| Article Description: pm with the engineer. |
Before the festival to see an article, said the product project should be led by the engineer, but the domestic let PM to drive the project, make a mess, very annoyed, how can make a good product?
Obviously, this article was written by an angry engineer, angry engineer! I have at least two points of empathy with him:
1, the domestic PM does often toss engineers, or even "the engineer as a tool to treat" the situation.
2, if the engineer has a wide range of product vision and comprehensive design quality, knowledge and line of unity, by the engineer to drive the project is a perfect choice.
Unfortunately, due to the problem of education environment, there are too few generalists in China. An excellent engineer, but also a good PM, rare, only people can be long, each do their own famous job. At this time more good at the requirements analysis and product design pm to drive the project, but also the choice of the last resort.
Ashamed to say. The demand is not reliable, or to change back and forth, and toss the engineers I have done a lot of things, until more than a year ago has been a great improvement. I should confess ... Although very few engineers can do pm, the reliable PM is actually not much, and finally everyone has to write a weekly newspaper, right?
In the product industry is far from mature enough at this stage, painful back and forth toss hard to avoid. But at the very least, PM should be the engineer as a partner rather than a tool, the idea of trying to stand in a trench, to gain their understanding. So to put aside the difficult to identify the needs of the right and wrong, only from the improvement of the collaborative process, I have accumulated the following experience.
First of all, to get the engineer's approval of the whole project. Every month there is an hour of departmental monthly meeting, to PPT, I talk about next month and even next stage, our task plan is what, goal set is what, explain the reason that make plan and goal in detail, close range and prospect analysis, for BAA do this thing for BAA design and so on. It is worthwhile for engineers to acknowledge that what he is about to do is worth working for. For the next PM and engineers communicate well bedding.
The monthly meeting also contains a detailed analysis of all the data that occurred this month, especially the recently released new features. This link is also for engineers to understand how much work they can produce.
As for the new features presented on the monthly meeting (many times before), the first is the egg for the engineers, and then the PM and operations included. I have to admit that I have an eye for engineers, because the confidence to motivate pm and operation, but for the lack of communication depth, need to use more tools to motivate engineers into the project.
The project task is divided into two kinds, large version and small module. For a large version, after the basic framework is set down, PM to the engineers to listen to the technical perspective of the design direction of the recommendations. The whole design process will be repeatedly discussed 35 times, for the technical rationality of the request for advice. Small module in the plan after the basic finalized, with the engineers to confirm once, visual manuscript after the report again. (so it is necessary for PM to sit close to the engineer)
I have made a public commitment at the departmental monthly meeting to say that any requirement, as long as the engineer thinks it is unreasonable, can stop and do nothing. Until PM can convince the engineer. If the dead or alive talk, only by me and technical manager to coordinate. Tough request to obey the situation in my here basically did not, be the engineer to persuade is occasionally, according to the advice of the engineer to change the plan. I also often talk to PM, small differences you all listen to engineers, there is no need to insist on their own opinions. You give him a little bit of fun, the speed of development is faster, everyone benefits. Besides, what's wrong with you listening to the technical partners ' opinions? Help you to change the perspective of thinking, together to find ways to improve development efficiency.
The final plan, PM said OK, engineers also feel the direction is roughly right, the details of the basic reasonable, the progress of the assessment by the engineer. PM think the time too long to accept, and then find me and technical manager together to see if it is a phased cut demand, or add force add to the class. Apart from a very small number of emergency repair tasks, the development schedule will not be determined unilaterally by PM. Includes a series of tasks priority arrangement, also by the PM first draft, engineers according to the development situation to adjust the order, and then jointly confirmed.
In the PM's request for the entire process, always in constant consultation, to ensure that the task is understood and accepted by the engineer, will not appear to resist, or numbness of mentality. If there is a sudden change in demand, more will be explained to the engineers, ask for understanding, because the waste of their work and feel sorry. The time spent on this is compared with the higher development efficiency, the steady gain does not compensate. Although there are some not in place when the specific collaboration, but the attitude is always good, the basic effect is also some.
Of course, the implementation of this set of procedures have two prerequisites. The first is to have a stable team, if become a bill of lading collaboration, this month together to do the next month, it is impossible to achieve a common sense of project ownership. Second, the engineer's personal quality is basically reliable, communication is smooth, especially the technical manager can serve the public, coordinate the differences without justifying. For example, a function can be done, at least for how long, I and PM are not fixed, mainly rely on technical manager to do the final judgment, if there is a fault in the development process, or do not follow the agreed plan for development, the technical manager to punish. I have more administrative management of the development team, relying on the technical core partners to manage the business, he will be more in-depth participation in the product structure design, task planning.
This, in turn, puts aside the suspicion that engineers are treated as tools. I think it's a shame to take any of my colleagues as tools. What's a partner? For example, to exchange the necessary information, to understand each other, such as to stand on the other side of the position to think, such as a little bit of encouragement and help.
To put it another way, I have seen a situation where engineers come up with a general idea, PM approves, and is responsible for detail design, which is implemented by the engineer. The result is happy. I have been asking engineers for ideas on a monthly or other occasion, for a change of perspective, to introduce fresh ideas and inspirations. Even if the idea is inconsistent, it will explain the reasons for the opposition very gently, it is impossible to veto. Lest the engineers be silent and work--what a loss it is to hear no technical partner's opinion.
Today there are Chi Yun: "The core of the scientific concept of development is harmonious development." ”
