|
|
|
|
|
by phlakaton
2533 days ago
|
|
I've met great engineers who were great at driving product, and great engineers that were terrible at it, or uninterested in it. I've met engineers who could invent a whole new product out of sackcloth to solve a customer need the business was only dimly aware of, and engineers who used all their knowledge of customer pain points and data to fritter around the edges of their systems, redesigning this or that but making little material progress in addressing serious issues. I have little time or patience for "engineers > PMs" arguments or vice versa. You should be a team working together to solve important problems, and you should each recognize and celebrate the skills each of you as individuals brings to the table. If you're not doing that, the problem lies with your team or organization, not the profession as a whole. |
|
But some skill sets are more effective at some tasks. You wouldn’t hire a stand-up comic to play quarterback on your football team. There are opportunity costs to doing so that make it a strategic blunder.
It’s really the same, only lesser in degree, when thinking about what sort of background & skill set someone should have when you hire them to manage your product development.
If you narrowly dismiss that consideration by acting like every skill set is equal & every type of person hired into the position of product management can do the job, it’s no less of a strategic blunder.