In the group administered as Linked In ( Human Capital in Information Technology (IT) ) has generated debate around a point raised by one member of the group "Is it necessary to set the PM (Project Manager)? " hand of Patricio Köhler. No single member of the group but also of this blog.
The question is posed as
Within IT there are several roles (not to be confused with people), bringing together a range of skills and responsibilities. Much of the responsibilities of the PM are limited to only collect information from Tech Leads, Architects, Functional Analysts. They are the ones who actually make business decisions (estimates scope, complexity, technology, etc). After stating this a while ago, some MPs defended their role on the grounds that they have a responsibility to negotiate. Apparently there is a feeling that none of the other roles mentioned has the ability to negotiate or are assumed not to have high communication skills.
So I wonder:
"As you can put a person like Tech-Lead, Architect or Business Analyst without negotiating skills and ability to communicate clearly?
-many tasks in a PM can be automated (a leading soft control / project budget)?
"It would be more useful to have a" Product Manager ", who must understand technical issues and have primary responsibility for guiding the direction of the product?
I come following the thread of the discussion and I think views are very interesting to read. Since each organization / company / team can provide options from the perspective of the experience. Maybe here and there is no recipe much applicable to 100% of cases because it plays much the size of the company and the organization of it. Whether horizontal or vertical teams.
I invite you to read all views on the subject.
Remember that the link is group here and that is a group-membership. If not members, please let me apply for membership and will accept it!
0 comments:
Post a Comment