Hacker News Reader

Comment by mavelikara | Hacker News Reader

I have found that many EM/PM pairings are not balanced.

The M in both names means different things - the PM manages is the product scope, the EM manages teams. Thus, most PMs are ICs, and EMs are people managers.

This, in turn, causes the experience needed to become a PM or EM to differ. Very few organizations would hire a new grad into an "Associate People Manager" job - it is implied that one needs some experience in the industry before one can be entrusted with people management duties. But many new grads step into "Associate Product Manager" roles, where they are on a career track to own business strategy. This is, IMO, a bad trend in PM orgs.

This imbalance in industry experience is often the root cause of tension between many PM/EM pairings, particularly in B2B space.

View on HN

> This imbalance in industry experience is often the root cause of tension between many PM/EM pairings, particularly in B2B space.

This is an incredibly astute observation. Product management has become an incredibly hyped role which has seen a lot of growth. Similarly, there are been an explosion in supposed PM methodologies and tools which have yet to be proven. There has not been an opportunity for the profession to stabilize yet.

My observation is that a lot of junior people are coming in with little experience and are naturally using approaches which don't always make sense for the business. They don't really have the option to do anything else because they are too junior and don't have have a span of control to change all the things they need to (if they see the bigger picture.)

You find that they'll be endlessly churning smaller features which pisses off a bunch of your biggest advocates. The irony is that you may have folks in your support team who have a much more strategic view of your customer needs, but they not empowered to do anything while you have junior PMs who mean well, but can be eroding the experience.

This type of situation gets under the skin of engineers and they'll throw out statements like "why do we even have PMs?" Over time this can lead to attrition in the engineering team.

Interesting data point. At my (non-software-focused) engineering firms, all product managers are capital-M managers and most come with signifiant hands-on experience within the business—-they often significantly influence very large product strategy decisions than can have 15+ year impacts—-so are expected to be leaders on both the technical and business aspects.

The setup is clearly a lot easier to swing in a bigcorp with relatively low turnover and relatively high-value products, rather than a smaller company without a deep talent pool and sufficient span of control for a manager-level product manager... but I think it’s a better model all the same.

*PdM, incidentally, to differentiate them from project managers who are the PMs

who do they manage? or what is meant by "capital-M managers"? If they're managing junior PMs(or product management folks with a lowlier title, analysts, etc?) wouldn't that mean you have non capital-M people "doing product management" if not officially PMs?

That sounds like an argument for requiring some experience in the industry before the PM role? But at least the PMP does require prior experience.

PMP is about project management, not product management. Not really related.

That it's not really related, but many junior PMs could get a leg up from understanding a few elements from PMP so that they can effectively run projects.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com