3 ms·
in a perfect world, yes. but now you're relying on 2 competent, motivated people instead of 1 competent and motivated person. why rely on 2? why not just give t
by munin 15y ago
in a perfect world, yes. but now you're relying on 2 competent, motivated people instead of 1 competent and motivated person. why rely on 2? why not just give the project manager the authority?
is there something about their ability in this regard you don't trust? then, why are they a project manager? the success or failure of the project could impact the jobs of all of the members of the project, and potentially everyone in the company. why will you trust this responsibility to them, but not the ability to fire individual members of their team?
- eropple 15y agoProject managers manage projects, not engineers. In many cases, project managers are stakeholders in the project. They have conflicted interests. Being able to tell your project manager "no" is important, because it allows engineers to arrest function and scope creep without fearing for their jobs by saying "no" to the wrong person. . Where I am right now, we report instead to technical managers, and are allotted to project managers' projects based on scheduling availability, project importance, and a number of other factors.
- munin 15y agoyou have bigger problems if you can't say "no" to the guy who could fire you, in my opinion
- eropple 15y agoI can. And I have. That doesn't make it a good dilemma to create in the first place: do the right thing, or protect your job? With due respect, I think your notion of how interpersonal relationships work in this sort of situation is rather flawed.