Well I agree that this is poorly written (I wrote it).
The point of the article is not that companies shouldnt have PM, but that you shouldnt make them owner of the innovation in a B2B context. Of course if you start with the assumption of "Good PMs" it will work, but you will rarely find these "good PMs"
100% what others are saying. This is a hot take rant with bad arguments based on an experience with a bad product manager (or maybe you're just difficult to work with and your ideas aren't as innovative or as good as you think).
I can easily flip the script and say "Devs at B2B shouldn't be anything more than oompah-loompahs" or "UI designers shouldn't be allowed to give ideas" based on a couple of my own isolated experiences.
You want to be taken seriously? Don't rant and explain what structure/methods would be more appropriate for a B2B business that would balance the need for innovation that makes users happy with keeping the paying gatekeepers willing to keep paying
In this whole article the word "problem" is only written once, and it's in the line "the problem with product managers is".
Given you don't understand that the core pillar of the product manager role is to be the owner of the problem space, I'm not sure how qualified you are to comment on how valuable our role is or isn't.
Discovery isn't about decided what does or doesn't get built, it's about discovering what the real problem is that your customers need solved (almost like it's in the name).
If your PM is good at their job, the answer to that question should be pretty clear once they're done. That's not them "telling you what to do", if you want to go build a solution to a problem nobody actually has, you have fun with that.
And if you PM is defining solutions and telling your team how/what to build, that's on you to push back and take ownership of the part of the process that you're meant to be owning.
A lot of PM's end up overreaching because they're just tired of there being a leadership vacuum and nobody willing to fill it. Trust me, we're busy enough, we don't want the extra work.
It's not meant to be apologising, it's meant to provide context so that engineering teams can be more comfortable pushing back and retaking control of the solution space.
Should PM's be better at not steam rolling engineering teams? Yeah, 100%, it's literally the #1 thing that I consciously work on when it comes to personal development and self discipline etc.
But it would also help if engineering teams were more... I want to say "aggressive" when it comes to solving new problems and building new solutions.
I get that "new features" is seen as a PM thing and we always get shit for pushing "new features" over things like fixing tech-debt. But for 95% of products, "new features" are going to be a very consistent reality and often they're responded to extremely negatively by engineering teams, even (and some times especially) when those engineering teams are placed in the drivers seat to come up with the solutions.
Sorry if you took it personally or you think this is a rant. This is clearly not the case, I can repeat it, PM have a lot of value, but there is one specific area that we shouldn't give them control over.
It doesnt mean they are bad PM or good PM, innovation requires just fundamentally opposed skills to the standard product management ones that we see in books.
I didn't take anything personally. IMO your implication that I did just feels like another attempt to straw-man PM's.
Trust me, we deal with so much psuedo-emotional garbage every day that stuff like this just slides off our backs.
My point is that you obviously don't actually understand what a PM's job is, so you probably shouldn't be telling everyone what they can and cannot do.
As a PM I've been the one that's lead some of the largest and most successful innovation focused initiatives that the companies I've worked at have ever delivered. In some cased delivering revenue uplifts totaling 20-30% of the companies entire income.
Engineers don't have a monopoly on innovation. Innovation is what happens when a great solution is paired with a nasty problem. For at least one half of that calculus, most companies need good PM's.
> but there is one specific area that we shouldn't give them control over.
This is a bit like encountering an engineer who isn’t very good (or maybe it’s just a lack of experience) and then concluding that the engineering org should not be allowed to control architecture based on that experience.
Or encountering a dev team who goes off and builds some complex feature that no one asked for and then concluding that dev teams should never have a say in what should be built.
The existence of bad PMs or bad devs (or good PMs/devs executing a misguided plan) shouldn’t be used to justify a general sweeping argument about either discipline.
Going by this article and the rest of your writings it's hard for me to think that this 'one specific area that we shouldn't give them control over' isn't really 'whatever area polote happens to be in right now.'
I don’t get all this criticism. It’s a rant, I personally enjoy a good rant so thanks! Now everyone saying you don’t understand the role? Hogwash, most companies and their management are incompetent and don’t understand the role either, they simply hobble along on their “chaos is a process” BS. I read this as one of those. It happens, a lot.
Yep. It's no longer a rant when a recognizable pattern emerges.
(and I don't think they are personnally incompetent - quite the contrary; but in my experience, it's the managerial process that is often designed to generate incompetency as a side-product)
I’ve had the same b2b PM woes. I even had my PM tell someone that they (the PM) didn’t really need to know how to use our product, as long as they talked to users and wrote down what they wanted into stories.
I have since taken back more product owner power as founder. Innovation is up again! So I think it’s helping.
Paul, it’s a bad article. Your arguments don’t make sense and are mostly strawmen. If you want to improve it, show it to someone in real life and have them talk over it with you. You’ll probably get a lot farther than a few sentences of feedback over the internet. But it’s really bad.
Imagine feeling qualified to write this article without knowing the difference between a project manager and a product manager. Imposter syndrome indeed. Thinking you are the correct person to evaluate a “PM” without knowing what half the letters mean is pretty amazing, leaving us to wonder what would happen if this person ever were to encounter a program manager.
Let's be fair here... I consider myself a pretty proficient Product Manager and even I would struggle to tell you what the Program Manager in our Org is actually meant to do.
Don't get me wrong, they do a lot and it's all valuable. But even they can't tell me what their fundamental role responsibility is hahaha.
On the other hand you’re not out there writing slam pieces on project managers, so I don’t think your lack of clarity around these terms is causing anyone any heartburn. And yeah these terms are a little under-differentiated in some shops. How I learned it [0]:
Project manager handles a discrete undertaking with a beginning and an end that falls outside whatever your org considers “ongoing operations.”
Program manager handles a portfolio of interrelated projects. If a lot of projects are failing and you want a single throat to choke, the program manager might be a good person to replace.
Product manager seems like it could be interpreted as kind of like a program manager (for a large, complex set of inter related projects) or a project manager (if there’s only one project) except that the organization’s ongoing operations include the creation and development of the product, instead of the product being a single event/discrete undertaking.
Source: read PMBOK decades ago
[0]: maybe others who learned differently can chime in? Doesn’t seem like this terminology is universal.
The point of the article is not that companies shouldnt have PM, but that you shouldnt make them owner of the innovation in a B2B context. Of course if you start with the assumption of "Good PMs" it will work, but you will rarely find these "good PMs"