Jerry
07-03-2006, 07:37 AM
Johanna Rothman (http://www.jrothman.com/) had a post I found interesting, particularly in light of the discussion elsewhere (http://www.requirements.seilevel.com/messageboard/showthread.php?t=281)on this board around what aspect of the PdM skillset can be taught versus what needs to be gained through experience. Project Managers and Technology (http://www.jrothman.com/weblog/2006/06/project-managers-and-technology.html) discusses her response to the question - "Do you feel that to be a great Project Manager one need not know completely about the technology involved?"
I think that Johanna does a great job of painting the extremes of this situation and thereby framing the discussion. Note that her use of the acronym "PM" here refers to "Project Manager."
Here are the two extreme situations I would like to avoid: the un-knowledgeable PM and the PM who would rather be the architect. I've worked with several organizations who thought that PMs in other industries, such as event planning, would make great PMs of software projects. Nope. Not a chance. The PM needs to understand the process of the project. And in addition to the process, understanding enough about the product and the tools can help a PM assess risk and manage it during the project.
In my experience, the PM as architect is just as bad. This PM understands the process and the technology and ignores the work of the PM. If the PM is focused on development instead of managing the project, the project suffers as much (although differently) as if the PM was ignorant of the project.
I think that Johanna does a great job of painting the extremes of this situation and thereby framing the discussion. Note that her use of the acronym "PM" here refers to "Project Manager."
Here are the two extreme situations I would like to avoid: the un-knowledgeable PM and the PM who would rather be the architect. I've worked with several organizations who thought that PMs in other industries, such as event planning, would make great PMs of software projects. Nope. Not a chance. The PM needs to understand the process of the project. And in addition to the process, understanding enough about the product and the tools can help a PM assess risk and manage it during the project.
In my experience, the PM as architect is just as bad. This PM understands the process and the technology and ignores the work of the PM. If the PM is focused on development instead of managing the project, the project suffers as much (although differently) as if the PM was ignorant of the project.