4 ms·
What you describe is a dysfunctional organization, not a justification for PMs.
by jshen 14y ago
What you describe is a dysfunctional organization, not a justification for PMs.
- lifeisstillgood 14y agoI think that is the right answer - a dysfunctional organisation is the justification for PMs and BAs if the film crew \ theory x idea is right then an org aisation that is becoming dysfunctional hires more PMs I suspect that they are symptom initially and then cause.
- bricestacey 14y agoI disagree. A PM is an excellent communicator between engineers and the rest of the organization. It's not a matter of dysfunction, but a way of filtering what is important and what isn't. I've been in both situations where a) I am in direct contact with the rest of the organization and b) where an intermediary is. I prefer B and that is what a PM is for. Some large organizations may be able to eliminate the middle man, but I wager they've dug a ditch so deep they can't tell the difference.
- jshen 14y agoMy large organization has the managers of engineers, who are engineers themselves, act as the intermediary. I've met very few PMs who know enough to filter anything.
- cube13 14y agoOr a large, international organization with employees and clients all around the world, each of whom believe that their problem is the most important thing in the world.
- jshen 14y agoI've worked for some of the largest corporations in the world, 3 of them in the fortune 100 one of which is a fortune 20 company. I've seen it done well and done poorly at that scale. What the person I replied to was describing is a dysfunctional organization, not a functional large organization. Creating a large functional organization is just like creating good abstractions in software. You have to figure out how to structure things so that teams/business units can work together with minimal communication across teams.