The phases product teams go through
firstround.com
firstround.com
A good PM also brings in engineers to meet customers frequently, so long as it respects the engineer’s schedule.
In most all other regards, I can't fathom how a proper engineer makes a better PM. I would suggest either: your personal product engineering skills might be higher than average, or the quality of PM's you have worked with is lower than average. Engineers typically are more interested in: frameworks, languages, algorithms, performance, technology of the day, etc - rather than the customer experience, messaging, ease of use, and business value brought to a customer.
Context: CompSci background, built lots of products, founder through Series C companies.
As a software engineer myself, I think I'd go mad if I had to work with fellow engineers who were that stereotypically one-dimensional. Frankly, even the nerdiest of kids whom I went to college with that chose to present themselves as such had broader interests than that. I got into this field myself because I liked solving problems and was half-decent at doing so with math and computers, which hardly excludes caring about customer experience, messaging, ease of use, and business value.
If I'm choosing to work at companies with products aligned to my interests and values, and if my day-to-day work actually matters to the success of the product, why would I not care about customer experience, etc.? The success of the product or project will ultimately reflect on me, so frankly, I'm going to have strong opinions about what work the PMs are trying to push on the team (maybe not literally push, but at least pressure) and how that work is then communicated back to the customers and stakeholders. The engineers who don't learn to give a crap about all that are setting themselves up as sheep.
Another possibility is we're honest with ourselves is that the PM has a skill that you do not, and therefore you do not recognize the skill in action, and perhaps don't have the business acumen to understand the positive results it brings about. For example, a decision that seems short term may be made because of the opportunity cost that buys progress in another area.
IME: technically-trained PMs are worth their weight in gold. PMs without a technical background are extremely dangerous liabilities.
Context: Mostly b2b products where careful judgement on technical feasibility is the difference between "useless" and "game-changer".
> Engineers who understand anything to business and product management are extremely rare. And people who are good at it and genuinely interested in it usually move to this role
It depends. Only if they don't take a huge paycut by moving into the PM role, and only if the org is willing to let them move into the PM role.
Many business are not willing to lose highly productive engineers with niche skillsets and are not willing to pay PMs as much as they pay their senior engineers.
IME, senior engineer -> executive/founder is a lot more common than senior engineer -> PM. But it's not because engineers can't be product people... sorta the opposite.
> a lot of PMs are actually just projects managers instead of being product managers.
No true Scotsman, right?
Edit for below: that’s exactly what I’m saying in the sentence following the one you quoted.
Unfortuantely, many companies/projects/teams don't budget properly for the PM role and you end up with MBAs or other non-technical business folk, who are often 1/3 to 1/2 the price of good technical PMs.
would I rather have a competent and responsible person to keep track of all that and drive the necessary compromises?
hell yes.
But if you can find people who can service both tasks at a high level then all the better.
And if you’re lucky enough to find someone who can do those things AND sell at a high level too then get behind anything they do, because you’ve got yourself an incredibly rare creature that can make a path through darn near anything and come out dry on the other side.
The article has a nice context for Project Managers helping to execute on the original R&D to find PMF. I like that idea a lot as project management in general can speed up iteration greatly.
Having a clearly rationalised summary of what a product team is for, and roughly when to introduce it, is an invaluable reference when transitioning from the "drunken walk" phase with a first time founder.
Helped me remember:
- every good project/product I've worked on that has scaled began as something small and messy until.. it was less messy and less small by each iteration.
- having a team to innovate, startup, grow, and scale are often different teams.
- made some great points for providing opportunities to junior team members and not only experienced ones. People leave regardless but the ones who stay will be great.