Slashdot Mirror
Project Management For Programmers?
welshdave asks: "I'm a senior web developer in a medium sized company where the project managers have no programming experience of any sort. I'm of the opinion that project managers should understand the projects that they're managing and want to move into project management myself. I'm aware that I may meet resistance from the current project managers - many of them have been hired with no previous experience of anything. Previous suggestions to senior management that myself and other developers would feel better with a technical person running projects have been dismissed. As a result we are routinely told to skip testing or to implement the impossible, with an emphasis on how things look rather than how well things actually work. Has anyone else found the barrier to project management is their technical knowledge. How did you get past it?"
I found that it was easier to sit down with my PM and asked then the one thing they needed to make their job easier. If it was half way reasonable I went out of my way to give that to them ... in turn they seemed more willing
to listen to reason and help form a project
timeline that was 1/2-way based on reality.
chongo (was here)
As a developer I've found that most management-types don't give a hoot about technical details, or much of anything else that a heads-down developer might care about.
What will get attention is an understanding of business need, an attention to detail in terms of reporting progress and delivering systems that work, and positive attitude.
As a manager I get very tired of hearing about the programmers, sysadmins, etc. complaining that such-and-such can't be done, or otherwise blocking progress. Much more often than not things that "can't be done" just require a re-statement of the problem and some creative application of simple ideas.
My recommendation would be to make a friend or at least the aquaintance of one of the project manager's bosses, and just talk. Don't attack the current project managers style -- that would make their boss look bad. Don't complain about the impossibility of whatever. Mention that you have an idea of how to accomplish some objective. Show that you have some clue as to what the managers are interested in. Show that you have some interest in the companies performance. Be prepared to give out some 'write ups' that show a very clear train of thought and that make a clear recommendation up front, with backup material and dialogue exploring alternatives explaining why the recommendation makes sense.
If that doesn't work, then get a job with a company that has a clue. They're out there.
"But actually trying to use m4 as a general-purpose langage would be deeply perverse" --ESR
I think you're right in this. A project manager should, in my opinion, be responsible for planning and control, and not for any tech-stuff.
In my company, there is a group of persons that discusses with the customers about what they want, and what is possible. THAT's a point where tech-expertise is needen. When the specs are settled, it is handed over to a PM to make sure it gets implemented.
Good project managers need a different set of skills than system architects. Project managers think in terms of timelines, tasks and dollars. Architects think in terms of system components, their interactions, user requirements and technology. While there are some people who can do both well, they are quite rare as they require fairly different ways of thinking.
Anyway, I'll bet dollars to donuts that the resistance you face from upper management has more to deal with the fact that you put the system before the company. They want project managers that put the company (or client) first. Big suprise, eh? If you want to lead projects, explain how you (or rather, people like you) can help the company make more money or make the client happier while spending the same amount of money (which, should lead to more money for the company). It's pretty much as simple as that. Cheers
One thing both you and the project manager need to understand is:
;)
The project manager deals with the business side of things.
The technical lead deals with the technical side of things.
So while he may be setting (or have forced upon him) aspects such as deadlines, you need to control scope, methodology and quality. Communicate with him constantly. Imply (if not state explicitly) that you need to work on resource allocation, something he may be trying to plan for you right now. to have everything stated down on paper is best for both of you, you can at least then agree or disagree and sort things out.
It may also help to implement a proper development strategy you can agree on - if he won't listen, just escalate the issue. One that is tried and tested is a good bet, whether it's Extreme programming (a good suggestion) or something coming from the business side of things.
Whichever it is, the problem here seems to arise from a lack of definability of responsibility and roles, and that's what needs to be set and agreed upon so you can both do your job properly! He's probably as exasperated at you at the moment
Fross
(a technical architect working as a project manager!)
I've had managers before that varied from well experienced, technically, to not at all. Rarely was I asked to perform the impossible. And in those cases where it was impossible, it really was impossible. I simply pointed this out to the manager ... and I explained in detail why that was the case. In all cases things got corrected. Maybe I'm not so closed-minded as some techies out there, and I know most everything is possible. The better managers I found came to me with the ideas of what they were considering doing, and asked me to prepare a report on the feasibility and costs (mostly in hours of work) of doing it. I usually included an impact analysis as well. But you can be sure that if I tell my manager that it is impossible, then it really is impossible. Usually the truth is "it'll cost ya". Maybe techies need to learn to say that more often.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
Until recently, I was the development manager at a fairly large internet company; we had project managers who knew very little about software development, database design or how to run software projects. Do you know why ? because that was my job.
Whatever you may think, technology is not the most important part of the project - delivering what the business wants and making the right trade-offs to get that done is what matters. The intellectual purity of our great code is wonderful, but who cares if it gets delivered 6 months after it's needed ?
The project manager's job is to work out what needs to get built and by when; they need to get all the external dependencies sorted out, ensure the requirements are either known or the person(s) who controls those requirements is available when required, get the money and resources sorted out, and work with a techie on how to get the deliverables built in time.
I was that techie - and it worked pretty well. The project manager asks for stuff by a certain date, I work with the rest of the team to see what we'd need to do to make that happen, I negotiate with the PM on what is and is not in scope, and get the techies to start with whatever needs to happen to get the project done.
Every couple of days, I sit down with the Project Manager to agree out where we are, re-negotiate dates/resources etc. if required, assess new requirements, maybe work out in more detail what the plan for the next phase looks like. If we have to cut corners - and this does happen, coz we don't live in a perfect world - I work with the developers to see what we can cut that will have the least effect on the quality - the PM doesn't make that call, I do.
Project Management requires skills I don't have - I don't understand the commercial pressures on the company, I don't understand the legal framework we're working in, I don't have the patience to build and update Gantt charts, I don't enjoy endless meetings or chasing people for every little detail of their deliverabes. The project managers know this - they don't think any less of me, just as I respect the fact they couldn't design a database schema to save their lives.
So, I would suggest trying to form a good working relationship with your project manager by trying to understand what they do for a living, understand that there is more to a project than the technical deliverables, learn to speak their language, and offer alternatives when they ask for the impossible.
The attitude of most of the posts in this subject has been "huh, we're 200 times smarter than those idiots running the project, they're so stupid they couldn't blah blah blah". Hey, if you're so smart, it's your job to use that intellgence to move the project forward, not whine about how what a bad job everyone else is doing.
It's all very well in practice, but it will never work in theory.
I think you should add some examples....
I think one popular issue are colors in emails. Really? Why are colors bad in email? (Tell people not to use HTML mail because it's bad?), or even worse RTF?.
From a technical standpoint I understand very well that emails are text only, no colors, no underline, no bold. But now step backward from your techy knowledge and think about it from a pure users perspective. Now why can't I put colors in my email??? Whats really so bad or difficult about them?
--
Karma 50, and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt.
Programming skills and management skills are mutually-exclusive. I've always found project managers to be hired as programmers who were later found to be lousy programmers. I remember working with one guy who was hired because of a great resume. His first words when he came in the door were "I'm really not technical". He became a project manager because, although he wasn't technical, he gave great face.
A project manager is basically a eunuch acting as a catcher in a shitball game.
If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem
> I may meet resistance from the current project
> managers - many of them have been hired with no
> previous experience of anything.
Really? Wow, you work in an organization where they hire managers without experience, but they also hire quality programmers? Hum, sounds fishy.
> Previous suggestions to senior management
> that myself and other developers would feel
> better with a technical person running projects
> have been dismissed.
As someone who hasn't actually managed a project, you're in no position to assess the situation.
Clearly you can't see or understand your colleauges' contributions or experience. Therefore, you are likely in no position to be a project manager.
You get to be a project manager by proving yourself, not by telling your management that you're better than others.
> Has anyone else found the barrier to project
> management is their technical knowledge.
> How did you get past it?
No, the barrier is being an egotistical programmers who thinks that they're better than non-technical people. That's the real barrier.
I'm technical. But I appreciate quality management, and I understand that they have critical value to the projects we pursue.
I think that's a start. But I also think you're many years away from being a good project manager. Given your attitude, I'd hate to work with you.
Has anyone else found the barrier to project management is their technical knowledge. How did you get past it?
Absolutely not. Although I have suffered the problems you mention.
I have found that these are more often due to poor communication between PM and coder. It's the PM's job to direct the project to a successful completion while keeping an eye on resource allocation. It is the techie's job *clearly* explain the technical restrictions and options.
If you are relying on one team member to have *all* the necessary skills, then you do not have a real "team".
I am a Karma Library.
Whether its IT, Municipal drafting Electrical or whatever, Engineers (regardless of how long they have "managed" projects) are NOT Project Managers. You frustrate the hell out of me. I've been a Professional Project Manager for years and an Amateur computer geek. The thing that always stuck in my craw is the assumption that just because a person knows an Engineering Discipline that they automatically know how to manage projects. Project Management is a complex discipline and to manage projects well takes a solid educational background in that arena. It is a skill set unto itself. Document Controls, managing Gaant charts and schedules and (especially) managing the "people" end of things takes a great deal of effort to excel at. But NOOOOOO, Engineers always assume that because they can conceive a project, they MUST be able to manage it, and it always ends up as a grand jitterbug called, "Crisis Management". Now, don't get me wrong. Its not like I hate engineers. Many of my friends are engineers. I have spent most of my life working in and around engineers. Engineers are not Project Managers. Project Managers are Project Managers Engineers have to concern themselves with managing details. Project Managers have to manage the "big picture". In the end, if a correct perspective was given to the Project Management Profession was given more respect (or even an open minded consideration) a LOT more projects would complete more successfully.
I miss my PM. Her job was basically:
When prototypes for the project were running late, I didn't have to spend endless hours chasing people down and tracking the issues delaying them. My PM did that.
When the project had slipped 6 weeks, I wasn't the one on the calls getting yelled at and yelling back about the fact that more than 50% of the TYPES of prototypes we needed hadn't even been delivered yet. My PM did that. I was down in the lab working.
When I had to attend technical calls ( like bug scrubs ) I didn't have to go dig up the bugs being covered so I could review them for the meeting. My PM always met with us 30 minutes prior and went over the list so that we could get things clearly in mind going into the call.
And when the shit hit the fan, and we were death marching till 2am for weeks on end, my PM was there making sure we got fed ( on the company dime ), and staying late to make sure we did eventually go home and sleep.
None of this really requires much technical skill on the part of the PM. All it requires is a respect for the team and an understanding that the most effective way to get your project in on time is to support the team. By the middle of the project we ( the technical guys ) where willing to kill ourselves to meet the project objectives for this PM.
As someone with both extensive technical background and solid leadership and project management skills I can state for a fact that my ability to successfully envision, flesh out (e.g. requirements and design documents), estimate and plan (e.g. develop project schedules and resource estimates which I then translate into MS-project) a project or development effort is inextricably linked to my understanding of that project and its technical underpinnings.
Over the course of my career I have dealt with legions of formal "project managers", (folks who are pure project managers lacking any technical background) and I have yet to realize any value in my interactions with any of them, beyond the occasional willingness to record meeting minutes.
To date I have found them to be glorified secretaries, whose primary tactic is to latch on to knowledgeable people and not only drain information but actually get them to perform the real tasks of project management, such as scheduling and resource estimation.
In addition, many of these folks like to act as middlemen, brokering information and jealously hiding their sources so people must go to them for information. This would not be a terrible thing if they actually understand the project and had the knowledge required to effectively answer questions and communicate the status of the project accurately but that is very rarely (never in my experience) the case.
In my own experience, I have had a number of project managers assigned to various efforts I was responsible for, ostensibly so I could focus purely on the development effort and on technical leadership. In every case I have spent months working with a non technical project manager, spending 3-4 hrs a day with this person reviewing (creating) the project plan and having to spoon feed information to them (essentially so they could answer questions in meetings) as well making detailed suggestions about how they could overcome some obstacle external to our group that was needed in order for the project to succeed. In the mean time while this significant chunk of my time is being invested into sharpening my puppeteering skills the formal project manager has been horrible miscommunication project requirements and status to other groups.
So in short order these folks are out and I'm back attending meetings and working with external groups as well internal.
The primary factor behind the ineffectiveness of these folks is there complete lack of technical background. Successful project management is not just about writing up project plans and throwing dates and times down, its about understand the underlying objectives, as well as the pitfalls and obstacles in the way of those objectives. It's about understanding the project goals thoroughly enough to be able to determine what tasks are required to accomplish the project and making resource estimates that are realistic and effective.
This understanding and affinity for the project is something formal project managers very rarely have.
'm a senior project manager in a medium sized company where the programmers have no business experience of any sort. I'm of the opinion that programmers should understand the business that they're part of and want to move into programming myself. I'm aware that I may meet resistance from the current programmers - many of them have been hired with no previous experience of anything. Previous suggestions to senior management that myself and other project managers would feel better with business person programming on projects have been dismissed. As a result we are routinely told to push out deadlines or that our requirements are impossible, with an emphasis on how technically aesthetic things are rather than how well things meet the business requirements. Has anyone else found the barrier to programming is their business knowledge. How did you get past it?"
IT sounds to me that you project managers are behaving like non-technical clients, so treat them that way.
Guide them through the development process, get well defined requirements.
manage there expectations.
Get proper business logic out of them
So,
'I want a button that save the file in x format'
becomes,
'I must be able to save the file in x format' and
'There should be a UI component to do it'
Then get a decent definition of the format, work through any problems with them and any possible future requirements, Set up some testing requirements. Why do they need to save the file.
Once this is done, decide where in the UI the save file should be available from.
It is your responsibility to ensure that the project managers do a good job. Send them back to the clients if there's something missing, set up decent procedures, make sure testing is defined with the requirements so that it doesn't get skipped, and most importantly make sure things are set out in a clear fashion that everyone understands, with out scope for ambiguity.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
It seems like this is a common theme in this industry as I am sure anyone who has been in it for a length of time will tell. I am in almost in the exact situation, as a Senior Developer answering to managers (and in many instances a VP) with a limited technical background in web technologies.
One could go further to say our managers "know enough to be dangerous", often claiming they are "technically minded" and feel they inherit the skills of the team they manage, often changing specifications or routinely trying to influence technical decisions.
So what do you do? Here is a bit of what we have done to make things better:
Understand that you have been hired to do a job because you are qualified to perform the task. I don't want to sound like a motivational speaker, but you need to be confident in the ability to do your job as an expert. Any influences you try and make to a superior will not be taken seriously if you don't take yourself seriously. And don't be afraid to say "Let me do my job. I am the expert here."
Next, do the research. Don't walk in and say something like "We need to test our code." That is a given (or should be). Walk into an office with a formalized test procedure printed out in your hand and say "We need to do THIS." Also, try and site specific project management guidelines they are not following. Speak their speak. If you want to argue that a PM is not doing their job, make sure you know what that job is and how they are not performing it.
That having been said, if all else fails I will quote one of my colleagues: "Be a cock." If you are trying to influence a project manager in accepting what is an industry standard practice, be it formalized requirements definitions, change request processes, staging areas, federated databases or whatever, sometimes you need to "step up" and push the changes through. But remember there is a difference between being a cock and being an asshole. You don't have to be afraid to argue (or fight) with your boss for the betterment of the project, just make sure you can back up your point. "Why are you fighting me on this when the entire industry acknowledges this at the best practice?"
Donno if this helps. Hopefully it does.
"If you're not failing every now and again, it's a sign you're not doing anything very innovative." -- Woody Allen
Let me tell you straight off: Your problem is not restricted to software development only. I work in mechanical engineering and it is largely the same.
What works for me is to always ask for a solid project plan. If all's well, if there is a project budget, there MUST be a project plan somewhere. If there is not, find another place to work! The project plan is your best friend if you want to keep your PM in line.
A good project plan contains at least:
- Outline of the project goals
- Project boundaries (what you will NOT be doing)
- A project planning with a work breakdown
- Milestones with deliverables and delivery dates
- Known risks in the project
- Backup plans to eliminate the risks
- A cost estimation
To use the project plan in your favor do the following (in writing!):
- For every task that does not seem to fit the goals of the project, ask your PM to explain how this contributes
- For every task that seems to go beyond the projects' boundaries, ask your PM to explain why this is necessary.
- For every activity for which the planning seems inadequate or unrealistic, ask your PM the following questions: HOW did he estimate a planning for this activity? Did he actually TALK to the people who must perform this activity? If not, on WHAT did he base his planning? Ask him to replan AFTER talking to the people performing the activities.
- If you see risks to the project that were not mentioned in the project plan (like not testing and such), mention them (of course with a reasonable explanation) and ask your PM to explicitly mention them in the project plan.
- Of course, ask him to think of a backup plan for these risks (or deliver it to him yourself).
Ok, the trick to effectively tighten the leash on your PM is to warn him on paper and then, if he doesn't respond harrass him with your remarks during the review meetings of every milestone! If you have valid points, it will reflect badly on him with the management being there and it will teach him to listen to his techies.
It may take time and you may need to do this often, but I must still encounter a situation where this doesn't work if you are pigheaded enough.
Hope this helps,
Delgul
What you're asking for is a ship captain that doesn't know how the ship works!
No, what he's asking for is a ship captain that doesn't neccessarily understand how the ship's engine works. The captain should understand how to manage the workers in the engine room to get the most productivity out of them while keeping them happy, while interfacing with the passengers of the ship who keep yelling for the ship to go faster or slower so that the workers in the engine room don't have to deal with them. The ship captain should understand how to manage, run, and guide the ship - not tear it apart and reassemble it.
Shayne
Today I didn't even have to use my AK; I got to say it was a good day -- Icecube
What you're asking for is a ship captain that doesn't know how the ship works! Most project managers have no idea about the inner working of their projects. The end result: flawed deadlines, angry programmers, impossible tasks, annoyed bosses and/or clients.
About 2 years ago, I would have agreed with you. But now, I would say your Project Manager (whether technical or non-technical) is the problem. A non-technical project manager can do a great job of leading/planning a project AS LONG AS that individual does not make technical decisions for their engineers. The PM must listen to his/her senior engineers/architects to accomplish good schedule planning. Give the engineer a good set of requirements and get a resource and time estimate from the engineer. The PM must trust the engineer here. If the engineer conistently produces bad estimates (not from changing requirements, etc), then find another engineer to do estimates. The PM can then use these estimates to make decisions on what features to drop, priorities, etc. That avoids flawed deadlines, angry programmers (hey, they or another engineer made the estimate), etc. I've found this actually works out quite well at my current job. Never been happier.
You're on to something, for sure.
The problem the OP describes usually comes down to a lack of communication between the people doing the work and the people ordering it. Building up trust is a great way to get people to listen to you.
This is also why the various agile methods (XP, Scrum) work well; short-cycle iterative processes force a lot of interaction, and frequent deliveries build confidence on both sides. Allowing features to be reprioritized every iteration gives managers the feeling that they're in full control, which makes them much less likely to demand impossible things.
But I have seen cases where this won't work. In an organization of sufficient size, the high-ups are so isolated from reality that they can only manage by appearances; the people under them can succeed just by creating the appearance of success. All programmers know that it's easy to create the appearance of success for v1.0 while leaving a steaming pile of turds under the hood that will sabotage any attempts at v1.5. Truly evil managers will take this every time and then move on to a higher position, leaving somebody else holding the bag.