecise, to at least show that something's being done. How do you measure the success criteria for the role of a PM? It's challenging. But it should be done.
    - crispyambulance 8y ago
      Measure and "quantifiably measure" are two different things. I agree that performance can and should be evaluated, however, for many jobs that is an intrinsically subjective task. There's nothing wrong with that. It's just the nature of such roles. You still evaluate, you just don't boil it down to one "score".
- TStowe 8y ago
  Oftentimes I've seen PMs used to talk directly to clients about projects, and groups of execs. Hired because they're great "window dressing".
- zaarn 8y ago
  On a similar thought the IT department of organizations in the past was neglected. After all, they don't add any value, they are only needed to shuffle around dead hardware for new hardware. Similarly a good manager provides auxiliary value; it doesn't directly add value to the organization but if it's not there then the overall value decreases. Not everything in an organization is immediate positive effect.

bfdm 8y ago

Yep, it's the thankless job that when done well nobody notices.

JMTQp8lwXL 8y ago

Invisible makes it sound intangible. If you can't quantify the value you're adding to an organization, are you adding any at all? Making sure "the right people are talking", "decisions are made", etc. do sound like things that can be tracked to confirm if a PM is indeed adding value.

kamaal 8y ago
>>If you can't quantify the value you're adding to an organization, are you adding any at all? At some point in time recurring wins can look like a perpetual machine. The problem is when you get there, people think like, Now that we got what we want why do we need this person? It's only after the person goes and a few months down the lane you begin to see things falling apart. Of course by then things just become the new normal.
crispyambulance 8y ago
> If you can't quantify the value you're adding to an organization, are you adding any at all? The problem with that line of thought is that it's not at all easy (or even possible) to quantifiably measure performance on an individual basis. This is especially true for roles like PM's whose job is to enable the labor and talent of others.
- JMTQp8lwXL 8y ago
  Many roles are difficult to quantifiably measure. The same is true for software engineers-- suppose two developers are shipping code, but one writes 2x as many lines of code. Do we say they're twice as productive, or delivering twice as much business value? Not necessarily. But there should be something that can be measured, even if it's imprecise, to at least show that something's being done. How do you measure the success criteria for the role of a PM? It's challenging. But it should be done.
  - crispyambulance 8y ago
    Measure and "quantifiably measure" are two different things. I agree that performance can and should be evaluated, however, for many jobs that is an intrinsically subjective task. There's nothing wrong with that. It's just the nature of such roles. You still evaluate, you just don't boil it down to one "score".
TStowe 8y ago
Oftentimes I've seen PMs used to talk directly to clients about projects, and groups of execs. Hired because they're great "window dressing".
zaarn 8y ago
On a similar thought the IT department of organizations in the past was neglected. After all, they don't add any value, they are only needed to shuffle around dead hardware for new hardware. Similarly a good manager provides auxiliary value; it doesn't directly add value to the organization but if it's not there then the overall value decreases. Not everything in an organization is immediate positive effect.