[potamic]

The article is actually making a case for fewer PMs, not to do away with PMs altogether. In startups, founders tend to do PM because they bring the vision for what to build. Additional PM hires in such environments aren't likely to add much value. Even in large enterprises, most product decisions are really taken by a handful of very senior roles. Most of the PM org is there primarily to ensure fulfillment of whatever decisions are taken. They get reduced to a more of a bureaucratic function, which is where most people's frustration arises.

Nobody likes to have a stakeholder with no power to make decisions. A product manager who cannot tell you what comes a year down the line. A project manager who cannot change processes to improve efficiency. An engineering manager who cannot create opportunities for their team. Or a tech lead who cannot prioritise tech debt. You cannot avoid bureaucracy in large organisations, but you can reduce the surface. There's a case to be made to consolidate such bureaucratic functions under a single role for a team. But in smaller organisations and startups, it can perhaps be done away with entirely too.