[codingdave]

As someone who did make that transition, I wouldn't recommend consuming any content to start. You have been a dev. If you want to be a PM, you should already have opinions on how to build an ideal workflow, what kind of information the devs need, and what your ideal setup would be. Go write up your own PM manifesto of what your ideal team/org/process structure looks like.

Then, once you have sorted out your own opinions, go read up on what everyone else does. Learn from it and modify your worldview based on what you learn. Learn how the non-tech aspects of the job play into the role of PM, and read books and take courses on those things. And again, synthesize it into your own ideal.

The thing is that PMs who read books, blogs, listen to podcasts and do what they all say are a dime a dozen. But PMs who truly understand the creation of software and are willing to break out of the mold to create their own world... not only do we need more of such people, but startups in particular need someone with the personality to buck the system and do what is actually needed.

Going through that exercise is also good practice for the role. PMs need to hear a plethora of opinions, sort out which ones make sense, which ones do not, and devise solutions that meet diverse needs in the best way. Being overloaded with info and sifting the good from the bad is the key skill to do all that. So practice exactly that as you learn.

[kingkongjaffa]

> You have been a dev. If you want to be a PM, you should already have opinions

yes yes yes

> on how to build an ideal workflow

no no no. Workflow and process is the least important part by far.

> what your ideal team/org/process structure looks like.

no no no. waste of time.

> PMs who truly understand the creation of software

We're solving customer problems, the creation of software is a side effect for engineering to worry about, this is the 'how', your effort must be focused on the 'why' and the 'what'.

It's pretty shocking you don't mention understanding customers once in this advice.

It is not your job to sweat this stuff. The best PMs are adaptable to the business, and develop a thesis based on customer discovery, about how your business can add value to customers. Then you convince the business to build what your think can give value, aligned with your product vision and product strategy.

Hopefully those opinions you have are about your customers and the problems they have.

The ingredients of good PM are not processes and workflows, but product sense, design taste, and customer empathy.

Product discovery is the single most important activity you can do as a PM (that others do not do or don't want to do).

[codingdave]

Heh. The spirit of what you are saying is true, but believe me - I've worked under plenty of PMs who develop the ideal customer-focused product vision, but whom cannot get anyone to follow their lead. Look around HN discussions and you see engineers talking about how worthless PMs are, how they just fill space, etc. You cannot be a product leader if nobody follows you. And someone wanting to go into a PM role should do it with an approach that doesn't land them in that "worthless PM" zone.

Remember that my answer was not "How to be a PM", it was "how to transition from dev to PM". We are talking about a dev wanting to make a change. You lose all the value of past experience if you tell them to just go be the standard PM. That is my bigger point - not to ignore the customer, but to use their existing knowledge to do it all, and to do it better. To be someone whom the customer will trust and whom the team will follow. To make the experience of building the product as important as the experience of using the product, resulting in the mythical "high-performing team" who is able to deliver the product vision that yes, you also will come up with.

Both sides matter. Neither can exist without the other. And someone who has 15 years of building experience can be amazing at the side that most PMs neglect, driving their delivery teams into the dystopian scrum-hell with which we all are too familiar. So while your points do have merit, they miss the uncommon opportunity of an engineer's skills being applied to the whole picture.

Think less about what they will be in 10 years, and more about what they can be great at in 10 weeks. That is why I focused on what I did.