6 ms·

Product Managers, Stop Pissing Off The Engineers

38 points by bdehaaff 13y ago

five18pm 13y ago
Let me add couple more: (1) Asking for a feature and then never showing up once when it is being built. "Hey, we are adding this page here. Is it okay?" <No answer>. "Hey, is this workflow good?" <No answer>. Once implemented, come around and ask "Why is this built this way?" (2) Not being interested in any feature that engineering is interested in. It is okay to talk to customers all the time, but once in a while turn around and talk to engineering too.
- bdehaaff 13y ago
  I totally agree. I think the best PMs actually leave at least 20% of their roadmap for engineers to tell them what else needs to be built.
michaelochurch 13y ago
I stopped reading here: Involve engineering management early and often, so everyone has a chance to contribute to the product vision and buy into where the product is headed. This is tailored to people in inefficient VC-istan companies where engineers don't get to speak for themselves, hence "involve engineering management". Ok, we're done here. I agree that there are a lot of terrible, arrogant PM's out there. PM is the ultimate MacLeod Clueless job in many organizations (with engineers closer to the MacLeod Loser tier) because it involves a lot of context-switching and annoying work, but is ultimately just as subordinate as anything else, since the job still involves serving executives.
- bdehaaff 13y ago
  Good point. I deleted "management" from the post. The best orgs (and also the most successful) are those where everyone has a voice. Maybe you will keep reading now and let me know if anything else in the post really tweaks you the wrong way.
  - michaelochurch 13y ago
    In general, quite good and I agree with it. Minor nit: (1) you used the term "executive team" and I hate that phrase. Don't get me started on teamism. I hate this cargo-cult bullshit where every group of people is called a team. Executives are a court, in the medieval sense. Also, I still sense that you're writing from a closed-allocation perspective. (I'm not even sure that proper open allocation would have a PM/engineer distinction. Why not hire people who are willing to do both?) Closed allocation is doomed to produce garbage and no amount about of telling other people to be better will correct for its foundational problems.
    - seivan 13y ago
      "Closed allocation is doomed to produce garbage and no amount about of telling other people to be better will correct for its foundational problems." I've been thinking on this lately, it does make sense. Never been in a position to try it until now.
      - michaelochurch 13y ago
        What is your strategy for trying it? Are you starting a company?
        seivan 13y ago
        I quit one.
      - ashcairo 13y ago
        I imagine you can do both in a really small or one man team, but to do both in anything bigger will require a very difficult context switch between job functions.
doctorpangloss 13y ago
Eh—hoarding credit is sort of the M.O. of a really great product manager. A PM has to compete with all the other PMs to get her features implemented. And if the PM's feature gets implemented first, this PM looks super productive. I think if you're an product manager looking to be the best product manager, taking credit is imperative. Because at the end of the day, your feature is just paper until it is implemented. Not being hated, well, that's another matter... I sympathize with the enormous friction between folks who assign work and folks who finish it.
- michaelochurch 13y ago
  I sympathize with the enormous friction between folks who assign work and folks who finish it. I don't. If you create this separation between the two categories, you'll have a terrible organization and when it caves in on itself, I will cheer that process on. That's why open allocation is morally superior (in addition to working better). People "assign" work to themselves (without noise) and then do it. None of this parasitic high-horse management bullshit. You know how much better the world would be if "work" was a culture of doing things rather than delegating and taking credit? It'd be a different world. People might actually, like, work when they go "to work".
  - jeremy6d 13y ago
    I cannot praise this comment enough.
  - danso 13y ago
    You know how much better the world would be if everyone was good at work? If everyone had a correct estimation of his/her own ability? If everyone knew when to defer to those with better judgement? The world would be awesome. But that's not the way the world is. And not all well-oiled machines will stay well-oiled...and in such a situation, sometimes it may be worth it to have someone who manages the process and can play King Solomon anytime two workers are fighting over a baby. I'm not sure if the PM role does this well in practice, I'm just saying, I can imagine such a role in an imperfect work environment paying off.
  - 13y ago
hammerzeit 13y ago
In what world do PMs actually think the supposed thoughts in this article? Yes, it's important to document well, focus on why not how, and be a shit umbrella not funnel -- though these have been PM 101 everywhere I've worked. But when PMs infringe on these issues (and yes, all PMs do) I find it's rarely a conscious decision as much an impulsive/instinctive thing from being torn in 100 directions at once.
- marshray 13y ago
  For example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5930324 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5930324
austenallred 13y ago
I hate articles like this more than anything. If you really want to help product managers, do you have to spend the first half of the article telling them that you're so much more important than them? It takes two hands to clap.
- bdehaaff 13y ago
  I am not sure what your point is. Where in the blog post does it say that I am more important than they are? My career has been defined by being a PM and I have made all of those mistakes myself. In fact, our new company -- Aha.io -- is built for PMs.
  - abbottry 13y ago
    "However, the reality is that you need engineering more than they need you." Whatever. I like the article, it makes some good points. It's hard to write an article explaining one side of a situation like this without 'taking sides'. I think the the PM role/title has become such a generic position that articles like this one are really taking a stab at anyone non-engineering, not that I am upset by it. As a startup founder, meshing technical teams and non-technical teams is extremely difficult to do. The work environments, thought processes, personalities, etc. are so different.
  - bdehaaff 13y ago
    Ok. Just a misunderstanding. Thanks for the comments.
  - austenallred 13y ago
    I read that wrong - I thought you were an engineer complaining about PMs
- marshray 13y ago
  I see one paragraph that might fit that description. The one that starts with > However, the reality is that you need engineering more than they need you. And it's basically true. But I thought the line > You are overhead. Was too harsh and a slam. If the author really feels that's a notable point to make, it deserves a lot more explanation.
vijayr 13y ago
slightly off topic - anyone moved from coding to product management? I thoroughly enjoy product management - market research, coming up with new product ideas, feature ideas etc. No clue how to make the transition though :(
- michaelochurch 13y ago
  No clue how to make the transition though :( Become [executive's gender of interest] and learn how to sit on a desk.
  - Whitespace 13y ago
    > Become female and learn how to sit on a desk. Are you fucking kidding me? I don't have enough karma to downvote you, someone please do the honors.
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
    - michaelochurch 13y ago
      I realized that it was horrible as written and I apologize. In that vein, I fixed it (replaced with "executive's gender of interest"). It was reverse-pattern-matched off of a certain company where the desk ornament happened to be female, but I've seen male desk ornament dynamics as well. That said, if you don't think 95+% of workplace favoritism is based on sexual desire, you're misled. That's especially true in the non-technical/subjective roles where ability is so hard to evaluate. Most corporate executives did their 20s wrong and want to Feel Like A (Wo)Man now that they're older. Which means that for non-tech/subjective proteges they tap either (a) young, attractive people of the opposite sex who give them a "hip" image, or (b) unscrupulous young men ~20 years their junior through whom they live vicariously.
      - jasonlotito 13y ago
        > That said, if you don't think 95+% of workplace favoritism is based on sexual desire, you're misled. Yeah, that's bullshit. Maybe in certain sectors, but unless you have something to back that up, I'm calling bullshit.
danso 13y ago
Being an engineer (by schooling) myself...I've always found it confounding how non-technical product managers do what they do...I've seen plenty of "shut up non-techie" posts (including this OP) but are there any really great non-techie product manager musings on this topic, explaining how they are able to reliably judge timeframes and output without having hands-on experience? I do think producers are valuable...in the art/entertainment world, for example...you don't have to be an actor/model/writer to be vital to a production's success. However, in software, it just seems that the implementation of the process is so vital in fully realizing the gains that code can bring you, that if you have a product manager who doesn't understand that, than the PM can do as much harm as good.
- bdehaaff 13y ago
  I am the author and I built my career as a "non tech background" PM before I became a CEO. My super secret to success (not really that secret). Be great at explaining the "whys" and "whats" and work closely with engineering on the "hows." Understand what it will take to build something before agreeing on the roadmap. Building great product requires awesome PM and engineering.
fredsanford 13y ago
You know... This brings a part of my life back to mind that I hoped to forget... FS, if you're reading and recognize this, I still respect the hell out of you and wish you well. I can't go into too much depth here without revealing more than allowed. I am purposely vague and I apologize if that bothers or offends you but I don't want to see any litigation in my future. I don't know how to take this article. I wish some of the insight had been around when it mattered to me (working 60 - 80 hour weeks because of management over-promising because they wouldn't take the time to understand the scope because the PM was sure it was "trivial") but some of it also smacks of the PM thinking of her/himself as some kind of deity whose wishes would make the work happen magically. Me, personally, I like my deities to be left in church where I can ignore them as I deem necessary... Anyway, the best PM like being I ever had contact with was a QA department head who had been in the line of business his whole life and knew exactly what something needed to do to succeed in that business. He had a second in command that was also a lifer. Between those 2 guys, when they got interested in something, that something did some smooth sailing. If they were disinterested or too busy with a fire, all hell would break loose. Well, at this particular company, every time all hell would break loose, they would, instead of fixing the original software, buy something similar and try to massage it into the product. During the ~19 months or so I was there, they bought, had been in talks to buy or were suing the seller over the bought product not working for 4 different products. The funny thing was, all of these products were based on disparate technology... The original software was built in a combination of Delphi, Borland C++ and the Borland DB engine. Of the bought software, One was Java based, it wouldn't run for 12 or more hours at a time. One was based on .Net and it crashed more than it worked. 2 were based on popular C++ App Frameworks. Those 2 kinda worked, sometimes, if you held your mouth right and kept your support contracts up to date. Now, we have a company with at least 4 different technologies with maybe 2 of the original developers of any of the software left. The only guy that remains with any sense and sanity is the QA guy because his family is tied to the company. And all along he's been yelling/screaming/cajoling/nurturing, whatever he can do to get the management to leave the programmers alone and so they can get the work done.
- jmspring 13y ago
  A bad PM can be countered with good engineering management. That said, I've been at a place that had both. Weekends were planned into the schedule and they thought that was the norm. At a certain point, the brain drain was pretty serious (myself included). Not meeting deadlines isn't always an engineering issue it is a management and planning issue. Another more recent example, boot strapped startup. General engineering goal with a high level of what pieces are needed. Most of those working on it are contractors not always onsight. Functionality decisions are made between a couple of parties, but not communicated down resulting in added effort. In this case, there isn't a lot of engineering pushback, but the PM should be aware of the need to communicate more directly, yet doesn't. When pressed for specs, a blank face. An example, for me, of a bad PM.
madkins1868 13y ago
Oh great, another Product Manager/Project Manager/XYZ Manager has pissed off the software engineering masses post again. Another "we can live without you, but you can't live without us scribe...". Really? You mean I can't go find a top notch, $15/hr engineer to build in Kathmandu to build the product to my specs? Get a hold of yourself boys. You're not all that. I can (and have) built plenty of products with a wide assortment of engineering resources worldwide. If you're worth your salt, you recognized that it is the relationship between disciplines that matters - nt your "Engineers will Rule the World" mantra. Get over yourselves....
- bdehaaff 13y ago
  I built my career as a PM before becoming a CEO, so this might not be just another one of those posts. Are there market-leading products that have been built with lead $15/hr engineers? Please call out a few, I would love to learn about a few of them.
gfody 13y ago
If you're having non-technical product managers owning technical products you're asking for trouble. Since when did any non-technical product person become the domain master go-to-guy for any technical product? I have seen product managers provide great leadership on technical products but they have always been supremely capable and the engineers respected them for it. Some product person with an inflated ego spinning buzzwords is not going to be respected by engineering and will not succeed in influencing them in any way. What you may think: I have been around engineers a long time and know the difference between NoSQL and MySQL. And there is no doubt that I would have been a great engineer if I had lerned to program, found it rewarding, and led a ton of open source projects. Anyone who seriously thinks this way is most likely hated by engineers and probably gets made fun of a lot behind his back.
- bdehaaff 13y ago
  Exactly, all of the "what you might think" points were exaggerated but not intended to be ridiculous. Great PM works and respects the value of what engineers can contribute during the plan AND build efforts.
  - gfody 13y ago
    I think I am responding more to the way you have set the scene where we have non-technical product managers owning technical products. I think if this situation exists you've actually got a fucked company or at least some serious org-level trouble with the division of roles and responsibilities and probably not something you could fix by head-shrinking your product people. Actually it's funny if you think about it the only way non-technical product managers maintain their positions owning technical products is by finding such companies and actively partaking in all the what you may think behavior. Forgive me if this whole piece is intended as subtle irony in which case I say well done and humbly accept my swoosh.
digisth 13y ago
I'd like to add "Don't give estimates to other stakeholders (especially a client!) without talking to engineering." Even if you have some technical expertise, your guess may be off due to a lack of knowledge of the specifics of the platform, framework, gotchas, other priorities the team may have and a million other things. The reality is that you can get yourself (and your team) into a bind if you commit to an estimate/schedule without discussing the details of what will be delivered with engineering. Don't do that.
hamburglar 13y ago
I read most of it, but you really lost me in the first sentence. If you are actually the CEO, that's one thing, but one sure fire way to piss off the engineers is to think of yourself as "the boss" simply because your role has "manager" in the title. Everywhere I've worked, the engineers answer to an engineering manager, and the engineering manager is a peer to the PM.
bkilgore 13y ago
What a short-sided article. I actually think it's more often the other way around--that engineers keep pissing off product managers! ;-) Part of the problem, in my opinion, is that engineering tends not to give feedback, as much as they give derision. And product management tends to be too timid to stand up for themselves. In reality, we all piss off each other. We'd all be better served if egos were checked at the door, and we could have open, collaborative conversations about creating really great products.

38 points by bdehaaff 13y ago

Let me add couple more: (1) Asking for a feature and then never showing up once when it is being built. "Hey, we are adding this page here. Is it okay?" <No answer>. "Hey, is this workflow good?" <No answer>. Once implemented, come around and ask "Why is this built this way?" (2) Not being interested in any feature that engineering is interested in. It is okay to talk to customers all the time, but once in a while turn around and talk to engineering too.

bdehaaff 13y ago
I totally agree. I think the best PMs actually leave at least 20% of their roadmap for engineers to tell them what else needs to be built.

michaelochurch 13y ago

I stopped reading here: Involve engineering management early and often, so everyone has a chance to contribute to the product vision and buy into where the product is headed. This is tailored to people in inefficient VC-istan companies where engineers don't get to speak for themselves, hence "involve engineering management". Ok, we're done here. I agree that there are a lot of terrible, arrogant PM's out there. PM is the ultimate MacLeod Clueless job in many organizations (with engineers closer to the MacLeod Loser tier) because it involves a lot of context-switching and annoying work, but is ultimately just as subordinate as anything else, since the job still involves serving executives.

bdehaaff 13y ago
Good point. I deleted "management" from the post. The best orgs (and also the most successful) are those where everyone has a voice. Maybe you will keep reading now and let me know if anything else in the post really tweaks you the wrong way.
- michaelochurch 13y ago
  In general, quite good and I agree with it. Minor nit: (1) you used the term "executive team" and I hate that phrase. Don't get me started on teamism. I hate this cargo-cult bullshit where every group of people is called a team. Executives are a court, in the medieval sense. Also, I still sense that you're writing from a closed-allocation perspective. (I'm not even sure that proper open allocation would have a PM/engineer distinction. Why not hire people who are willing to do both?) Closed allocation is doomed to produce garbage and no amount about of telling other people to be better will correct for its foundational problems.
  - seivan 13y ago
    "Closed allocation is doomed to produce garbage and no amount about of telling other people to be better will correct for its foundational problems." I've been thinking on this lately, it does make sense. Never been in a position to try it until now.
    - michaelochurch 13y ago
      What is your strategy for trying it? Are you starting a company?
      - seivan 13y ago
        I quit one.
    - ashcairo 13y ago
      I imagine you can do both in a really small or one man team, but to do both in anything bigger will require a very difficult context switch between job functions.

doctorpangloss 13y ago

Eh—hoarding credit is sort of the M.O. of a really great product manager. A PM has to compete with all the other PMs to get her features implemented. And if the PM's feature gets implemented first, this PM looks super productive. I think if you're an product manager looking to be the best product manager, taking credit is imperative. Because at the end of the day, your feature is just paper until it is implemented. Not being hated, well, that's another matter... I sympathize with the enormous friction between folks who assign work and folks who finish it.

michaelochurch 13y ago
I sympathize with the enormous friction between folks who assign work and folks who finish it. I don't. If you create this separation between the two categories, you'll have a terrible organization and when it caves in on itself, I will cheer that process on. That's why open allocation is morally superior (in addition to working better). People "assign" work to themselves (without noise) and then do it. None of this parasitic high-horse management bullshit. You know how much better the world would be if "work" was a culture of doing things rather than delegating and taking credit? It'd be a different world. People might actually, like, work when they go "to work".
- jeremy6d 13y ago
  I cannot praise this comment enough.
- danso 13y ago
  You know how much better the world would be if everyone was good at work? If everyone had a correct estimation of his/her own ability? If everyone knew when to defer to those with better judgement? The world would be awesome. But that's not the way the world is. And not all well-oiled machines will stay well-oiled...and in such a situation, sometimes it may be worth it to have someone who manages the process and can play King Solomon anytime two workers are fighting over a baby. I'm not sure if the PM role does this well in practice, I'm just saying, I can imagine such a role in an imperfect work environment paying off.
- 13y ago

hammerzeit 13y ago

In what world do PMs actually think the supposed thoughts in this article? Yes, it's important to document well, focus on why not how, and be a shit umbrella not funnel -- though these have been PM 101 everywhere I've worked. But when PMs infringe on these issues (and yes, all PMs do) I find it's rarely a conscious decision as much an impulsive/instinctive thing from being torn in 100 directions at once.

marshray 13y ago
For example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5930324 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5930324

austenallred 13y ago

I hate articles like this more than anything. If you really want to help product managers, do you have to spend the first half of the article telling them that you're so much more important than them? It takes two hands to clap.

bdehaaff 13y ago
I am not sure what your point is. Where in the blog post does it say that I am more important than they are? My career has been defined by being a PM and I have made all of those mistakes myself. In fact, our new company -- Aha.io -- is built for PMs.
- abbottry 13y ago
  "However, the reality is that you need engineering more than they need you." Whatever. I like the article, it makes some good points. It's hard to write an article explaining one side of a situation like this without 'taking sides'. I think the the PM role/title has become such a generic position that articles like this one are really taking a stab at anyone non-engineering, not that I am upset by it. As a startup founder, meshing technical teams and non-technical teams is extremely difficult to do. The work environments, thought processes, personalities, etc. are so different.
- bdehaaff 13y ago
  Ok. Just a misunderstanding. Thanks for the comments.
- austenallred 13y ago
  I read that wrong - I thought you were an engineer complaining about PMs
marshray 13y ago
I see one paragraph that might fit that description. The one that starts with > However, the reality is that you need engineering more than they need you. And it's basically true. But I thought the line > You are overhead. Was too harsh and a slam. If the author really feels that's a notable point to make, it deserves a lot more explanation.

vijayr 13y ago

slightly off topic - anyone moved from coding to product management? I thoroughly enjoy product management - market research, coming up with new product ideas, feature ideas etc. No clue how to make the transition though :(

michaelochurch 13y ago
No clue how to make the transition though :( Become [executive's gender of interest] and learn how to sit on a desk.
- Whitespace 13y ago
  > Become female and learn how to sit on a desk. Are you fucking kidding me? I don't have enough karma to downvote you, someone please do the honors.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - michaelochurch 13y ago
    I realized that it was horrible as written and I apologize. In that vein, I fixed it (replaced with "executive's gender of interest"). It was reverse-pattern-matched off of a certain company where the desk ornament happened to be female, but I've seen male desk ornament dynamics as well. That said, if you don't think 95+% of workplace favoritism is based on sexual desire, you're misled. That's especially true in the non-technical/subjective roles where ability is so hard to evaluate. Most corporate executives did their 20s wrong and want to Feel Like A (Wo)Man now that they're older. Which means that for non-tech/subjective proteges they tap either (a) young, attractive people of the opposite sex who give them a "hip" image, or (b) unscrupulous young men ~20 years their junior through whom they live vicariously.
    - jasonlotito 13y ago
      > That said, if you don't think 95+% of workplace favoritism is based on sexual desire, you're misled. Yeah, that's bullshit. Maybe in certain sectors, but unless you have something to back that up, I'm calling bullshit.

danso 13y ago

Being an engineer (by schooling) myself...I've always found it confounding how non-technical product managers do what they do...I've seen plenty of "shut up non-techie" posts (including this OP) but are there any really great non-techie product manager musings on this topic, explaining how they are able to reliably judge timeframes and output without having hands-on experience? I do think producers are valuable...in the art/entertainment world, for example...you don't have to be an actor/model/writer to be vital to a production's success. However, in software, it just seems that the implementation of the process is so vital in fully realizing the gains that code can bring you, that if you have a product manager who doesn't understand that, than the PM can do as much harm as good.

bdehaaff 13y ago
I am the author and I built my career as a "non tech background" PM before I became a CEO. My super secret to success (not really that secret). Be great at explaining the "whys" and "whats" and work closely with engineering on the "hows." Understand what it will take to build something before agreeing on the roadmap. Building great product requires awesome PM and engineering.

fredsanford 13y ago

You know... This brings a part of my life back to mind that I hoped to forget... FS, if you're reading and recognize this, I still respect the hell out of you and wish you well. I can't go into too much depth here without revealing more than allowed. I am purposely vague and I apologize if that bothers or offends you but I don't want to see any litigation in my future. I don't know how to take this article. I wish some of the insight had been around when it mattered to me (working 60 - 80 hour weeks because of management over-promising because they wouldn't take the time to understand the scope because the PM was sure it was "trivial") but some of it also smacks of the PM thinking of her/himself as some kind of deity whose wishes would make the work happen magically. Me, personally, I like my deities to be left in church where I can ignore them as I deem necessary... Anyway, the best PM like being I ever had contact with was a QA department head who had been in the line of business his whole life and knew exactly what something needed to do to succeed in that business. He had a second in command that was also a lifer. Between those 2 guys, when they got interested in something, that something did some smooth sailing. If they were disinterested or too busy with a fire, all hell would break loose. Well, at this particular company, every time all hell would break loose, they would, instead of fixing the original software, buy something similar and try to massage it into the product. During the ~19 months or so I was there, they bought, had been in talks to buy or were suing the seller over the bought product not working for 4 different products. The funny thing was, all of these products were based on disparate technology... The original software was built in a combination of Delphi, Borland C++ and the Borland DB engine. Of the bought software, One was Java based, it wouldn't run for 12 or more hours at a time. One was based on .Net and it crashed more than it worked. 2 were based on popular C++ App Frameworks. Those 2 kinda worked, sometimes, if you held your mouth right and kept your support contracts up to date. Now, we have a company with at least 4 different technologies with maybe 2 of the original developers of any of the software left. The only guy that remains with any sense and sanity is the QA guy because his family is tied to the company. And all along he's been yelling/screaming/cajoling/nurturing, whatever he can do to get the management to leave the programmers alone and so they can get the work done.

jmspring 13y ago
A bad PM can be countered with good engineering management. That said, I've been at a place that had both. Weekends were planned into the schedule and they thought that was the norm. At a certain point, the brain drain was pretty serious (myself included). Not meeting deadlines isn't always an engineering issue it is a management and planning issue. Another more recent example, boot strapped startup. General engineering goal with a high level of what pieces are needed. Most of those working on it are contractors not always onsight. Functionality decisions are made between a couple of parties, but not communicated down resulting in added effort. In this case, there isn't a lot of engineering pushback, but the PM should be aware of the need to communicate more directly, yet doesn't. When pressed for specs, a blank face. An example, for me, of a bad PM.

madkins1868 13y ago

Oh great, another Product Manager/Project Manager/XYZ Manager has pissed off the software engineering masses post again. Another "we can live without you, but you can't live without us scribe...". Really? You mean I can't go find a top notch, $15/hr engineer to build in Kathmandu to build the product to my specs? Get a hold of yourself boys. You're not all that. I can (and have) built plenty of products with a wide assortment of engineering resources worldwide. If you're worth your salt, you recognized that it is the relationship between disciplines that matters - nt your "Engineers will Rule the World" mantra. Get over yourselves....

bdehaaff 13y ago
I built my career as a PM before becoming a CEO, so this might not be just another one of those posts. Are there market-leading products that have been built with lead $15/hr engineers? Please call out a few, I would love to learn about a few of them.

gfody 13y ago

If you're having non-technical product managers owning technical products you're asking for trouble. Since when did any non-technical product person become the domain master go-to-guy for any technical product? I have seen product managers provide great leadership on technical products but they have always been supremely capable and the engineers respected them for it. Some product person with an inflated ego spinning buzzwords is not going to be respected by engineering and will not succeed in influencing them in any way. What you may think: I have been around engineers a long time and know the difference between NoSQL and MySQL. And there is no doubt that I would have been a great engineer if I had lerned to program, found it rewarding, and led a ton of open source projects. Anyone who seriously thinks this way is most likely hated by engineers and probably gets made fun of a lot behind his back.

bdehaaff 13y ago
Exactly, all of the "what you might think" points were exaggerated but not intended to be ridiculous. Great PM works and respects the value of what engineers can contribute during the plan AND build efforts.
- gfody 13y ago
  I think I am responding more to the way you have set the scene where we have non-technical product managers owning technical products. I think if this situation exists you've actually got a fucked company or at least some serious org-level trouble with the division of roles and responsibilities and probably not something you could fix by head-shrinking your product people. Actually it's funny if you think about it the only way non-technical product managers maintain their positions owning technical products is by finding such companies and actively partaking in all the what you may think behavior. Forgive me if this whole piece is intended as subtle irony in which case I say well done and humbly accept my swoosh.

digisth 13y ago

I'd like to add "Don't give estimates to other stakeholders (especially a client!) without talking to engineering." Even if you have some technical expertise, your guess may be off due to a lack of knowledge of the specifics of the platform, framework, gotchas, other priorities the team may have and a million other things. The reality is that you can get yourself (and your team) into a bind if you commit to an estimate/schedule without discussing the details of what will be delivered with engineering. Don't do that.

hamburglar 13y ago

I read most of it, but you really lost me in the first sentence. If you are actually the CEO, that's one thing, but one sure fire way to piss off the engineers is to think of yourself as "the boss" simply because your role has "manager" in the title. Everywhere I've worked, the engineers answer to an engineering manager, and the engineering manager is a peer to the PM.

bkilgore 13y ago

What a short-sided article. I actually think it's more often the other way around--that engineers keep pissing off product managers! ;-) Part of the problem, in my opinion, is that engineering tends not to give feedback, as much as they give derision. And product management tends to be too timid to stand up for themselves. In reality, we all piss off each other. We'd all be better served if egos were checked at the door, and we could have open, collaborative conversations about creating really great products.