|
|
|
|
|
|
by NAHWheatCracker
625 days ago
|
|
|
I agree with you completely that you need trust. > Our job is to highlight the tradeoffs they’re making so they can make informed decisions. This is an oft-stated thing that I oft-disagree with. It states that engineers ought to be subordinate to PMs, which shouldn't always be the case. If you have shit engineers and great PMs, the best outcome is likely to shift decision making to PMs. If you have great engineers and shit PMs, decision making should shift towards engineers. If they are both equivalently shit or great, it should be a balance. I believe this is the most likely scenario. I believe that balance is thrown out the window if engineers "highlight the tradeoffs" while the actual decision making is lies with the PMs. How to actually achieve balance is extremely idiomatic to the team and organization. It's hard to get people to have adult, non-confrontational discussions about this sort of thing, however. Too many people will treat it as a negotiation. |
|
|
I think of it more as a partnership.
If I’m in charge of getting groceries and you’re in charge of budgets, we need to have an informed discussion on what exactly is our budget and what food we need so we don’t starve. Sure I could blow the whole budget on steak and I might even love eating nothing but steak for 3 days, but eventually some carbs would be nice. Likewise neither of us will be happy if I go max stingy and buy nothing but bags of rice for the week.
The reason I think PMs should make the final call is not that engineers are subordinate, it’s that PMs are accountable. (RACI – responsible, accountable, consulted, informed). The person whose ass is on the line makes the call.
Usually when I ask engineers if they want to be accountable for making the call (and its outcome), things get real quiet real fast :)