[xyzelement]

Didn't read article but can react to headline.

I am a PM who used to be an engineer and eng manager. In my engineering life, in retrospect I did PM work too - ie, orient my teams work to highest value as expressed in financial and user impact terms.

The eng/PM split is an unfortunate outcome of the fact that many engineers and engineering leads aren't capable of thinking in practical business terms, and so they need a PM in the mix to steer the ship.

The problem starts not when you get a PM but when your engineers need one.

For what it's worth, I find being a mix of the two really optimal - I am still capable of having hardcore technical discussion even as my focus is on the business, but I was doing that from the engineering seat as well.

[bastawhiz]

I don't think you read the headline, either. The headline (and the article) both make no mention of engineering. In fact, you said nothing about innovation, which is the core premise of the article. From the post:

> There is a famous quote about Henry Ford “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses”. Innovation is not something you see in the data. It is someone that has intuition and most people disagree with. When you start by saying “Let's look at the data and talk to users and we will build what we see”. You are basically saying “Let’s not innovate but work on the most visible issues”.

Which actually is an indictment of, as you describe, "thinking in practical business terms".

[xyzelement]

Fair enough! You're right.